Proven Liar Biden caught lying about Writing Law Review Articles on Privacy

[CivilDiscourse]

Source: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6VlOB5dcoTIJ:[url

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/08/bidens-inaccurate-claim-about-writing-law-review-articles-privacy/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=opera-gx][/url]
“And I have written, way back, a number of law review articles about the Ninth Amendment and the — and the 14th Amendment and why that privacy is considered as part of a constitutional guarantee. And the — they’ve just wiped it all out.”

— President Biden, remarks in Madrid, June 30

The Facts

HeinOnline, an online platform of research articles, shows 19 law review citations that list Biden as an author or co-author. (The full list also includes six articles in Foreign Affairs magazine and other nonlegal publications.) But these articles concern issues such a violence against women, war powers, federal drug policy, world trade and foreign policy — issues that were central to Biden’s long career in the Senate. None of these law review articles concerned the right to privacy.

When we asked the White House for evidence of his statement, we received a long list of citations to comments Biden made about the right to privacy, often when he presided over Supreme Court nominations as the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. For instance, one citation noted that Biden got Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., during his confirmation hearings, to agree that there was a right of privacy to be found in the 14th Amendment, and one that “extends to women.”

While these remarks certainly demonstrate Biden’s long-standing interest in the legal debate over these amendments, they cannot be called law review articles.

The White House also provided an opinion piece that appeared under Biden’s name in the Philadelphia Inquirer in 1991, headlined, “Yes, the Constitution implies rights that aren’t spelled out.”

This is more on point. The op-ed focuses on the Ninth Amendment, which simply states: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” This amendment was an effort by James Madison to deal with concerns that, by listing certain rights, the Bill of Rights would prevent Americans from receiving any rights that had not been spelled out. Biden said in the op-ed that the amendment meant that “we assume that our personal lives are free from government intervention, absent specific constitutional authority for that action.”

But some years after that op-ed was published, the court, in a 1997 ruling, said that these additional rights need to be “deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition.”

In his majority opinion in Dobbs, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. used that standard to argue that “the inescapable conclusion is that a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions. On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law until 1973.”

Alito’s recounting of history is not universally accepted. “When the United States was founded and for many subsequent decades, Americans relied on the English common law,” reads an amicus brief filed in Dobbs by the American Historical Association and the Organization of American Historians. “The common law did not regulate abortion in early pregnancy. Indeed, the common law did not even recognize abortion as occurring at that stage. That is because the common law did not legally acknowledge a fetus as existing separately from a pregnant woman until the woman felt fetal movement, called ‘quickening,’ which could occur as late as the 25th week of pregnancy.”

In any case, an opinion piece is not the same thing as a law review article, which tends to be longer and deeper in the legal weeds than a typical op-ed.

The Pinocchio Test

Biden can fairly claim to have written an op-ed for a newspaper about the Ninth Amendment and the right to privacy that he believes is part of it. He can also claim to have engaged in long discussions with justices now on the court about the rights embodied in the Ninth and 14th amendments. He certainly has a deep understanding of these issues from his long service on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

But the president stated he had written “a number of law review articles” about these amendments. That’s gilding the lily — and a president must remain accurate about his achievements. He earns Two Pinocchios.

Two Pinocchios

© Copyright Original Source

[rogue06]

It is like his claim that he used to drive 18-wheelers is based on his riding as a passenger once for a short trip.

And I believe it was his getting Four Pinnocchios for his regularly repeated erroneous assertion regarding the Second Amendment (2A), regarding cannons being prohibited, that the point was made that when a president starts basing policy on misremembered facts and history, then its more than just gilding the lily.

[Stoic]

I guess it depends on what your standards are for considering something a lie.

If he made the claim on these boards and you called it a lie, the moderators would probably get on your case about it, given that it could simply be a failure of memory.

[CivilDiscourse]

I guess it depends on what your standards are for considering something a lie.

If he made the claim on these boards and you called it a lie, the moderators would probably get on your case about it, given that it could simply be a failure of memory.

So, senility is your other option?

[Cow Poke]

I guess it depends on what your standards are for considering something a lie.

If he made the claim on these boards and you called it a lie, the moderators would probably get on your case about it, given that it could simply be a failure of memory.

I think you actually have a point you may not have intended to make --- the old Duffer is out to lunch.

[Cow Poke]

I think it's a combination --- he was already a liar, but his 'mental state' causes him to be even more 'transparent' with his lying.

[rogue06]

I think it's a combination --- he was already a liar, but his 'mental state' causes him to be even more 'transparent' with his lying.

He has a history of telling bizarre easily debunked whoopers about his past stretching back decades but I think his tall tales are crowding out his actual memories.

[Stoic]

So, senility is your other option?

Imperfect memory does not necessarily imply senility.

[CivilDiscourse]

Imperfect memory does not necessarily imply senility.

Well, we are talking about someone who's claimed to have been arrested during civil rights era, claimed he was arrested while meeting Nelson Mandela, lied about driving an 18 wheeler, got caught plagiarizing during his first campaign, so you are right, the most likely scenario is that he just misremembered.

[Stoic]

Well, we are talking about someone who's claimed to have been arrested during civil rights era, claimed he was arrested while meeting Nelson Mandela, lied about driving an 18 wheeler, got caught plagiarizing during his first campaign, so you are right, the most likely scenario is that he just misremembered.

I think it's likely that some of Trump's "lies" are things he really believes, or did when he made the claims. That's probably true of Biden, also.

[Cow Poke]

I think it's likely that some of Trump's "lies" are things he really believes, or did when he made the claims. That's probably true of Biden, also.

A bunch of us overlooked Trump's moral failures because he got things done. What has Biden accomplished, besides pretty much destroying the Democratic party's chances for holding the House and possibly the Senate, and bringing his own approval record about as far South as a POTUS can.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

A bunch of us overlooked Trump's moral failures because he got things done.

Such as? Apart from ensuring three conservative judges were appointed to the SCOTUS [one of which was courtesy of McConnell's duplicity].

What has Biden accomplished, besides pretty much destroying the Democratic party's chances for holding the House and possibly the Senate, and bringing his own approval record about as far South as a POTUS can.

I suspect some here would dismiss anything that a Democrat administration did - simply because it was Democrat.

[rogue06]

A bunch of us overlooked Trump's moral failures because he got things done. What has Biden accomplished, besides pretty much destroying the Democratic party's chances for holding the House and possibly the Senate, and bringing his own approval record about as far South as a POTUS can.

I can't remember which liberal pundit has been defending Biden, but his point is that old Joe has done exactly what the left wanted. He defeated Trump and pushed through that multi-trillion dollar inflation causing legislation.

[rogue06]

Such as? Apart from ensuring three conservative judges were appointed to the SCOTUS [one of which was courtesy of McConnell's duplicity].

You mean by following what was known as the "Biden Rule"?

[Cow Poke]

Such as? Apart from ensuring three conservative judges were appointed to the SCOTUS [one of which was courtesy of McConnell's duplicity].

If that were all it was, it'd be worth it, but it was much MUCH more.

I suspect some here would dismiss anything that a Democrat administration did - simply because it was Democrat.

You suspect a lot of things that are outright dead wrong.