VIDEO: Pamela Karlan Mocked Crucifixion To Students


Judicial Democrat activist, Pamela Karlan, testified before a House Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday, to discuss her favorable opinions about the Impeachment of President Donald J. Trump, who she politically opposes in numerous conflicts of interest.

Karlan who made an off-color joke about the name of the President’s son at the hearing has a history of anti-white, anti-heterosexual, anti- Christian remarks, claiming they are jokes, including when mocking the crucifixion of Jesus.

Karlan says she considers her comments to be part of her “snarky personality”, of which she is proud.

However, in reality, as an impartial judge, her jokes show her inappropriate and biased behavior and her lack of understanding of established American culture.

Wednesday her jab was over the name Barron, as she tried to make a joke when being questioned by Rep. Shelia Jackson Lee (D-TX).

Watch the footage:

In April, Karlan, a professor of law at Stanford Law School, was recorded breaking down details in the Supreme Court Case, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, where a Colorado wedding cake baker was being sued for refusing to make a cake for a homosexual wedding.

Karlan, an activist on expanding voting privileges in US elections, was reviewing the case for students, detailing evidence including photos of cakes meant to prove that baking cakes was, in fact, an artistic expression.

During those comments, Karlan, while mocking cake makers, said that a cake with a depiction of the crucifixion was in terrible taste, showing her lack of ethics.

The Crucifixion of Jesus, along with two other men on Calvary, is a sacred cornerstone to the Christian faith and often used as a symbol, especially at Easter.

The familiar scene has long been used in artist expression, around the world.

In a video of her comments, Karlan is recorded saying:

“The case was going to come down to was the baking of the cake expressive activity.  Did Colorado have sufficient regulation?  At the oral argument, and I should say one thing [mocks cake makers as artists], that I found the most fun fact about the case was that there was a brief amicus curiae on behalf of neither side by the firm of Baker Bots on the behalf of bakers for cakes.

They were not taking a side of the anti-discrimination part.  They said they wanted people to know that baking a cake is a very expressive activity [audience laughs].

And there were huge numbers of photographs of cakes and some of these photographs were in unbelievable bad taste, [audience laughs].  My favorite one was a cake of the crucifixion done in buttercream, with three little.. um.. um..  you know crosses on it with three little people on them.  And I am just sorry that they didn’t have a version of it where you could press a button and play ‘Look on the Bright Side Of Life’ because it was so… [audience laughs],” Kalan said.

Karlan’s comments start at 32:00