Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
it will be overturned on appeal. The judge is a PP supporter and should have recused himself.
it's amazing that you want to end something that goes after those in power just because it could be used against your Abortion God.
it will be overturned on appeal. The judge is a PP supporter and should have recused himself.
it's amazing that you want to end something that goes after those in power just because it could be used against your Abortion God.
Naw, guy, I'm against it because they LIED about the content of the report.
There are limits to use of hidden camera journalism.
These had been previously established in the Food Lion case.
The landmark Food Lion case - The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Again, the judgement was for them trespassing, not lying in their report.
Again, the judgement was for them trespassing, not lying in their report.
So what's your point?
My point is that any complaints you have about the content of the videos is meaningless with regards to this judgement.
They were found liable for misrepresenting who they were, which should appall anyone who cares about journalistic freedom.
My point is that any complaints you have about the content of the videos is meaningless with regards to this judgement.
They were found liable for misrepresenting who they were, which should appall anyone who cares about journalistic freedom.
If they misrepresented who they were, how can I trust they didn't misrepresent what they saw through deceptive editing? Which is exactly what these misogynistic fucks did.
Nice try. The whole point of undercover investigative journalism is to get an inside view of something you want to report on.
You start with your hatred of them and their position, and then fill in the blank with whatever you want to rationalize your asinine opinions.
It's called being a hack.
Nice try. The whole point of undercover investigative journalism is to get an inside view of something you want to report on.
You start with your hatred of them and their position, and then fill in the blank with whatever you want to rationalize your asinine opinions.
It's called being a hack.
No, it's called an observation. They lied about who they were. They then took video and deceptively edited it to make it look like PP was selling baby parts.
Religious fanatic scumbags.
I wonder where the trial was held?PP wins $2M judgement against the criminal wingnuts. James O’Keefe is having a meltdown.
Planned Parenthood wins $2m lawsuit against anti-abortion group behind fake videos and 'malicious campaign'
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/planned-parenthood-wins-2m-lawsuit-013616347.html
An anti-abortion group broke the law by trespassing, illegally recording and manipulating videos to make Planned Parenthood officials appear as though they were profiting off fetal tissue donations, a federal jury ruled on Friday.
The six-week trial ended with the jury ordering the Centre for Medical Progress to pay nearly $2.3m (£1.8m) in damages for violating multiple federal and state laws.
David Daleiden, the president of the anti-abortion group, was found to have trespassed on private property and committed other crimes in recording the 2015 videos. He and other employees of the centre were ordered to pay varying amounts.
They won a lawsuit, but they are every bit the losers they always have been.
Is your google broken, or just another lazy wingnut?I wonder where the trial was held?PP wins $2M judgement against the criminal wingnuts. James O’Keefe is having a meltdown.
Planned Parenthood wins $2m lawsuit against anti-abortion group behind fake videos and 'malicious campaign'
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/planned-parenthood-wins-2m-lawsuit-013616347.html
An anti-abortion group broke the law by trespassing, illegally recording and manipulating videos to make Planned Parenthood officials appear as though they were profiting off fetal tissue donations, a federal jury ruled on Friday.
The six-week trial ended with the jury ordering the Centre for Medical Progress to pay nearly $2.3m (£1.8m) in damages for violating multiple federal and state laws.
David Daleiden, the president of the anti-abortion group, was found to have trespassed on private property and committed other crimes in recording the 2015 videos. He and other employees of the centre were ordered to pay varying amounts.
They won a lawsuit, but they are every bit the losers they always have been.
The lib journalists should have included that information
The editing wasn't found actionable. Stop adding it to the judgement.
Investigative journalism is a needed part of our system. You want it gone to defend your god abortion.
The editing wasn't found actionable. Stop adding it to the judgement.
Investigative journalism is a needed part of our system. You want it gone to defend your god abortion.
Trespassing under false pretenses is still against the law.
By your "logic", it should be okay for reporters to break into your house, hack into your computer, and then selectively edit what they find to make you look bad, all in the name of journalism.
Wow, not even close. But that you have to go there shows how weak your position is.
Wow, not even close. But that you have to go there shows how weak your position is.
Why not? I mean, if acheving your anti-choice agenda is the important thing, then anyone trying to prove their agenda is there.. and if they plant some incriminating files on your computer, that's kind of okay, because it's okay to use deception to slander people you don't like...
Now you are equating framing and planting evidence to undercover journalism?
You are a fucking nut.
Um, that's called under cover journalism....60 minutes was great at it back in the day. As for your nonsense about admitting to something they "weren't" doing, well why would anyone with two brain cells do that? Do you do that?Now you are equating framing and planting evidence to undercover journalism?
You are a fucking nut.
Uh, what do you think these nuts were doing.
They were misrepresenting themselves to get people to say stuff they wouldn't normally say.
They then edited the tapes in such a way to make them look guilty of something they weren't actually doing.
This is why they got slapped with a 2 Million Dollar fine.
Now you are equating framing and planting evidence to undercover journalism?
You are a fucking nut.
Uh, what do you think these nuts were doing.
They were misrepresenting themselves to get people to say stuff they wouldn't normally say.
They then edited the tapes in such a way to make them look guilty of something they weren't actually doing.
This is why they got slapped with a 2 Million Dollar fine.
Um, that's called under cover journalism....60 minutes was great at it back in the day. As for your nonsense about admitting to something they "weren't" doing, well why would anyone with two brain cells do that? Do you do that?
Again, the editing had nothing to do with the judgement. Stop misrepresenting about that.
They got them to say stuff to what they thought the investigators were. They weren't forced to say anything, nothing was planted.
That you have to make up what they did to justify your sad position is typical of you.
Um, that's called under cover journalism....60 minutes was great at it back in the day. As for your nonsense about admitting to something they "weren't" doing, well why would anyone with two brain cells do that? Do you do that?
Sixty Minutes didn't outright lie like these guys did.
Again, the editing had nothing to do with the judgement. Stop misrepresenting about that.
They got them to say stuff to what they thought the investigators were. They weren't forced to say anything, nothing was planted.
That you have to make up what they did to justify your sad position is typical of you.
Marty, I'm not the one paying a $2MM judgement... they are.
it will be overturned on appeal.
