Tomi Lahren Suspended After Guns, Abortion Comment

Tomi Lahren is hot… in hot water.

Popular political commentator Tomi Lahren has been suspended for one week by conservative media outlet “The Blaze.” The exact nature of the suspension is unclear, but the Daily Caller reports that it could be the result of a pro-choice comment she made last week on the television show “The View.”

“I’m pro-choice and here’s why,” Lahren said. “I’m a constitutional, you know, someone that loves the Constitution. I am someone that is for limited government, and so I can’t sit here and be a hypocrite and say I’m for limited government but I think that the government should decide what women do with their bodies.”

Lahren continued: “I can say, you know what, I am for limited government, so stay out of my guns and you can stay out of my body, as well.”

Lahren was suspended shortly after the interview. While The Blaze hasn’t stated the reason for her suspension, Glenn Beck, the outlet’s founder, criticized Lahren on his radio show. He played clips of Lahren seeming to flip-flop on the abortion issue and argued against the idea that conservatives are hypocrites for opposing abortion.

“I would disagree that you’re a hypocrite if you want limited government and yet you want the government to protect life of the unborn. It’s very, very clear,” he said. “But it takes intellectual honesty, and it takes a willingness to actually think these things through and to do more than just read Twitter or Facebook to get your news and your political opinions.”

Lahren’s troubles at The Blaze began even before her comments on The View, according to the Daily Caller. Her inflammatory style has put her at odds with other Blaze employees, and she might leave the network even before her contract expires in September.

To her critics on Twitter—which included other Blaze reporters—Lahren tweeted, “I speak my truth. If you don’t like it, tough. I will always be honest and stand in my truth.”

Lahren, 24, has been gaining increasing popularity over the last several months for a segment of her show called “Final Thoughts,” a short rant about current political events. She occasionally tackles gun-related issues, calling on politicians and government officials to reduce restrictions and regulations on firearms.

“The anti-gunners say they don’t want to infringe on your rights, but that’s the first lie,” she told Personal Defense World in October of 2016. “The Second Amendment states our right to bear arms ‘shall not be infringed.’ That means no arbitrary restrictions on the type or size of firearms we own.”

About the author: Jordan Michaels has been reviewing firearm-related products for over two years and enjoying them for much longer. With family in Canada, he’s seen first hand how quickly the right to self-defense can be stripped from law-abiding citizens. He escaped that statist paradise at a young age, married a sixth-generation Texan, and currently lives in Waco.

{ 29 comments… add one }
  • R. Harris MD March 26, 2017, 1:02 am

    The decision in Morrison by the Supreme Court lays the foundation for the Constitutional right to privacy. Privacy in medical matters was the basis of the decision of Morrison. In that case, the court ruled that the State of New Jersey had no right to restrict access to birth control (the legislature reasoned that birth control was equivalent to “killing babies”because they would not be conceived or born) and the court ruled that due to the right of privacy the woman had a right to access care from her doctor without interference from government. So lies the basis of Roe V Wade. There is a Constitutional restriction on the government’s right to interfere with the right of privacy of a person to access care from their doctor,lawyer, priest, or anyone else for that matter. The notion that a ball of cells is a human being is scientifically BS. The data shows that over 40% of all pregnancies terminate themselves before the woman even knows she is pregnant. This is due to genetic abnormalities incompatible with life. After the aforementioned Roe V Wade decision, it was determined that before 20 weeks gestation, there was not a viable fetus and therefore that was not an”individual” and the government could not interfere with the woman’s right to choose an abortion. Whether you like it or not, that is the basis of the law in this country. Every attempt to “work around ” the law has been struck down by every Supreme Court since Morrison was decided. Those courts have been populated in the majority by conservatives. The restriction on government interfering in your right to privacy extends to all individuals for all issues not just abortion. It would help if the populace would learn the basis of the law in this country and why we have the laws that we have. Whether you are against abortion or not, the law is as it is above. If you want to change it and give up your right to privacy for all matters protected under Morrison, feel free to try and pass a Constitutional Amendment to make that change. By the way–the chances of passing that Amendment is nil–whether you like it or not, you cannot get it through the Congress and 3/4 of the states to change the Constitution.

  • Paul A. Stambnaugh March 25, 2017, 2:34 pm

    Glenn Beck and “The View” are far, far left socialist/ Liberals. If everything was left up to them you would not have any freedoms. Look who they support. That should tell you something. loosers and cry babies of the like.

    • Harold Littell March 27, 2017, 11:32 am

      When did Glen Beck become a leftist? Did I miss something? Last I checked, about ten seconds ago, he’s still very much pro-gun and pro-life.

  • Doc Loch March 25, 2017, 1:24 pm

    And the error continues among the ignorant. Since when is a fetus who has distinctly different DNA, “MY body.” Not in any sense is an embryo of a human (or any other mammal) still part of the body of the mother from, potentially, Zygote stage to Morula for sure. This argument of the justifiers does not hold any scientific or moral water and simply shows the desire to belay personal consequences of decisions at the expense of another human life!

    So, she may be for limited government which is good, but the question is who should provide consequences to those who take the lives of others that are NOT THEIR OWN!

  • FirstStateMark March 25, 2017, 12:55 pm

    Wow! A round of applause after every alt-left liberal statement. Reminds me of that other waste of time alt-left liberal gathering called Real Time with Bill Maher.

  • michael March 25, 2017, 5:03 am

    i am surprised, a conservative that actually has a brain!

  • Patrick Bludau March 24, 2017, 5:25 pm

    Tomi is correct, and I agree: it is NOT the federal government’s job. I like guns, don’t agree with abortion, and have medical insurance through work. But I don’t want or need the federal government controlling me. Liberty: a life free from government intrusion.

  • Frank Ubar March 24, 2017, 11:29 am

    Most Americans are pro gun and pro choice so this shouldn’t surprise anyone. Get over it.

    • Rouge1 March 24, 2017, 1:43 pm

      Yea Frank baby killing and guns do go hand in hand.

  • Retrocon March 24, 2017, 11:25 am

    Reality check, folks.

    The FEDERAL government has a constitution that forbids the infringement on the right to bear arms. It is a federal matter.

    The constitution does neither forbid or allow abortion. So, like murder and battery and burglary, abortion, which would be murder of a child IMHO, is left to the states to decide. Bending the constitution to read abortion into privacy rights is wrong, that would be saying that I have a right to murder you, as long as it’s in the privacy of my own home. The BoR was intended to protect politically dangerous speech, privacy, arms, etc.

    Tomi, if a constitutionalist, should clarify her answer, as the two “rights,” she stated are not one in the same.

    That said…. she is hot.

    • R Harris MD March 26, 2017, 4:11 am

      Please read my comment posted above. Your knowledge of Constitutional law is flawed and therefore your conclusion that there is no Constitutional protection for abortion is faulty. The law is as noted above and that privacy rights defined under the Constitution as decided in Morrison and subsequently Roe V Wade make your argument baseless. Whether one supports or opposes abortion the law as to privacy is as noted in my post above–learn the law so that your comments make sense–this one does not meet any standard as to the current status of Constitutional law.

  • Wayne Hynes March 24, 2017, 11:20 am

    Tomi Lahren is the only reason I returned to The Blaze and then ONLY to tune in to Tomi. She’s articulate, bright and unafraid, expressing publicly the same core beliefs I have. I had stopped watching Dana Loesch because she went from warrior to desk diva. I’ll stop tuning in The Blaze when Tomi leaves. And… Glenn Beck is just a nutcase.

  • KSG March 24, 2017, 10:56 am

    Tomi, you are welcome at my house any time! Come on in relax, feel free to exersize your 1st amendment rights without backlash and enjoy are 2nd amendment right all day’n night. Keep up the good work and don’t let the haters push you around. From behind enemy lines in California, soon to be back in the free world (Nevada). I got you back!

  • mcFoo March 24, 2017, 10:08 am

    Nothing surprising here – “The Blaze” is another one of those “Fake News” outlets that ranks with all other fictional drama shows. They do not want any employees actually acting like they care about reality, facts and stirring up any pots that do not raise viewer ratings with their typical text-and-drive mindless target audience.

  • BJG March 24, 2017, 9:59 am

    Never heard of her. but if she agrees with the democrats baby killing bulls**t, to hell with her.

  • ToddB March 24, 2017, 9:51 am

    Its an odd thing I see in gun forums people saying how reasonable conservatives are that liberals are the unreasonable ones. Guess that’s why Tomi Lauren went from a darling of the right to a ‘traitor’ in just a few hours, because they are so ‘reasonable’? Tomi dared to say ‘its not really different’. It may make perfect sense to some people, but to most you cant say ‘I don’t want the govt telling me what to do’ on religion, guns, speech, media, how to raise their kids, etc. Then in the next breath say ‘I want the govt telling OTHER people what to do’ when it comes to religion, speech, media, how to raise their kids or that high voltage wire, abortion. I am far from some liberal, but I cant stand hypocrites. I sit and read the stupidity people spew in forums. How they want the liberal media banned, while trying to say conservative media is protected by the constitution. Or how liberal protestors need to shut up, but their freedom of speech is sacred. ITS NOT FRIGGIN DIFFERENT. Freedom of speech is…freedom of speech. Freedom of the press is…freedom of the press. It doesn’t depend on if you agree with it. If the far right wants the govt to leave them alone, then they should stop demanding the govt tell other people what to do. “Its different” is garbage, its an excuse for not making a rational argument, usually because a rational argument cant be made.

    • Todd March 27, 2017, 10:08 am

      This has been going on for centuries possibly millennia. It’s how wars start over territory. “My views count yours don’t. ”
      I’m surprised you think it’s odd. You may be confusing “conservatives ” and the alt right with Libertarians. If you were to go on some liberal forums there would be identical hypocritical views just reversed.

  • Glenn61 March 24, 2017, 9:15 am

    This is what happens to an issue when the Left or more accurately Leftist Women gat to make the rules and have inpt in laws in things like guns and abortion.
    Guns are heavily regulated, varies from state to state, can’t obtain one if your not an adult with out a criminal record, and sre subject to constant attacks from the politicians wanting to ban them.
    Abortion on the other hand, Thanks to Roe “V” Wade,, is an undeniable right in all 50 states, can be obtained by a minor, can usually be implemented right up until the day the baby is due, and fuels the fetal tissue trade at the expense of a defenseless baby.
    What if arms, that are mentioned and numerated in the Constitution, were as unregulated as abortion, which is not…?

    • Mike Hawk March 24, 2017, 9:55 am

      Another ignorant zombie…try fact checking there chuckle nuts. Less than 1% of abortions are after week 22, and the few states that allow those abortions after week 22 are more than not conservative states. Again, try reading shit bird!

      • Rouge1 March 24, 2017, 1:52 pm

        The baby killing cheerleader calling someone chuckle nuts? I guess it takes a big man to kill babies they are hard to kill.

      • Ray Taylor March 24, 2017, 7:37 pm

        Clean up the comments a bit, dirt-dauber.

    • R Harris MD March 26, 2017, 9:33 am

      Please define for me any evidence of your so called “fetal tissue trade”. That means finding a reference in a peer reviewed medical journal, not some comment from Druggie Limbaugh or other right wing commentator. I can point you to the best place to search and that is the NIH databases (National Institutes of Health/Department of HHS/US Government). Find for me any article that defines a “trade” in fetal parts or tissue and then maybe I’ll consider the BS that you have published above. There is no “trade” from abortion that leads to tissues being bought/sold/traded on some open market. Comments that have no basis in medical fact but are nothing but political propaganda are of no value in attempting to discuss the rights of an individual to express a basic political view. One may express massive ignorance of reality, as you have done so brilliantly here, but do not attempt to sell it as medical fact.

  • Simon Andric March 24, 2017, 8:02 am

    That is complete BS that they suspend her. We all know what worthless liberal hacks the dummies from that show are. She is a smart girl and since I never watch that garbage show, I could only imagine what she was up against. If the blaze wants to incriminate and suspend their employees for stating their opinion on other shows, then they should not be considered a journalist company. They are acting like a liberal criminate media outlet.

    • Dr Motown March 24, 2017, 8:37 am

      Glenn Beck seeing some competition, so he has to act against her. The man developed the whole anti-Trump movement with the hope that Trump would lose and he could emerge as the “savior” to the Republican Party and increase his own wealth and advertising fees. “See, I told you so! Pick my candidate next time!”

  • Mike Veilleux March 24, 2017, 6:53 am

    Non story. Didn’t even know she existed.

  • SuperG March 23, 2017, 12:25 pm

    It just dawned upon me, this is a web site about guns…I thought.

    • Alan March 24, 2017, 9:15 am

      It is, but if you think that you can separate Guns and politics (She IS a PRO GUN political commentator, ya’know?), then you’re in La La Land.

    • Mike Hawk March 24, 2017, 9:42 am

      Well, if you read the article it quotes her comments and beliefs on gun rights. Try reading

    • Mike Hawk March 24, 2017, 9:49 am

      good for her for speaking the truth! Glenn Beck is two bit hack job who’s hypocrisy and lies know no bounds. Too many mindless zombies listen to him and blindly believe him without ever opening their eyes and looking at facts. God help you if you’re one of them…

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend