White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre is rapidly building a reputation for herself as the high priestess of ill-preparedness. 

"I would have to get back to you on that" is her typical reply to even the most elementary of questions.

She also isn't exactly a wordsmith.  If she continues down this path, perhaps someday she may surpass Kamala Harris.

Just yesterday, Joe Biden signed an executive order that ensures access to abortion for women following the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade (1973).

Biden said the order helps women travel out of state to receive abortions, ensuring that health care providers comply with federal law so women aren't delayed in getting "care," and advances research and data collection "to evaluate the impact that this reproductive health crisis is having on maternal health and other health conditions and outcomes."

Jean-Pierre was asked about the timing of the order — i.e., why the order wasn't signed sooner.

The question was valid.

Politico leaked a draft opinion on May 2, 2022 by Supreme Court justice Samuel Alito that provides the rationale on why Roe v. Wade must be overturned.  Roe v. Wade was overturned on June 24, 2022.

This is an issue that is dear to the Democrats, with their far-left base being fanatical proponents of abortion.  One would have assumed that the White House should have been prepared with the executive order the moment Roe v. Wade was overturned, at least to appease their base.

Perhaps the Democrats wanted to create panic among their unenthusiastic base to ensure that people would vote for them during the midterms.  They know that their base is not exactly excited about Biden or the Democrats, which could lead them to skip voting in November.

Another plausible explanation is that incompetence, ineffectiveness  and ineptitude are norms, not aberrations in Biden's White House.  Matters have deteriorated to such an extent that they cannot even attend to the needs of their base.

No wonder even Democrats are reluctant to support the idea of Biden running for re-election in 2024.

Back to Jean-Pierre.

She prattled on in her response.  She claimed that Biden was consulting with legal experts.  She also said that in government, there are "steps and processes that we have to take in order to take actions as big as — as big as these."

She then made a claim that raised a lot of eyebrows.

"From day one, when the Supreme Court made this extreme decision to take away a constitutional right, it was an unconstitutional action by them — a right that was around for almost 50 years, a right that women had to make a decision on their bodies and how they want to start their families.

"And so the president has been very clear that he's going to do everything that he can.  It doesn't stop with this.  But we also understand that you know, it's — he can't only be the only person working on this, right?  That's why we continue to ask Congress to take action."

Jean-Pierre says it was "unconstitutional" for SCOTUS to overturn Roe. pic.twitter.com/zQyzdZxRh8

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) August 3, 2022

Jean-Pierre was merely reiterating her boss Joe Biden's assertion when he signed the executive order to protect abortion access in the wake of Roe v. Wade's reversal.

"Let's be clear about something from the very start: this was not a decision driven by the Constitution," he said, adding that the Court's conservative majority was "playing fast and loose with the facts."

So let's revisit the facts:

Start with the basics.  In the U.S., as every schoolchild is taught (at schools where they still teach), the Legislative Branch makes the law, the Executive Branch executes the law, and the Supreme Court interprets the law.  That's to say, it's the Supreme Court's actual job to determine which parts of the law are constitutional and which are not.  Somehow, it's now the Biden administration that claims the right to interpret the law as well as execute it now.

Now let's go to the particulars:

Justice Harry A. Blackmun, who authored the long Roe opinion, included the medical history of abortion, citing the views of Persians, Greeks, and Romans.  He also quoted two versions of the Hippocratic oath and early English authors dating to the 13th century.

What Blackmun did not quote is any provision in the Constitution that protected abortion "rights."

Legal experts and the most ardent proponents of abortion have asserted that the reasoning in Roe was weak.

Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg, years before she became a Supreme Court justice, acknowledged that the Court made a mistake by going too far, too fast in its first ruling on the constitutionality of abortion.  She even delivered speeches criticizing the Court's handling of the abortion issue.

The Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade does not eliminate abortion access in the U.S.  It instead reverts the issue back to the states.

It is also important to reiterate that there is emphatically no mention of abortion in the Constitution.  Abortion is not even implicitly protected by any constitutional provision.

Now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade, the issue of abortion returns to the state legislatures.

The Democrats can pass a law that legalizes abortion.  They could make it their primary campaign issue.

But they don't.  In truth, it won't be easy.

The far-left base of the modern Democrat party are fervent proponents of abortion to the extent that they support the killing of babies until the day of birth, and they demand funding from taxpayers to do it as well as an end to the rights of medical professionals to perform the killing against their consciences and what they know by medical training.

Most fair-minded people do not approve of this.

Even proponents of abortion, such as U.S. president Bill Clinton, once believed that abortion should be "safe, legal, and rare."  Once upon a time, the Democrats believed in this principle, and even Hillary Clinton said this during a presidential debate in 2008.  Those days are over.

Back to Jean-Pierre.

Her job is to provide information rooted in facts.  She isn't a social or political commentator.  Providing opinions is beyond the realm of her job description.

Every syllable she utters is part of the nation's history.  It is therefore incumbent upon her always to be factual.  If she doesn't have the right information, she can always resort to her trademark: "I would have to get back to you on that."

Someone should find out if she ever does. 

But instead, she chose to state an opinion and make a claim that was inaccurate.

A fair media establishment would have held her accountable and would have fact-checked her remarks.  But alas — the mainstream media function as the propaganda wing for the Democrats.

Ideally, the White House should have censured Jean-Pierre.  She should have been compelled to issue an immediate retraction and an apology.

But nothing of the kind occurred or is likely to occur.

With every passing day, the Democrats are violating many sacrosanct fundamentals.

Hopefully, Jean-Pierre will be held accountable during the next White House press briefing.  Perhaps Peter Doocy, who is one of the rare members of the press who challenges the White House, will once again rise to the occasion.

Image: Twitter screen shot.