That question, lobbed by Wall Street Journal reporter Catherine Lacey, should have been easy for Karine Jean-Pierre to answer. But in the White House briefing room Wednesday afternoon, the press secretary refused to do so.

“I don’t have anything to share from here,” she said, echoing her answer in early May when posed a similar question by a reporter. That time, Jean-Pierre, sighing, said: “I’m not going to speak to that from here.”

In the enlightened era of 2023, when words like “bastard” and “illegitimate” child seem as old-fashioned as horse-drawn carriages, the Biden White House appears committed to pretending that one inconvenient little Biden doesn’t exist.

Perhaps it shouldn’t be surprising that an abortion extremist like President Joe Biden — who has backed legislation that would make abortion legal over all nine months of pregnancy if the mother’s health is at risk— should view a seemingly unplanned child’s life as disposable, as not demanding that he step up as a grandfather.

But it’s still shocking how brazen he has been about treating his own granddaughter, Navy Joan Roberts, like she doesn’t exist.

When Biden announced he had won the presidential election in 2020, he invited all his other grandchildren up on stage. In both 2021 and 2022, the White House hung Christmas stockings for six grandchildren, completely ignoring Navy Joan, who was born in 2018 and was confirmed as Hunter Biden’s daughter after a court-ordered paternity test in 2019.

“Remarkable that Joe Biden hangs a Christmas stocking for his dog, but won’t acknowledge his granddaughter,” tweeted Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, where Navy Joan lives with her mother, Lunden Roberts.

Remarkable that Joe Biden hangs a Christmas stocking for his dog but won't acknowledge his granddaughter.

Not an ounce of decency. https://t.co/F1uaAhOPhp

— Tom Cotton (@TomCottonAR) July 3, 2023

Last week, Hunter Biden and Lunden Roberts settled their latest court case, which dealt with whether the little girl could use the Biden last name (she can’t) and how much child support Roberts would receive to raise and care for their daughter.

But based on Jean-Pierre’s answer, don’t look for the 4-year-old to start getting any public recognition from her grandfather now that the court case is settled. Furthermore, a recent New York Times report revealed that “In strategy meetings in recent years, aides have been told that the Bidens have six, not seven, grandchildren.”

That’s not because Navy Joan—or her mother—are trying to avoid being entangled with the Bidens.

“The girl is aware that her father is Hunter Biden and that her paternal grandfather is the president of the United States,” reported the New York Times’ Katie Rogers on Saturday. “She speaks about both of them often, but she has not met them.”

How cruel can the Bidens be?

Hunter Biden — who has gone on to have son Beau with now-wife Melissa Cohen (Beau is acknowledged publicly as a Biden family member) — has largely been mum on the topic of his daughter. In his 2021 memoir, “Beautiful Things,” he suggested that his time with Lunden Roberts was meaningless, describing her—not even using her name—as one of the women he’d “been with during rampages since my divorce … hardly the dating type.”

“We would satisfy our needs and little else,” Hunter Biden wrote, adding:

I’m not proud of it. It’s why I would later challenge in court the woman from Arkansas who had a baby in 2018 and claimed the child was mine—I had no recollection of our encounter. That’s how little connection I had with anyone. I was a mess, but a mess I’ve taken responsibility for.

But whatever the circumstances of Hunter Biden and Lunden Roberts’ encounter, an innocent child was conceived.

She has done nothing to merit this callous treatment by President Joe Biden and Hunter Biden.

President Biden seems to be bringing the pro-abortion mindset to this scenario.

After all, abortion allows for the illusion of control. Abortion on demand ensures that even if someone has sex and regrets it, they can put the genie back in the bottle. They can snuff out the life of the baby that resulted.

While Navy Joan is alive, Joe Biden seems to think that he can just ignore her—and he won’t face any accountability. He won’t face awkward questions about whether he thinks children conceived out of wedlock are less deserving of love. He won’t have to answer as to why he thinks it’s OK that his own granddaughter can be brought to D.C., as she was last year, and not get to meet her grandfather.

Infuriatingly, he might be right that he won’t ever be held accountable.

The New York Times may have covered the story, but in the article itself, the Times suggested it was only conservatives who cared, writing that the court case between Hunter Biden and Lunden Roberts “has been extensively covered in conservative media, from Breitbart to Fox News, and conservative commentators assailed the Biden family after news of the settlement.”

In general, there has been little appetite to cover the story, despite President Biden’s use of his other grandchildren to present himself as a family man. After all, if the Bidens really wanted their grandchildren to be off limits to the media, there’s an easy enough solution: include all the grandkids at events, or include none of them. Ditto for the Christmas stockings. And don’t tell staff to perpetuate the lie you only have six grandkids when you have seven.

Thankfully, Navy Joan seems to be being raised with lots of love in her life. Her mother’s Instagram shows her visiting the beach, playing baseball, celebrating Easter and touring Washington, D.C. “Wouldn’t trade you for the world,” Roberts captioned one post of her and Navy Joan.

In another post, shared on Mother’s Day, Roberts writes, “To the little girl that made me a mama, Navy Joan, I hope one day when you look back you find yourself proud of who you are, where you come from, and most importantly, who raised you.”

Meanwhile, Roberts’ dad, Rob Roberts, is making sure Navy Joan knows a grandfather’s love. The New York Times reported:

“I may not be the POTUS,” Mr. Roberts said in a text message, using an acronym for the president, but he said he would do anything for his granddaughter. He said she “needs for nothing and never will.”

But it’s still insane that a president can do this in 2023—a supposedly enlightened era where we recognize children should not be faulted for the mistakes of their parents, and should be loved and accepted, whatever the messiness of their conception.

Yet apparently in a world where leftists push abortion relentlessly, it’s easy to slip into a mindset of no unplanned children should be alive, their existence an uncomfortable reminder of past decisions.

When we talk about promulgating a pro-life culture, of course the first hope is for a culture where every conceived child’s right to life is acknowledged and honored. Right now, we’re on a promising trajectory toward that, with a slew of states passing pro-life laws after Roe v. Wade was struck down in June 2022 in the Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women’s Health Organization decision.

But a genuinely pro-life culture is also a culture that celebrates life, including when it’s messy. Navy Joan may have been conceived in one of the darkest periods of Hunter Biden’s life, but she herself—a young girl who seems to love America and her family—should be a sign of hope, a beautiful reminder of how so often good is brought out of evil, of how light emerges in the darkness.

It’s too bad Joe Biden is too impoverished to appreciate that.

Article cross-posted from Daily Signal.

New York Attorney General Letitia James is apparently not a fan of Target shifting its position on its “Pride Month” merchandise—which included a “tuck-friendly” swimsuit for men who want to wear women’s suits, an LGBT-themed onesie, and items designed by a company known for its “Satan Respects Pronouns” pin.

In a move that would generally elicit frantic cries about the end of democracy, James, a Democrat, has decided that she and other elected officials, not Target’s customers or employees, should decide the retail giant’s marketing strategy.

“Target’s decision to pull some of its pride merchandise because of backlash from anti-LGBTQ+ customers is wrong,” tweeted James on Wednesday.

“Hatred and bigotry can’t win: New York elected officials and I are urging @Target to reverse its decision and stand up for #LGTBQ+ rights,” she added, saying that she and other elected officials had sent a letter.

.@Target's decision to pull some of its pride merchandise because of backlash from anti-LGBTQ+ customers is wrong.

Hatred and bigotry can't win: New York elected officials and I are urging @Target to reverse its decision and stand up for #LGTBQ+ rights.

— NY AG James (@NewYorkStateAG) June 14, 2023

How is this James’ or other New York elected officials’ business?

Before you bring up Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ war with Disney, remember this: Disney started that by speaking out against the Parental Rights in Education bill, legislation that had the audacity to limit what could be said about sexual orientation or gender identity among kids in kindergarten through third grade.

Target, as far as I know, has taken no positions on New York legislation. Nor did James cite any examples in her tweets.

No, this is just straight-up a politician trying to intimidate a private business because that private business isn’t acting the way the politician prefers.

And by using her government Twitter account and citing a letter signed by her and other “elected officials,” James is making no pretense of acting as a private citizen. No, she’s talking as one of the most powerful people in one of the most influential states in the U.S.

She’s also taking a move straight from the playbook of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who tweeted earlier this year that “California won’t be doing business with @walgreens” after Walgreens announced it wouldn’t sell abortifacient drugs in some states.

California won't be doing business with @walgreens — or any company that cowers to the extremists and puts women's lives at risk.

We're done.https://t.co/OB10cYfm8H

— Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) March 6, 2023

Three months later, Newsom’s threat appeared to be mostly bluster. California has now reportedly allowed Walgreens to bid for a major contract again. The state also continues to let Medicaid patients use Walgreens. (But don’t think Newsom had a change of heart. Apparently, it’s likely illegal to ban Medicaid patients from Walgreens.)

Walgreens’ move, mind you, came when 21 states’ attorney generals announced they didn’t think it was legal for pharmacy chains to sell abortifacient drugs in their states.

Still, though, Newsom clearly tried to use California’s economic muscle to force pharmacies in red states to uphold blue state’ values.

Again, democracy is not in fashion when it comes to people who don’t hold the “right” views.

That brings us to the real reason James (likely) is taking this completely inappropriate step: The Left is suddenly in real danger of losing the culture war.

Sure, leftists may have forced same-sex marriage on all 50 states in a 2015 Supreme Court decision that went against the votes of 31 states’ residents. Yes, they might be manipulating laws and regulations to promote the trans agenda, even at the expense of women’s safety and privacy. And yes, they may have captured the boardrooms, Big Tech, the universities, Hollywood, and so many more institutions.

But as the Bud Light boycott and the Target backlash shows, people are beginning to wake up—and realize they’re not alone.

In fact, there are a lot of Americans who have an issue with a man who “identifies” as a woman promoting womanhood. There are a lot of Americans who think that they shouldn’t have to explain to their kids when running errands what a “tuck-friendly” swimsuit is. There are a lot of Americans who think that teen girls shouldn’t have to risk their safety and compete against teen boys in girls’ sports, just because the boys want to say they’re now girls.

Bud Light is no longer the top-selling beer in the country. (Congratulations to Modelo Especial, which took the crown.) “Bud Light sales have been roughly 25% lower year-over-year in every single week since it partnered with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney for an Instagram post in early April,” reports CNN. Things are so dire that Bud Light is planning to “provide financial assistance to its wholesalers” and “reimburse fuel for distributors’ trucks,” CNN also reported.

Meanwhile, Target’s stock was at its lowest price in three years Wednesday. It got dinged by Bank of America, which “lowered its price objective from $180 to $145 while saying the reduction is a response to weakened peer multiples, decelerating traffic, and modest mobile app engagement,” reported Fox Business.

Other companies are no doubt taking note.

That’s what leftists like AG James can’t stand.

The Left doesn’t just accept losses. Whether it’s through an activist Supreme Court, lawmaking by bureaucrats, or other moves, the Left is always trying to find some way—no matter how absurdly unconstitutional it is—to get its objectives through.

So, James is trying something new, and effectively saying to Target, “shame if anything happened to that nice business you got.” Even more amazingly, this comes at a time when Target is reportedly getting bomb threats from someone who “accused Target of betraying the LGBTQ+ community,” per The Washington Post.

For once in recent years, the Left is losing a battle in the culture war. But instead of doubling down on their arguments for their views and making the case democratically, they’re resorting to thuggish intimidation.

Article cross-posted from Daily Signal.

Forget #MeToo—we’re now in an era where not wanting to be around a naked person of the opposite sex makes you a bigot breaking the law, not a victim of sexual harassment.

Amazingly, it gets even worse: You can’t be a woman and refuse to touch a naked man, as long as he identifies as female. How sad that the suffragettes aren’t alive to witness our new glorious era.

In Washington state, a brave Korean spa dared to stand up for women-only spaces—and got shot down by a district court judge this week.

In 2020, Haven Wilvich, a man who identifies as female, filed a complaint with the Washington State Human Rights Commission saying that Olympus Spa would not allow him to enter. Olympus Spa, which has two locations in the Seattle area, is a women’s spa that has nude female patrons in several areas.

In fact, the spa requires women to be nude: “Nor is nudity optional. It is allegedly ‘required for certain procedures called ‘Seshin’’ pursuant to Korean tradition,” writes U.S. District Judge Barbara Jacobs Rothstein, of the Western District of Washington, in her decision.

The spa does not allow men to enter. Why? Well, these spa employees have religious beliefs about modesty. According to Rothstein’s decision, the plaintiffs in the case—the owner of the spa, four of its employees, and a regular customer—don’t think, because of their Christian beliefs, that men and women should see each other naked outside of marriage.

The plaintiffs also have a religious conviction that women’s privacy deserves to be respected.

“Women are in a vulnerable position when they are unclothed and/or having treatment while unclothed and we seek to ensure that they feel their privacy and rights are respected,” the plaintiffs stated, according to Rothstein’s decision. “This is a biblical principle from 1 Peter 3:7, 1 Timothy 3:1-7, 1 Timothy 5:2, Phillipians 4:3, Genesis 1:27, Proverbs 31:17, Phillipians 2:3 and more.”

But when it’s religious liberty vs. an aggressive transgender agenda, apparently the transgender agenda wins in Washington state.

And to be clear, Olympus Spa even had this accommodation: Men could enter the spa if they had “gone through post-operative sex confirmation surgery.”

But in 2023, demanding that penises be kept out of a woman’s spa is oh, so retro—and illegal.

Olympus Spa President Sun Lee told the Washington State Human Rights Commission in early 2021, after it had asked the spa about Wilvich’s complaint, that the female-only rule was important because of Korean cultural traditions and a desire to avoid sexual harassment.

“Mr. Lee … detailed the ‘cultural underpinnings’ of the services offered at Olympus Spa—services ‘closely tied to the Korean tradition known as jjimjilbang[.]’ In Olympus Spa’s view, ‘nudity and females-only … cannot be segregated from the cultural requirements for ‘seshin’ services[.]’” wrote Rothstein.

Furthermore, the spa noted in its 2021 response that it was concerned about sexual harassment.

Rothstein continued in her ruling: “Citing Washington’s laws on lewd conduct, facilitating lewd conduct, and public indecency, Mr. Lee conveyed his fear that exposing female customers (especially minors) to male genitalia could subject Olympus Spa to criminal penalties.”

The Washington State Human Rights Commission, which upholds the state’s antidiscrimination laws, was not swayed, finding that Olympus Spa’s policy discriminated based on gender identity.

So let’s take a moment to digest this. Staying true to cultural traditions and practices? Illegal. Violating cultural norms and traditions? Legal.

Preventing underage girls from being in the same area as a naked man? Illegal. Allowing adult naked men visual access to underage naked girls? Legal.

Olympus Spa ultimately settled with the ironically named Washington State Human Rights Commission, but in 2022, brought forward a lawsuit saying that the enforcement of state antidiscrimination laws violated their First Amendment rights.

Rothstein dismissed that lawsuit with her Monday decision upholding the commission’s finding that Olympus Spa’s women-only rules violate state law.

It’s not the first time that aggressive men have tried to invade women’s spaces.

In Canada, Jessica Yaniv—a man who identifies as female—filed discrimination complaints against women estheticians who wouldn’t wax his genitals. In 2019, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal found that “human rights legislation does not require a service provider to wax a type of genitals they are not trained for and have not consented to wax,” reported CBC News. What a win for common sense—and women.

Or let’s take the 2021 case of the Wi Spa incident in Los Angeles. Women complained to staff that they saw a man, penis visible, in their spa. Employees said they couldn’t do anything because of local laws.

Later, Darren Merager, a man who identifies as female, was charged with “exposing an erect penis to four women and a minor girl,” reported the New York Post. Merager told the Post that he was innocent and didn’t have an erection.

The Post also detailed other times Merager was suspected of or charged with indecent exposure—all of which Merager maintains were misunderstandings or incidents of transphobia.

The case appears to be ongoing. In February, Los Angeles magazine reported a judge held a pretrial hearing and said the case could move forward. But in the meantime … what about women?

Well, in Washington state, they’re hardly of importance, clearly. Perhaps one day we’ll view “Let them see penises” as being as out of touch as the phrase attributed to Marie Antoinette.

But for now, the revolution marches on. Penises are here to stay in women’s spaces—and the full force of state law is here to ensure that.

Article cross-posted from Daily Signal.