Anti-abortion activists indicted for undercover videos smearing Planned Parenthood

[emilynghiem]

They weren't charged for the same reason this lame asset indictment has been brought...politics.

Exactly. Activists exacting revenge via the legal system. That's about it.

Another name for that is, "tyranny".

I think it's more "bureaucracy" than "tyranny."

The saddest thing about these conflicts, is both sides are convinced
they are doing the right thing. Things get twisted around, and since
both sides are convinced the other has ill intent, it gets exacerbated instead of getting corrected.
And then both sides are even more convinced.

The real tragedy is both sides really want to solve terrible problems,
and just don't see how what they are doing is hurting other people.
so that's why they look so evil. I really don't think they get it at all.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
But so is the road to heaven.
Things can and will go wrong, the difference is if we can forgive them.

 

[emilynghiem]

If they weren't doing it, why did they stop doing it? LMAO!

if they were doing it why hasn't anybody been brought up on charges except for the lying criminals that faked the videos?? LMAO even more!!!

They weren't charged for the same reason this lame asset indictment has been brought...politics.

Not believable since 10 of the 12 states which investigated the matter are run by Republicans.

Harris County Texas is run by Democrats and they're charging the CMP personal with fraudulently purchasing body parts.

Yet more reason not to believe you.

The investigation into Planned Parenthood was launched by District Attorney, Devon Anderson, a Republican.

And again, 10 of 12 of the states which investigated Planned Parenthood's alleged illegal sales of fetal tissue were performed in states run by Republicans. If Republicans, who want to defund Planned Parenthood, can't find any wrong doing on PP's part, then you've got nothing.

Faun
I think the problem is much broader than that.
I don't think we will solve this problem until we
separate both prochoice and prolife funding from govt.

Recognize both as political beliefs and the equivalent of religious lobbying.
And agree to keep them out of govt and fund them separately in private.

This is precisely why people argue to keep social programs,
health care, personal decisions out of federal hands.

People cannot agree on such sensitive issues, and it is cruel
to make politically opposing sides argue over which groups to fund or not.

Let each fund what they believe in, and quit railroading ANY of this through federal govt
unless people agree. Reward people with tax breaks for investing directly into
whatever programs they choose, and quit making federal issues out of groups in conflict.

Enough!

 

[Vandalshandle]

If the republicans insist on defunding health clinics that have been providing care for poor women's health needs, I guess that I can't stop them. After all, they are just continuing their war on women, which is their stock in trade. Apparently, republican women do not get breast cancer, uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, STD's, or any other medical problems that the poor come down with, so why should they invest in care for those that do come down with those things?

 

[Faun]

if they were doing it why hasn't anybody been brought up on charges except for the lying criminals that faked the videos?? LMAO even more!!!

They weren't charged for the same reason this lame asset indictment has been brought...politics.

Not believable since 10 of the 12 states which investigated the matter are run by Republicans.

Harris County Texas is run by Democrats and they're charging the CMP personal with fraudulently purchasing body parts.

Yet more reason not to believe you.

The investigation into Planned Parenthood was launched by District Attorney, Devon Anderson, a Republican.

And again, 10 of 12 of the states which investigated Planned Parenthood's alleged illegal sales of fetal tissue were performed in states run by Republicans. If Republicans, who want to defund Planned Parenthood, can't find any wrong doing on PP's part, then you've got nothing.

Faun
I think the problem is much broader than that.
I don't think we will solve this problem until we
separate both prochoice and prolife funding from govt.

Recognize both as political beliefs and the equivalent of religious lobbying.
And agree to keep them out of govt and fund them separately in private.

This is precisely why people argue to keep social programs,
health care, personal decisions out of federal hands.

People cannot agree on such sensitive issues, and it is cruel
to make politically opposing sides argue over which groups to fund or not.

Let each fund what they believe in, and quit railroading ANY of this through federal govt
unless people agree. Reward people with tax breaks for investing directly into
whatever programs they choose, and quit making federal issues out of groups in conflict.

Enough!

Federal funding is already separated from abortions. There is no reason to cut off organizations like Planned Parenthood, which provides about 97% of its services to non-abortion issues, because the brain-dead right is fucked in the head.

 

[emilynghiem]

If the republicans insist on defunding health clinics that have been providing care for poor women's health needs, I guess that I can't stop them. After all, they are just continuing their war on women, which is their stock in trade. Apparently, republican women do not get breast cancer, uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, STD's, or any other medical problems that the poor come down with, so why should they invest in care for those that do come down with those things?

1. Why is this being sold as if Planned Parenthood is the only means for helping women?
that reminds me of the argument that not forcing Hobby Lobby or other employers to provide
health insurance with REQUIREMENTS to include contested abortifacient drugs
is DEPRIVING employees of birth control "as if employer insurance is the only way to obtain that"

2. Why not make it a requirement that if taxpayers don't want to fund PP then there is an ALTERNATIVE the federal govt can fund that isn't PP if they object so much. Then negotiate with opponents to set up that alternative, which might work out since opponents of ACA need to set up alternatives they want to fund instead anyway.

3. Also if PP does such good work, why aren't there enough donations and voluntary support to provide it?
If you can't serve every person out there because of limited funds, well welcome to the real world.
Most groups DO have to limit their scope to what they can provide effectively,
or else form more groups to cover the rest of the demands.

Why not encourage more people and groups to set up and fund MORE programs like PP offers,
but without the controversial issues?

 

[Vandalshandle]

If the republicans insist on defunding health clinics that have been providing care for poor women's health needs, I guess that I can't stop them. After all, they are just continuing their war on women, which is their stock in trade. Apparently, republican women do not get breast cancer, uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, STD's, or any other medical problems that the poor come down with, so why should they invest in care for those that do come down with those things?

1. Why is this being sold as if Planned Parenthood is the only means for helping women?
that reminds me of the argument that not forcing Hobby Lobby or other employers to provide
health insurance with REQUIREMENTS to include contested abortifacient drugs
is DEPRIVING employees of birth control "as if employer insurance is the only way to obtain that"

2. Why not make it a requirement that if taxpayers don't want to fund PP then there is an ALTERNATIVE the federal govt can fund that isn't PP if they object so much. Then negotiate with opponents to set up that alternative, which might work out since opponents of ACA need to set up alternatives they want to fund instead anyway.

i said it before, and I will say it again. If the republican

3. Also if PP does such good work, why aren't there enough donations and voluntary support to provide it?
If you can't serve every person out there because of limited funds, well welcome to the real world.
Most groups DO have to limit their scope to what they can provide effectively,
or else form more groups to cover the rest of the demands.

Why not encourage more people and groups to set up and fund MORE programs like PP offers,
but without the controversial issues?

I said it before, and I will say it again. If the republicans want to defund the PP health care for needy women program, who am I to stop them? Of course, they could always set up a new program, and change the name, but they won't. We all know that.

 

[emilynghiem]

Federal funding is already separated from abortions. There is no reason to cut off organizations like Planned Parenthood, which provides about 97% of its services to non-abortion issues, because the brain-dead right is fucked in the head.

Faun I see no reason to make anyone fund Planned Parenthood against their will.
If people disagree with the ethics of Wal-Mart, don't they have the right to boycott, protest,
and refuse to give their money to Wal-Mart?
Why can't this be treated similarly?

Now, if PP is the ONLY source of help for certain women or certain services, then why not
settle this dispute by having
A. The Democrats and liberal prochoice supporters of PP channel all their funding into separate
health systems run on this philosophy of prochoice but mandated control through federal govt.
B. The Republicans and conservative prolife supporters of free market direct their taxes
into separate health and medical systems run on this philosophy of prolife and free market.

Then let taxpayers decide which groups to pay for which services or approach to services.

We need as many people as possible setting up more facilities, programs and provisions to meet the diverse needs out there. Why not reward citizens with tax breaks for setting up and investing in their own programs?
Why not have all of these, to cover all populations,
instead of competing to fund or defund different groups through the federal level.

If the answer is NO, not everyone agrees to fund it, then that program is funded privately.

 

[Faun]

Federal funding is already separated from abortions. There is no reason to cut off organizations like Planned Parenthood, which provides about 97% of its services to non-abortion issues, because the brain-dead right is fucked in the head.

Faun I see no reason to make anyone fund Planned Parenthood against their will.
If people disagree with the ethics of Wal-Mart, don't they have the right to boycott, protest,
and refuse to give their money to Wal-Mart?
Why can't this be treated similarly?

Now, if PP is the ONLY source of help for certain women or certain services, then why not
settle this dispute by having
A. The Democrats and liberal prochoice supporters of PP channel all their funding into separate
health systems run on this philosophy of prochoice but mandated control through federal govt.
B. The Republicans and conservative prolife supporters of free market direct their taxes
into separate health and medical systems run on this philosophy of prolife and free market.

Then let taxpayers decide which groups to pay for which services or approach to services.

We need as many people as possible setting up more facilities, programs and provisions to meet the diverse needs out there. Why not reward citizens with tax breaks for setting up and investing in their own programs?
Why not have all of these, to cover all populations,
instead of competing to fund or defund different groups through the federal level.

If the answer is NO, not everyone agrees to fund it, then that program is funded privately.

I guess you're new to this country; but here, it the U.S., there are many things funded with tax dollars and virtually everyone pays for something they'd rather not; and very few things everyone agrees to fund.

 

[emilynghiem]

Federal funding is already separated from abortions. There is no reason to cut off organizations like Planned Parenthood, which provides about 97% of its services to non-abortion issues, because the brain-dead right is fucked in the head.

Faun I see no reason to make anyone fund Planned Parenthood against their will.
If people disagree with the ethics of Wal-Mart, don't they have the right to boycott, protest,
and refuse to give their money to Wal-Mart?
Why can't this be treated similarly?

Now, if PP is the ONLY source of help for certain women or certain services, then why not
settle this dispute by having
A. The Democrats and liberal prochoice supporters of PP channel all their funding into separate
health systems run on this philosophy of prochoice but mandated control through federal govt.
B. The Republicans and conservative prolife supporters of free market direct their taxes
into separate health and medical systems run on this philosophy of prolife and free market.

Then let taxpayers decide which groups to pay for which services or approach to services.

We need as many people as possible setting up more facilities, programs and provisions to meet the diverse needs out there. Why not reward citizens with tax breaks for setting up and investing in their own programs?
Why not have all of these, to cover all populations,
instead of competing to fund or defund different groups through the federal level.

If the answer is NO, not everyone agrees to fund it, then that program is funded privately.

I guess you're new to this country; but here, it the U.S., there are many things funded with tax dollars and virtually everyone pays for something they'd rather not; and very few things everyone agrees to fund.

Faun don't know if you meant to be sarcastic or insulting,
but I am referring to the traditions that started the Constitutional govt,
where anti-federalist arguments still continue to this day:
the idea of rights belonging to the States or People
UNLESS SPECIFICALLY authorized by the Constitution for the central govt to have those duties.

I was born in Texas and lived here all my life.
Maybe it is my TEXAS culture that speaks to this idea
of running your businesses, churches, schools and community/charity programs YOURSELF
and only use Govt for things like national security that can't be done by state or by local volunteers.

I'm sorry that idea is FOREIGN TO YOU.
Hence the stereotype that Texans see the world
as either Texas or Not Texas. The State of Texas
has been its own nation before. So maybe the
mentality and traditions will always be on the side
of independence, and only working with federal govt
on issues that are UNIQUE and DESIGNED to be managed on that national level.

Health care is definitely not designed to be managed through Washington DC
for every state's populations. That's why these conflicts keep coming up
because of trying to mandate one public policy nationally on something as sensitive and personal
as health care, and especially reproductive decisions that are meant to stay private.
It just makes sense to me why these decisions ought to stay local, private and up to individuals.
Then there wouldn't be any fighting over federal funding --
and YES Faun what you said about "very little would be funded through govt"
is CORRECT -- that is the POINT -- to localize as much management so there is accountability directly among the people affected, and to minimalize how much is mandated at the top,
that has to be universal since it has to be applied and enforced for everyone -- that SHOULD be less so that our govt is NOT overburdened and backlogged with local issues that
belong to local govt. EXACTLY!

If you look up CONSTITUTIONALISM as a BELIEF IN LIMITED GOVT
this is an age old American tradition. That is part of the key core framework
of my beliefs. I am also a prochoice Democrat, so I am sympathetic with
all the issues of including diversity and minority interests; but by Constitutional
principles, this cannot be imposed on people against their will, consent or beliefs.

Ideally, people by our free will embedded in our human nature by design,
should be able to FREELY CHOOSE and CONSENT to laws and contracts.

I believe in Jefferson's statement in the Declaration of Independence that
the JUST POWERS OF GOVT ARE DERIVED FROM THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.

So that is why I am opposed to abusing either church or state authority,
or any other collective influence of corporations, media, parties, etc.
to BULLY people by either coercion, exclusion, or other discrimination.

If we really have formed good solutions that are effective sustainable and ethical,
I believe people will choose those freely and not have to be forced into them.

The best solutions I have found, I find that people CHOOSE to fund, participate and follow freely.

As for people with mental and criminal illness who reject and rebel out of self-destructive
or addictive/abusive tendencies, I found that the methods of CURING these conditions
ESPECIALLY rely on free choice to participate in order for the healing to work.

Only if people are already using coercion as a dangerous force, such as violence
and threatening others, then of course force is necessary to contain or arrest such threats, harms or dangers.

But in the case of things like health care choices, there is no such criminal
threat that justifies depriving citizens of liberty who have done nothing wrong yet!

So that is where I reject abuses of federal govt, to the point of pushing political propaganda
that the compelling interest of govt is enough to justify imposing legislation that is far from the "least restrictive."

Given the votes for the ACA were biased as Democrats/liberals who favor the belief in right
to health care as opposed to faith in free market solutions,
this shows it was politically biased and motivated, and is not from a threat only the federal govt can answer
by "imposing mandates on all citizens requiring purchase of private insurance"

Since that isn't even covering all costs or all people, that cannot be the solution to the threat.

If we don't stop this abuse of govt to push political agenda,
we will continue to see the subsequent conflicts and battles spring from that ongoing war of ideologies,
including the Hobby Lobby case and this Planned Parenthood debacle.

Instead of blaming people for each individual incident that comes up,
why not nip the whole problem in the bud by NOT pushing prolife OR prochoice
programs on taxpayers, but let all people and all parties choose to put their taxes and funding
into programs that respect their beliefs.

This isn't like other areas of legislation that are arbitrary!
These prochoice and prolife beliefs are SACRED and not subject for govt regulation much less forced funding.
Why not recognize that, and quit forcing people on both sides to defend their BELIEFS.
Why not protect beliefs equally by letting people fund their own, and keeping those out of govt mandates.

 

[WorldWatcher]

They weren't charged for the same reason this lame asset indictment has been brought...politics.

Not believable since 10 of the 12 states which investigated the matter are run by Republicans.

Harris County Texas is run by Democrats and they're charging the CMP personal with fraudulently purchasing body parts.

Office of District Attorney, Harris County, Texas, Devon Anderson

The Harris County Texas District Attorney is a Republican and was appointed by the Conservative Governor Rick Perry to complete a term and then won an election to hold the post.


>>>>

 

[Meathead]

Hell, even George Zimmerman got indicted.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

If the republicans insist on defunding health clinics that have been providing care for poor women's health needs, I guess that I can't stop them. After all, they are just continuing their war on women, which is their stock in trade. Apparently, republican women do not get breast cancer, uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, STD's, or any other medical problems that the poor come down with, so why should they invest in care for those that do come down with those things?

1. Why is this being sold as if Planned Parenthood is the only means for helping women?
that reminds me of the argument that not forcing Hobby Lobby or other employers to provide
health insurance with REQUIREMENTS to include contested abortifacient drugs
is DEPRIVING employees of birth control "as if employer insurance is the only way to obtain that"

2. Why not make it a requirement that if taxpayers don't want to fund PP then there is an ALTERNATIVE the federal govt can fund that isn't PP if they object so much. Then negotiate with opponents to set up that alternative, which might work out since opponents of ACA need to set up alternatives they want to fund instead anyway.

3. Also if PP does such good work, why aren't there enough donations and voluntary support to provide it?
If you can't serve every person out there because of limited funds, well welcome to the real world.
Most groups DO have to limit their scope to what they can provide effectively,
or else form more groups to cover the rest of the demands.

Why not encourage more people and groups to set up and fund MORE programs like PP offers,
but without the controversial issues?

1. Why is this being sold as if Planned Parenthood is the only means for helping women?

I stopped reading right there. You should read up on PP and what their mission is.
No one said it was the only means of helping women except you. PP makes a point to locate in underserved areas. This means that in many areas , PP is the only provider of these services that are readily accessible to the community. How many people can or will seek these services if they had to take half a day and three buses to cross town to do so?

 

[playtime]

they never did to begin with. that's what the various investigations by multiple states were all about. Texas indicting the liars that started this whole fraud is icing on the cake.

Of course they did. They admitted on video that they would take money in exchange for body parts. How does that not meet the definition of "sell?"

you mean the heavily edited video showing that they did so the lying indicted criminals can further their RWNJ agenda?

 

[playtime]

They weren't charged for the same reason this lame asset indictment has been brought...politics.

ignoramus' never cease to astound me with how they much rather believe a lie than take a bit of time < less than 2 minutes in this case> to learn the truth:

Antiabortion activists who videotaped Planned Parenthood allegedly used fake licenses
January 26, 2016
byMolly Hennessy-Fiske

Evidence emerged Tuesday explaining why Houston grand jurors charged with investigating misconduct by Planned Parenthood instead charged two antiabortion activists who had covertly filmed officials discussing the procurement of fetal tissue.

David Daleiden, 27, director of the Irvine-based nonprofit Center for Medical Progress, was indicted Monday by the grand jury on a felony charge of tampering with a governmental record, as was Sandra Merritt, 62, an employee at the center.

According to indictments released Tuesday, the pair used fake California driver’s licenses to gain entrance to Houston-based Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast and covertly film on April 9, 2015. If convicted, they face a potential fine of up to $10,000 and maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

Daleiden is also charged with a misdemeanor count related to purchasing human organs punishable by up to a year in jail and a $4,000 fine, authorities said.

“That charge was the result of an email he sent to Planned Parenthood employees in June 2015 and attached to that email was a proposal in which he offered to pay Planned Parenthood up to $1,600 per specimen” of fetal tissue, said Josh Schaffer, a Houston-based attorney representing Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast.

Schaffer noted that Planned Parenthood officials did not respond to Daleiden’s offer, “but it does not matter under Texas law. There does not need to be an agreement or payment. The crime occurred when the offer was made.”
[...]

Antiabortion activists who videotaped Planned Parenthood allegedly used fake licenses

so there you have it... the real reason why the nutters were indicted.

you are welcome.

 

[playtime]

they never did to begin with. that's what the various investigations by multiple states were all about. Texas indicting the liars that started this whole fraud is icing on the cake.

If they weren't doing it, why did they stop doing it? LMAO!

if they were doing it why hasn't anybody been brought up on charges except for the lying criminals that faked the videos?? LMAO even more!!!

They weren't charged for the same reason this lame asset indictment has been brought...politics.

Exactly. Activists exacting revenge via the legal system. That's about it.

how silly.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

If the republicans insist on defunding health clinics that have been providing care for poor women's health needs, I guess that I can't stop them. After all, they are just continuing their war on women, which is their stock in trade. Apparently, republican women do not get breast cancer, uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, STD's, or any other medical problems that the poor come down with, so why should they invest in care for those that do come down with those things?

The GOP represents a Patriarchal Authoritarian Era that is in decline ...they are against female sovereignty over their bodies ....they have been troubled since the advent of "the Pill" which created a new reality for female sexuality....the old dudes with beards are not happy...

"...but tomorrow is today and the Bells will toll for some ...but nothing can change the shape of things to come"

Stick a fork in them they are done...

 

[rightwinger]

Still waiting for Republicans to apologize to Planned Parenthood

For what?

Accusations that they are selling body parts

The Grand Jury did not agree

 

[Faun]

They weren't charged for the same reason this lame asset indictment has been brought...politics.

ignoramus' never cease to astound me with how they much rather believe a lie than take a bit of time < less than 2 minutes in this case> to learn the truth:

Antiabortion activists who videotaped Planned Parenthood allegedly used fake licenses
January 26, 2016
byMolly Hennessy-Fiske

Evidence emerged Tuesday explaining why Houston grand jurors charged with investigating misconduct by Planned Parenthood instead charged two antiabortion activists who had covertly filmed officials discussing the procurement of fetal tissue.

David Daleiden, 27, director of the Irvine-based nonprofit Center for Medical Progress, was indicted Monday by the grand jury on a felony charge of tampering with a governmental record, as was Sandra Merritt, 62, an employee at the center.

According to indictments released Tuesday, the pair used fake California driver’s licenses to gain entrance to Houston-based Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast and covertly film on April 9, 2015. If convicted, they face a potential fine of up to $10,000 and maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.

Daleiden is also charged with a misdemeanor count related to purchasing human organs punishable by up to a year in jail and a $4,000 fine, authorities said.

“That charge was the result of an email he sent to Planned Parenthood employees in June 2015 and attached to that email was a proposal in which he offered to pay Planned Parenthood up to $1,600 per specimen” of fetal tissue, said Josh Schaffer, a Houston-based attorney representing Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast.

Schaffer noted that Planned Parenthood officials did not respond to Daleiden’s offer, “but it does not matter under Texas law. There does not need to be an agreement or payment. The crime occurred when the offer was made.”
[...]

Antiabortion activists who videotaped Planned Parenthood allegedly used fake licenses

so there you have it... the real reason why the nutters were indicted.

you are welcome.

$1600 per specimen?? Yeah, he's fucked. PP wanted only to charge only $75 to cover their costs.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

So from this point forward will all undercover investigations be subject to prosecution ? No more investigations into Government corruption and such?

 

[Faun]

So from this point forward will all undercover investigations be subject to prosecution ? No more investigations into Government corruption and such?

Are you saying that journalists should be allowed to break the law in order to entrap their targets?