After Bill Donohue criticized Rep. Thomas Massie for his Twitter Christmas card showing his family holding long guns, on December 7, in a show of support, Rep. Lauren Boebert mimicked Massie by posting a Twitter photo of her standing in front of a Christmas tree with her four young sons, all of whom are holding long guns.

Boebert’s card was not doing Republicans any favor by supporting Massie in this offensive display. Christmas is about Jesus, not gun-toting family members.

That this fact needed to be explained suggests that Massie and Boebert were either clueless or just plain insulting. Either way, they are a disgrace.

Given the prominence of several abortion cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, the subject is weighing heavily on the minds of those on both sides of this issue.

If there is one thing that everyone should insist on it is honesty. Regrettably, the pro-abortion side is jam packed with those who have a hard time telling the truth. Here are three examples, all from the first half of December.

On December 13th, Whoopi Goldberg said on “The View” that “I, too, am pro-life. No one I know [who] has had an abortion went willingly or happily. They went because they had to go, because they didn’t have a choice.”

They didn’t have a choice? What does this say about the “pro-choice” movement? Is it based on a lie? Moreover, it is disingenuous for Whoopi to say she is “pro-life”: it is reported that she had six or seven abortions by the age of 25.

Barbara R. Casper is a retired professor of medicine at the University of Louisville, and the author of a recent op-ed in the Courier Journal on this subject. Taking the pro-abortion side, she said, “I am not pro-abortion. In fact, I dare say no one is actually pro-abortion.”

She is wrong. On September 30, 2021, Dr. Ghazaleh Moayedi testified in front of the House Oversight Committee on abortion. She told the panel that “for thousands of people I’ve cared for, abortion is a blessing, abortion is an act of love, abortion is freedom.”

On December 2, 2021, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended Roe v. Wade, which effectively sanctions abortion-on-demand. She expressed grave concern over the prospect that the Supreme Court might overturn this decision. “It’s really scary—and I say that as a practicing Catholic.”

The Catholic Church regards abortion to be “intrinsically evil.” By contrast, Pelosi is not only an enthusiast of partial-birth abortion, she wants to force the taxpayers to pay for them. Practicing Catholics don’t endorse the killing of babies who are 80 percent born, and they do not want the public to fund these abominable procedures.

One of the great things about being pro-life is that our side doesn’t have to lie.

On December 1st, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the most important abortion case ever brought since Roe v. Wade; indeed, it could overturn Roe. The case involves a Mississippi law that would ban abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. A decision is not expected until June 2022. One thing is for sure: there will be plenty of pro-life and pro-abortion protesters outside the Supreme Court.

The way protesters on opposing sides typically conduct themselves is dramatic. In early October, at the beginning of the Supreme Court’s new term, pro-life and pro-abortion activists protested outside the high court.

Pro-life protesters were shown praying, saying the rosary, holding huge sheets of paper with the names of Americans who signed a petition to end abortion, and carrying a wooden Cross with the inscription, “Jesus Saves.”

In keeping with this respectful approach, the pro-life side convened a prayerful event on November 28th in Jackson, Mississippi. The “Pray Together for Life” rally was orchestrated by Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, and was attended by other prominent pro-life leaders.

By contrast, in early October pro-abortion protesters were shown carrying anti-Catholic signs, “Keep Your Rosaries Off My Ovaries,” and placards denouncing pro-life activists, “You Are Pro-Life Until the Baby Is Poor, Black, Transgender, Gay, Mexican, Disabled, Sick.”

Other pro-abortion signs included, “Consent to Sex Is Not Consent to Pregnancy,” “My Body Is Not A Political Playground,” “You Will Not Control Us,” and “When Will My Body Be My Own?” Those who were arrested included a woman who held her hands above her head with a hanger placed around her wrists.

The different styles of protests are reflective of the respective goals of the protesters. Pro-life demonstrators invoke God. Pro-abortion demonstrators invoke hate.

The pro-abortion camp also distorts the truth. Pro-life Americans, who tend to be religious, are far more generous in giving to the poor than their secular pro-abortion counterparts. Thus, the bit about them not caring about all babies is ludicrous. But it is at least refreshing for the pro-abortion side to acknowledge that a pregnant woman is carrying a baby. If they weren’t so clueless, they would understand that this seriously undercuts their position.

Similarly, pregnant women are carrying the body of another human being, thus negating the foolish contention that abortion affects only the body of the expectant mother. Moreover, it is irresponsible for men and women who consent to having sex to deny that they are at least potentially consenting to pregnancy. Indeed, such irresponsibility accounts for a large part of the problem.

Following the allegations of physically and sexually assaulting several women, rock star Marilyn Manson had his home busted into on Nov. 29 by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. The alleged crimes took place between 2009 and 2011 in West Hollywood.

No reports have surfaced as to whether Manson’s home today resembles the one he apparently had when he was allegedly brutalizing these women. At that time some who knew him called his home a “meat locker” or a “black refrigerator,” a reference to the very dark and cold living quarters. It is also said he kept a separate room for women who misbehaved: the “chamber” was specifically designed acoustically to psychologically torture them.

Among Manson’s accusers is his former fiancée, “Westworld” actress Evan Rachel Wood. His former assistant also accused him of sexual assault, battery and harassment.

The most graphic depiction of his alleged assaults was made by “Game of Thrones” star Esmé Bianco. According to her, Manson forced her to suffer food and sleep deprivation, whipped her, made her submit to electric shocks and raped her during the night.

To those who have monitored Manson’s behavior over the years, none of this comes as a shocker.

In 1997, Bill Donohue wrote the following about him. “Manson is best known for his music that glorifies evil. A member of the Church of Satan, he has publicly identified himself with Lucifer. While performing, Manson often rips up Bibles, appeals to the crowd to become an ‘unholy missionary for AntiChrist Superstar’ and beckons his fans to worship the Manson ‘family.’ He sells T-shirts that read ‘Kill Your Parents’ and sings songs that celebrate violence, most of which are replete with obscenities.”

In 2000, Donohue called attention to Manson’s new album, Holy Wood. The lyrics of one of the songs, “Disposable Teens,” included, “I’m a teen distortion, survived abortion, a rebel from the waist down.” Other songs were called “Godeatgod,” “Cruci-fixion in Space,” “President Dead,” I’m in the Shadow of the Valley of Death,” “The Death Song,” “The Lamb of God,” “The Fall of Adam,” “King Kill 33̊” and “Count to 6 and Die.”

On the cover of the album was a depiction of an aborted baby nailed to a cross.

Donohue responded by saying, “It is Christianity that he hates and it is Catholicism that he hates most of all. Why else would he appear dressed as a bishop with a cross behind him in his video for ‘Disposable Teens’? And why else would he wear a pope’s miter while performing live? No, this guy is at war with Christ and the Vicar of Christ on earth.”

Looks like Manson’s Satanism has come home to roost.

We would have provided an email address for his agent, but CAA, one of the top agencies in the country, has dumped him, and so has his record company, Loma Vista Recordings.

Bill Donohue issued the following open letter on December 13 to Lorne Michaels, executive producer of Saturday Night Live

December 13, 2021

Mr. Lorne Michaels
Saturday Night Live
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112

Dear Mr. Michaels:

On March 24, 1997, I wrote to you at the same address about an anti-Catholic skit on SNL; it was the third attack in the previous three months. The March 15th edition was particularly vile—it included a mockery of the Eucharist. Now, 25 years later, I am writing to you again, this time about a vulgar assault on the Holy Family that aired on December 11.

Last Saturday’s show, which offered a “Hip Hop” rendition of the Nativity Scene, showed an adult man wearing a diaper. That man was Jesus. He was shown “twerking,” shaking his butt to music. Joseph, his stepfather, was called “Baby Daddy,” and was instructed on how to do a “pimp walk.” The most obscene portrayal was reserved for Our Blessed Mother: She was depicted as a pole-dancing stripper. Worse, she was ordered to “go grind on the wall.”

Some might say that because you are not Catholic that you may be unaware of just how offensive this skit is. They would be wrong. You know exactly how offensive it is. I say this because you are the long-time creator and producer of SNL, and I have been commenting on your show for decades.

In addition to the three SNL shows I cited in 1997, in April of that year there was a skit that mentioned “a picture of a rat sucking the breast of the Blessed Virgin Mary.” [You guys really do have it out for her.] In 2002 your writers mocked New York’s St. Patrick’s Day Parade for claiming, falsely, that gays were banned from marching. In 2007, all priests were portrayed as sexual predators. In 2013, Jesus and the apostles were smeared. In 2019, there were five shows wherein all priests were attacked for being sexual abusers. And in October 2021, Catholics were singled out for condemnation because some have objected to being vaccinated.

You owe Catholics an apology. SNL is not a stranger to apologizing.

In 1992, you personally apologized for a skit that offended Chelsea Clinton. That same year, Joe Pesci slammed Sinead O’Connor for her anti-pope stunt. In 2007, SNL apologized for ridiculing children with Down syndrome. Justin Bieber apologized in 2013 for smoking marijuana on the show. In 2014, Kate McKinnon apologized for offending cats.

In 2017, Larry David gave a half-apology for joking about concentration camps. That same year Kristen Stewart apologized for accidentally cursing on the show. In 2018, Pete Davidson apologized to former Navy SEAL and newly elected congressman Dan Crenshaw for mocking the patch over one of his eyes (the result of an explosion while serving in Afghanistan). In 2019, an SNL spokesman apologized on your behalf for hiring (and then firing) Shane Gillis for insulting Chinese Americans.

SNL is at its best when it pokes gentle fun at various public figures and demographic groups. It is at its worst when it trashes the most central characters, tenets, and clergy of a religious community.

While all Christians treasure the Holy Family, especially at this time of the year, assaults on Our Blessed Mother carry even greater significance with Catholics. The decent thing to do is to apologize. After all, if cats merit an apology, why shouldn’t Catholics?

Sincerely,

William A. Donohue
President

On December 14, the House of Representatives voted unanimously to ban imports from the Xinjiang region in China that utilizes slave labor. However, on December 15, the bill was blocked in the Senate by Oregon Democrat Ron Wyden; given Senate rules, his objection was sufficient to prevent the bill from moving forward. Then some Democrats pushed back. Wyden folded on December 16, and the Senate unanimously passed the legislation.

For many years, the Uyghurs [pronounced Weegers], a Muslim minority, have been treated like slaves by the Communist Chinese government. That is why an anti-slave bill was needed.

Politico gave an accurate summary of the bill. “The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act effectively bans all imports from China’s Xinjiang region, where the U.S. government has said that the Chinese Communist Party is perpetuating a genocide against the religious minority, including slave labor, forced sterilizations and concentration camps.”

The two most important U.S. organizations that are responsible for supporting slave labor in China are the National Football League and Nike. Nike basically owns Sen. Wyden—it has greased him with contributions totaling into more than $60,000—but without the enabling role played by the NFL, the genocide and slave labor would not be flourishing.

The NFL commissioner, Roger Goodell, isn’t shy about his enthusiasm for Communist China. Two years ago he said, “China is a priority market for the NFL. We believe that our game has a great deal of potential to expand to grow and bring new fans into our game. We have had double-digit growth this past year in China in our fan base and people engaging with our game. So we are excited by it.”

John Donahoe, Nike’s CEO, is just as exuberant about working with the slavemasters in China. “Nike is a brand that is of China and for China.” (Our italics.) In 2020, a study by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute named Nike as one of the companies that uses slave labor to make its products.

The NFL and Nike are joined at the hip.

In 2018, the NFL issued the following press release: “The National Football League and Nike announced a long-term extension to their on-field rights partnership. Central to the extension, Nike will continue to provide all 32 NFL Clubs with uniforms and sideline apparel bearing the Nike brand for use during all games.”

The degree of oppression in China, especially among religious minorities, isn’t in dispute. On July 1, 2021, the U.S. State Department released a damning assessment of conditions there.

“Over the last four years, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has carried out a mass detention and political indoctrination campaign against Uyghurs….Authorities use threats of physical violence, forcible drug intake, physical and sexual abuse, and torture to force detainees to work in adjacent or off-site factories or worksites producing garments, footwear…material for solar power equipment” and many other products. Garments and footwear are both Nike products.

It is not just a Muslim ethnic minority that is being oppressed.

Nina Shea, director of the Center for Religious Freedom at the Hudson Institute, offered an assessment of religious liberty in China.

“China’s Christians, at 100 million strong and constituting that country’s largest religious minority, are facing a new government policy of severe religious repression and persecution.” Minors are barred from attending houses of worship, churches are being closed, desecrations are increasing, Bibles are limited in supply, and adults are subject to state surveillance. Those who disobey are imprisoned.

To show how politically corrupt the NFL is, and how desperate it is to please its Communist friends in China, consider that on December 16 it published a map on social media that depicted the sovereign nation of Taiwan as part of China. Taiwan is a free country; China is a slave state. The league is in bed with the Communists; meanwhile it is selling out our democratic allies in Taiwan.

President Biden signd the bill, but no one should trust him. His special climate envoy, John Kerry, who is worth $250 million, has come under fire for owning stakes in an investment group that funds companies linked to the slave labor camps in China. Moreover, in the aforementioned State Department study, “material for solar power equipment” was cited as a good that is produced by slave labor.

Last month, Kerry was asked by a reporter why he doesn’t speak to the issue of human rights in China. He said “that’s not my lane here.” No wonder Politico said that the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act “encountered obstacles from the White House and the private sector.” Kerry was the White House obstructionist, and the NFL and Nike played the same role in the private sector.

What makes this all the more disgusting is the “social justice” policies promoted by the NFL and Nike. They are quick to side with the likes of Black Lives Matter, condemning America for being a racist country, yet they profit off of slave labor and genocide in China.

Why do organizations that have a very good family-friendly reputation find it necessary to offend Christians, especially during the Christmas season? As Bill Donohue recently detailed, the Salvation Army did so by adopting the racist ideas imbued in critical race theory. Now Costco has offended Christians by relegating Christmas to a second-class status.

In the December edition of Costco Connection, a publication of Costco Wholesale, the lead article, “A Festive Season,” compares Christmas to Hanukkah and Kwanzaa in a way that is downright insulting.

Written by Tim Talevich, the editorial director of the magazine, he provides a 111-word account of Hanukkah, a 38-word statement about Christmas and a 43-word summary of Kwanzaa. This alone would not mean much, but when we read what he says about the three holidays, it takes on more significance.

What Talevich says about Hanukkah and Kwanzaa is accurate and nicely done. But when it comes to Christmas, Talevich resorts to editorializing, and in a way that is not endearing to Christians. He wants us to know that December 25 is “likely not his [Jesus’] birthday” and that the “early Christians didn’t even celebrate Christmas.” He closes by saying “it’s a popular secular and religious event around the world.”

There is a significant difference between these three holidays. Hanukkah is a minor holiday in the Jewish tradition, one that is not mandated by the Torah the way other Jewish holidays are (e.g., Yom Kippur). Christmas is a major holiday for Christians. Kwanzaa was made up out of whole cloth in 1966 by an ex-con who served four years in prison—five years after he founded Kwanzaa—for beating and torturing two women.

It may be that December 25 is not the actual birthday of Jesus. So what? Why be pedantic about it? That’s when it is celebrated. We declared our independence from England on July 2, 1776, yet we celebrate the Declaration on July 4. Moreover, if Talevich is quick to doubt the birth date of Jesus, why did he write with certainty about the Maccabees in the second century B.C.?

The first evidence of celebrating Christmas is around A.D. 200. What does this mean to the average Christian? Nothing. Lots of celebratory events in history evolved over time, for all sorts of reasons. So what is the point that Talevich wants to make?

Any cultural observer worth his salt knows the game that is being played here. In keeping with the cultural mantra about inclusion and diversity—which are clearly political constructs—he seeks to elevate any day in December that could possibly compete with Christmas. That is why he even finds time to mention the winter solstice on December 21, National Ugly Sweater Day on December 17, and Festivus on December 23.

Talevich is not alone in diluting the importance of Christmas. Secularists can’t cancel it, though many have tried, but they can create faux competition with it. Those who think this is an exaggeration should consider how African Americans would react if we turned February into Diversity Month, celebrating our multicultural heritage. What would this do to the significance of Black History Month?

Talevich ends it by saying, “Costco’s role in all this? We’re here with food, gifts and just about anything else you might need to fully celebrate December’s holidays.”

Talevich is being disingenuous. Without Christmas, Costco’s cash registers wouldn’t ring so loudly. The food, gifts and everything else they sell are overwhelmingly Christmas gifts, and everyone knows it.

Recognizing all legitimate holidays is a good thing, but treating a major religious holiday as if it were inauthentic is offensive. This wouldn’t matter if Costco had a lousy reputation. And it wouldn’t matter if Talevich were a low-level employee. But neither is true. Which is why it matters.

CODA

The way the Costco issue ended is worth noting.

As we frequently do, we listed the email address of the offender on our news release; in this case we printed Talevich’s address.

After our email subscribers let loose on Talevich, he called Bill Donohue. Talevich stressed that he never intended to offend anyone, taking the opportunity to emphasize his Catholic credentials. Then he got aggressive.

Talevich said Donohue should have called him after he read the article; he also claimed he ran a pro-Christian article in the previous issue and that Donohue failed to complement him; and he denied that the cash registers ring loudly in December because of Christians.

Donohue told him that we are under no moral or legal obligation to contact those who have publicly offended us. Also, we don’t give out trophies to those who don’t offend us. Finally, Donohue argued that it is not Jews or blacks who are making Costco’s registers ring loudly in December—it is Christians, and everyone knows it.

Talevich was tongue-tied. We have reason to believe that Costco has learned a lesson.

After Pope Francis and President Biden met recently, President Biden said that the pope called him a “good Catholic” and that he should “keep receiving communion.” The Vatican has not confirmed the veracity of Biden’s account.

Like everyone else, we at the Catholic League have no way of knowing whether Biden’s remarks are accurate. But from what we know about the Vatican’s handling of the meeting, and Biden’s long record of lying about many important matters, we are maintaining a healthy skepticism about the president’s rendition.

It is certainly in Biden’s interest to have everyone think that the pope encouraged him to keep receiving communion. This issue matters because it has troubled many American bishops; they met from November 15-18 to discuss it. Biden’s lust for abortion rights, for instance, is cause for grave concern.

One reason why we are skeptical of Biden’s account is that it seems to be at odds with the Vatican’s decision to deny media press coverage of the meeting. The White House was banking on a photo-op, knowing that the optics would serve the president’s interests. But they were stiffed the day before the meeting.

If it is reasonable to conclude that the Vatican did not want the appearance of being played by the White House—sending the message that this pro-abortion Catholic president is a model Catholic—then it appears contradictory to laud his Catholic credentials. More important, why would the pope inject himself into the controversy between U.S. bishops and the president, knowing that by doing so he would undercut the USCCB (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops)?

Then there is the issue of lying. That Biden is a pathological liar cannot be denied. Here are a few instances.

The first example looks like small potatoes, but when coupled with the other examples, it takes on significance.

In 1974, when Biden was a freshman senator from Delaware, he bragged how he hit a ball 358 feet at his second congressional baseball game on July 2nd. In fact, he went 0-for-2.

The year 1987 was not a good one for the presidential hopeful. David Greenberg, writing in Slate, a left-wing media outlet, recalled how Biden plagiarized a speech given by British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock.

“Biden lifted Kinnock’s precise turns of phrase and his sequences of ideas—a degree of plagiarism that would disqualify any student for failure, if not expulsion from school. But the even greater sin was to borrow biographical facts from Kinnock that, although true about Kinnock, didn’t apply to Biden. Unlike Neil Kinnock, Biden wasn’t the first person in his family history to attend college, as he asserted; nor were his ancestors coal miners, as he claimed when he used Kinnock’s words.”

This was just the beginning of Biden’s lies. It was later revealed that he plagiarized from speeches given by Robert F. Kennedy, John F. Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey. The next day he admitted to telling more lies. He confessed to receiving an “F” in a law school course because he plagiarized five pages from a published article.

According to the Washington Post, Biden also told several lies about his academic credentials. He said that he graduated with “three degrees” from the University of Delaware. Wrong. He graduated with one degree. He said he won a coveted political science award at the university. He lied. He said he graduated at the top of his class at Syracuse Law School. He did not. He was 76th in a class of 85. He said he had a “full scholarship” at Syracuse. Another lie. He had a half scholarship.

Shaun King, an African American writer and civil rights activist, has tracked Biden’s civil rights record. Here is what he wrote last year about this issue.

“On two very important occasions, Joe Biden actually told the entire truth about his involvement in the Civil Rights Movement. Nearly everything else has been a lie. I’ve counted at least 31 different lies he has told about being an activist, organizer, sit-in demonstrator, boycott leader, voter registration volunteer, Black church trainee and more in the Civil Rights Movement, but every time I dig, I actually find more interviews, more lies, more fabrications, more tales he told to voters, reporters, historians, and more (his emphasis).”

When an anti-Semite attacked the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh in 2018, leaving 12 dead, Biden claimed he later visited the synagogue, saying he spoke to the people there. He lied. He was never there, as officials at the synagogue recounted.

In his first 100 days in office, the Washington Post listed 78 false or misleading statements he made.

Recently, several high ranking military officials said that Biden’s rendition of the advice they had given him on withdrawing from Afghanistan was patently untrue.

It is for these reasons that we are skeptical of Biden’s account of what the pope said to him at their meeting.

Los Angeles Archbishop José Gomez is under attack by left-wing Catholics and outside activists for his stellar speech given in Spain on November 4th. They are particularly angered over his comments on contemporary social justice movements, which he properly labeled as “pseudo-religions.”

The petition portrays Gomez as being somehow indifferent to racial injustice. That is a lie. He has been an outspoken champion of racial equality; it’s just that he doesn’t toe the line as set by those who have a larger agenda.

What is really getting to these activists is Gomez’s appreciation for how Marxist-inspired movements wreak havoc, without doing anything positive for the dispossessed.

Anyone is free to disagree with Gomez’s address, but there is something unseemly about left-wing organizations launching a petition drive against him. Gomez, who is president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, should be commended, not condemned, for his courage to speak the truth.

Those who started the petition, Faith in Public Life and Faithful America, have both received funding from George Soros, the atheist billionaire who hates the Catholic Church. The former is a front group for agenda-ridden zealots; the latter is run by a rogue Episcopalian priest who mettles in the Church’s affairs.

We rallied our email subscribers to support Archbishop Gomez.

Many Catholics were dismayed, if not furious, when they learned of news reports indicating that Pope Francis told President Biden on October 29 that he was “a good Catholic” and “should keep receiving Communion.” The Vatican has neither confirmed nor denied this account. As we said when the news broke, we have good reasons to be skeptical of Biden’s rendition.

After taking another look at this issue, examining the exact words used by Biden—not relying on media interpretations of what he said—our skepticism is growing. The president was asked about this matter at two press conferences: one on October 29, and the other on October 31.

On October 29, Biden was asked, “Mr. President, did the issue of abortion come up at all?” The first words out of his mouth were, “No, it didn’t.” Then he contradicted himself saying, “It came up.” So which account is true?

After Biden said, “It came up,” he then said what the media widely reported. “We just talked about the fact that he was happy I was a good Catholic and I should keep receiving Communion.”

If the first version is right—abortion never came up for discussion—then it seems peculiar, to say the least, for the pope to tell him he should “keep receiving Communion.” What would be the context for such a statement, if not abortion? After all, the entire controversy is about Biden’s pro-abortion record, so it is hard to imagine the pope imploring him to “keep receiving Communion” absent any discussion of abortion. Are we to believe he said this out of the blue?

If abortion did come up, what did the pope say to him about it? Just recently Pope Francis said that “abortion is murder. Those who carry out abortions kill.” Such an unequivocal remark suggests it is unlikely that the pope would discuss abortion without talking about it in such graphic terms. That would surely have made Biden uneasy, yet he did not appear to be that way when he spoke.

At the same press conference, Biden was asked, “Did you discuss the U.S. Conference of Bishops?” He answered, “That’s a private conversation.” This begs the question: Why would a discussion of the bishops’ conference be considered a private matter but not a conversation that affects him personally, namely his suitability to receive Communion?

It is entirely possible that Biden is lying.

After admitting that abortion never came up, he quickly pivoted. Why? Because he saw an opening, an opportunity to report to the press the most important thing he wanted from the pope—a chance to undercut those U.S. bishops who are deeply troubled about his pro-abortion record (they met from November 15-18 to discuss this subject). Having been denied the photo-op the White House desperately wanted, he needed to come away with something that served his interest. The Communion issue had to be in the forefront of his mind.

At the October 31st press conference, Biden was asked, “For these Catholics back home, what did it mean for you to hear Pope Francis, in the wake of this—in the middle of this debate, call you a good Catholic? And what did he tell you—should that put this debate to rest?”

“Look, I’m—I’m not going to—a lot of this is just personal,” Biden said.

But it wasn’t personal just two days earlier. In fact, he showed no hesitancy in getting the word out that the pope regarded him as such a good Catholic that he allegedly encouraged him to “keep receiving Communion.” What changed? Could it be that the Vatican contacted the Biden team and asked them to quash this issue, knowing that Biden’s account was not accurate?

Our incurious media are not asking these questions. That’s because they want to protect the pope and the president, both of whom they like.

There are too many unanswered questions to put this matter to rest. The unwillingness of the Vatican to either confirm or deny Biden’s account, and Biden’s inconsistent and implausible responses—only adds to the problem. Both sides do not look good.