Abortion accounts for 86% of Planned Parenthood non-gov't revenue

[icanthearyou 4,468]

I disagree. PP was not even on your radar until the edited videos were released. You continue to talk about what you believe to true rather than what you know to be fact. I disagree with your methods.

PP has always been on my radar in the sense that I detest organizations that valorize baby killing. I'm funny that way. But when the videos (which were released in full, and two forensic audits have confirmed were not altered in any significant way) were released and I realized how much federal funding they pull down that keeps them in business, I was incensed.

I am not sure this is completely factual. There seems to be some difference of opinion and, beneficial use of semantics.

http://www.statesman...thood/72994738/

http://mediamatters....y-edited/205264

I see, and appreciate your emotion. I do not feel that emotion, or the cause, gives anyone license, or justification, to misrepresent, amend, or conceal the truth.

See DKW's post. From the forensic audit Planned Parenthood commissioned:

A report commissioned by Planned Parenthood has found that the sting videos targeting its tissue donation practices contain intentionally deceptive edits, missing footage and inaccurately transcribed conversations. But there is no evidence that the anti-abortion group behind the attack made up dialogue.

…But the firm also wrote that it is impossible to characterize the extent to which the edits and cuts distort the meaning of the conversations depicted and that there was no “widespread evidence of substantive video manipulation.”

http://www.politico....ion-121800.html

PPFA conveniently declined to mention those statements in any of their press releases. It has been concluded that the full videos are authentic.

The latest forensic audit says:

According to a news report, the extensive report finds answer is no and the only edits in the videos consisted of bathroom breaks and time eating meals.

"This conclusion is supported by the consistency of the video file date and time stamps, the video timecode, as well as the folder and file naming scheme," the report states. "The uniformity between the footage from Investigator 1's camera and Investigator 2's camera also support the evidence that the video recordings are authentic." The report also confirms that "edits made to the Full Footage videos [for the shorter YouTube videos] were applied to eliminate non-pertinent footage, such as restroom breaks, meals, and other similar periods lacking pertinent conversation."

Again, I have not questioned the authenticity of the full length versions. I ask again, are they misleading/deceptive? Do they suggest criminal activity that, to this point and, after investigation, has proven to be absent.

First, as the audit shows, the stuff that was edited was non-pertinent stuff - bathroom breaks and such. It doesn't change the tenor or meaning of the conversation.

And no, I don't think they mislead. They say what they say, in full unedited glory. And as I've stated before, the loophole in the law is so ginormous, it may as well not exist. Basically all it accomplishes now is to keep the PP from selling them for extravagant amounts. But anyone with some common sense and a calculator can see that the clinics that partner with businesses like StemExpress to supply them with parts are making a nice chunk of change on the deal. They are not merely "covering costs" associated with the practice of gathering the needed parts. The buyers make it turnkey for them - supplying the boxes and dry ice for shipment. There's no need for the clinic to devote more resources to separating parts for shipment as they already do that for every abortion. They have to so they can be sure the procedure got out all of the baby. Anything left inside the womb can cause a life threatening infection to the once-to-be mother. The only added work is bagging the parts, placing them in the dry ice container, slapping some packing tape on it and letting the UPS or FedEx guy pick it up. Yet they get paid hundreds of dollars per specimen in many cases. It's not hard to figure out.

So they are breaking the law?

I think they are breaking the law. They aren't supposed to be making money off of this, but they are. But the law is vague and allows them the wiggle room to get out of it. So we need to tighten up the law so it's clear to them that this is not an acceptable practice.

I feel sure you are aware of the investigations and, the results? You still believe they are breaking the law?

[TitanTiger 21,682]

I disagree. PP was not even on your radar until the edited videos were released. You continue to talk about what you believe to true rather than what you know to be fact. I disagree with your methods.

PP has always been on my radar in the sense that I detest organizations that valorize baby killing. I'm funny that way. But when the videos (which were released in full, and two forensic audits have confirmed were not altered in any significant way) were released and I realized how much federal funding they pull down that keeps them in business, I was incensed.

I am not sure this is completely factual. There seems to be some difference of opinion and, beneficial use of semantics.

http://www.statesman...thood/72994738/

http://mediamatters....y-edited/205264

I see, and appreciate your emotion. I do not feel that emotion, or the cause, gives anyone license, or justification, to misrepresent, amend, or conceal the truth.

See DKW's post. From the forensic audit Planned Parenthood commissioned:

A report commissioned by Planned Parenthood has found that the sting videos targeting its tissue donation practices contain intentionally deceptive edits, missing footage and inaccurately transcribed conversations. But there is no evidence that the anti-abortion group behind the attack made up dialogue.

…But the firm also wrote that it is impossible to characterize the extent to which the edits and cuts distort the meaning of the conversations depicted and that there was no “widespread evidence of substantive video manipulation.”

http://www.politico....ion-121800.html

PPFA conveniently declined to mention those statements in any of their press releases. It has been concluded that the full videos are authentic.

The latest forensic audit says:

According to a news report, the extensive report finds answer is no and the only edits in the videos consisted of bathroom breaks and time eating meals.

"This conclusion is supported by the consistency of the video file date and time stamps, the video timecode, as well as the folder and file naming scheme," the report states. "The uniformity between the footage from Investigator 1's camera and Investigator 2's camera also support the evidence that the video recordings are authentic." The report also confirms that "edits made to the Full Footage videos [for the shorter YouTube videos] were applied to eliminate non-pertinent footage, such as restroom breaks, meals, and other similar periods lacking pertinent conversation."

Again, I have not questioned the authenticity of the full length versions. I ask again, are they misleading/deceptive? Do they suggest criminal activity that, to this point and, after investigation, has proven to be absent.

First, as the audit shows, the stuff that was edited was non-pertinent stuff - bathroom breaks and such. It doesn't change the tenor or meaning of the conversation.

And no, I don't think they mislead. They say what they say, in full unedited glory. And as I've stated before, the loophole in the law is so ginormous, it may as well not exist. Basically all it accomplishes now is to keep the PP from selling them for extravagant amounts. But anyone with some common sense and a calculator can see that the clinics that partner with businesses like StemExpress to supply them with parts are making a nice chunk of change on the deal. They are not merely "covering costs" associated with the practice of gathering the needed parts. The buyers make it turnkey for them - supplying the boxes and dry ice for shipment. There's no need for the clinic to devote more resources to separating parts for shipment as they already do that for every abortion. They have to so they can be sure the procedure got out all of the baby. Anything left inside the womb can cause a life threatening infection to the once-to-be mother. The only added work is bagging the parts, placing them in the dry ice container, slapping some packing tape on it and letting the UPS or FedEx guy pick it up. Yet they get paid hundreds of dollars per specimen in many cases. It's not hard to figure out.

So they are breaking the law?

I think they are breaking the law. They aren't supposed to be making money off of this, but they are. But the law is vague and allows them the wiggle room to get out of it. So we need to tighten up the law so it's clear to them that this is not an acceptable practice.

I feel sure you are aware of the investigations and, the results? You still believe they are breaking the law?

As I said, the law is vague enough that they have 'plausible deniability.' They don't have to document the costs vs what they are paid. As long as they code it the right way and the amount isn't mindnumbingly obvious that it's too high, they can get away with it.

I do believe they are breaking the law and I don't think it takes a genius to discern that. But they obfuscate and play right on the edge of what looks like a grey area to a prosecutor and get away with it for now.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

I disagree. PP was not even on your radar until the edited videos were released. You continue to talk about what you believe to true rather than what you know to be fact. I disagree with your methods.

PP has always been on my radar in the sense that I detest organizations that valorize baby killing. I'm funny that way. But when the videos (which were released in full, and two forensic audits have confirmed were not altered in any significant way) were released and I realized how much federal funding they pull down that keeps them in business, I was incensed.

I am not sure this is completely factual. There seems to be some difference of opinion and, beneficial use of semantics.

http://www.statesman...thood/72994738/

http://mediamatters....y-edited/205264

I see, and appreciate your emotion. I do not feel that emotion, or the cause, gives anyone license, or justification, to misrepresent, amend, or conceal the truth.

See DKW's post. From the forensic audit Planned Parenthood commissioned:

A report commissioned by Planned Parenthood has found that the sting videos targeting its tissue donation practices contain intentionally deceptive edits, missing footage and inaccurately transcribed conversations. But there is no evidence that the anti-abortion group behind the attack made up dialogue.

…But the firm also wrote that it is impossible to characterize the extent to which the edits and cuts distort the meaning of the conversations depicted and that there was no “widespread evidence of substantive video manipulation.”

http://www.politico....ion-121800.html

PPFA conveniently declined to mention those statements in any of their press releases. It has been concluded that the full videos are authentic.

The latest forensic audit says:

According to a news report, the extensive report finds answer is no and the only edits in the videos consisted of bathroom breaks and time eating meals.

"This conclusion is supported by the consistency of the video file date and time stamps, the video timecode, as well as the folder and file naming scheme," the report states. "The uniformity between the footage from Investigator 1's camera and Investigator 2's camera also support the evidence that the video recordings are authentic." The report also confirms that "edits made to the Full Footage videos [for the shorter YouTube videos] were applied to eliminate non-pertinent footage, such as restroom breaks, meals, and other similar periods lacking pertinent conversation."

Again, I have not questioned the authenticity of the full length versions. I ask again, are they misleading/deceptive? Do they suggest criminal activity that, to this point and, after investigation, has proven to be absent.

First, as the audit shows, the stuff that was edited was non-pertinent stuff - bathroom breaks and such. It doesn't change the tenor or meaning of the conversation.

And no, I don't think they mislead. They say what they say, in full unedited glory. And as I've stated before, the loophole in the law is so ginormous, it may as well not exist. Basically all it accomplishes now is to keep the PP from selling them for extravagant amounts. But anyone with some common sense and a calculator can see that the clinics that partner with businesses like StemExpress to supply them with parts are making a nice chunk of change on the deal. They are not merely "covering costs" associated with the practice of gathering the needed parts. The buyers make it turnkey for them - supplying the boxes and dry ice for shipment. There's no need for the clinic to devote more resources to separating parts for shipment as they already do that for every abortion. They have to so they can be sure the procedure got out all of the baby. Anything left inside the womb can cause a life threatening infection to the once-to-be mother. The only added work is bagging the parts, placing them in the dry ice container, slapping some packing tape on it and letting the UPS or FedEx guy pick it up. Yet they get paid hundreds of dollars per specimen in many cases. It's not hard to figure out.

So they are breaking the law?

I think they are breaking the law. They aren't supposed to be making money off of this, but they are. But the law is vague and allows them the wiggle room to get out of it. So we need to tighten up the law so it's clear to them that this is not an acceptable practice.

I feel sure you are aware of the investigations and, the results? You still believe they are breaking the law?

As I said, the law is vague enough that they have 'plausible deniability.' They don't have to document the costs vs what they are paid. As long as they code it the right way and the amount isn't mindnumbingly obvious that it's too high, they can get away with it.

I do believe they are breaking the law and I don't think it takes a genius to discern that. But they obfuscate and play right on the edge of what looks like a grey area to a prosecutor and get away with it for now.

Well, let's say, "in your opinion" they are breaking the law. By definition, exploiting the "loophole" is not a violation of the law.

[TitanTiger 21,682]

Loophole is simply my expression. They are technically breaking the law. This is not supposed to be a profitable thing for the clinic but it clearly is and not a few dollars a pop either. Even the main baby parts dealer Stem Express pitched it that way to the clinics on their site. The pitch said "financially rewarding" before all this attention from the videos called that out.

You can believe this little shell game if that makes you sleep better. I may have been born at night, but it wasn't last night.

[homersapien 12,387]

I think they are breaking the law. They aren't supposed to be making money off of this, but they are. But the law is vague and allows them the wiggle room to get out of it. So we need to tighten up the law so it's clear to them that this is not an acceptable practice.

Nucatola matter-of-factly explains how the tissue is collected, but she also explains that the tissue is donated by the woman having an abortion, that not all the organization’s clinics participate in the program and that Planned Parenthood charges between $30 and $100 for, but does not profit from, the gathering of tissues.

This is the supposed “gotcha” proof of illegal activity the filmmakers tout. Except it’s not.

In 1993 Congress passed a law allowing a woman to consent to donating fetal tissues after an abortion and allowing the charging of “reasonable” fees to cover the costs of collecting tissues.

The nine-minute video is a highly edited version of a nearly three-hour conversation in which the posers try to get Nucatola to admit to selling fetal tissue for profit. She doesn’t. PolitiFact Texas reviewed the 60-page transcript and found “Put simply, there’s no clear gotcha.”

http://www.statesman...thood/72994738/

[homersapien 12,387]

You know, if the Republicans had taken this hearing seriously instead of conducting a political "show trial" we might know a little more about the actual facts.

GOP Interrupts Planned Parenthood President For 5 Hours

House hearing is more like House talking.

House Republicans grilled Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards for five hours on Tuesday, and the conclusion was obvious: They wanted to do all the talking themselves.

The point of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing was to talk to Richards about the organization's use of federal funds. It went mostly like this: Republican asks question. Richards starts to respond, and Republican interrupts and asks question again. Richards starts to respond, and Republican interrupts and demands answer. Richards starts to respond, and the chairman, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), interrupts to move to next questioner.

Chaffetz set the tone by cutting off Richards all through his opening questions. He asked about an instance in which he said Planned Parenthood gave $200,000 to an advocacy group in 2013.

"I'm not familiar with that exact payment, but I'm happy to -- " Richards said before Chaffetz interrupted.

"Well, you gave them $200,000. If you don't know, you're running this organization," he said.

"Sir, I -- sir, I -- excuse me, sir," Richards said, trying to respond.

"No. Hold on," Chaffetz interrupted again. "No. No. Hold on." He talked through his question and eventually moved on to a new one.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) accused Richards of saying something she never actually said. She was in the middle of saying that Planned Parenthood's position is that "we trust women to make decisions about their pregnancies" when Gowdy interrupted.

"Ms. Richards, I appreciate the way you like to frame the issue, that you're the reasonable one and those of us who have a contrary position are not reasonable," he said.

"I didn't say that," Richards said.

"No, that's exactly the last answer you gave," Gowdy responded.

Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) really took the cake, though. He interrupted Richards several times, and at one point even cut her off as she tried to answer a question and said it was his turn to talk.

"This is my time. This is my time. So don't interrupt it," Gosar said.

One GOP lawmaker was quiet. Rep. Scott DesJarlais (Tenn.), a pro-life Republican who once pressured his wife and his mistress to get abortions, gave his Q&A time to someone else.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/planned-parenthood-congress-hearing_560af940e4b0dd8503099da7?3gl23xr

[TitanTiger 21,682]

I think they are breaking the law. They aren't supposed to be making money off of this, but they are. But the law is vague and allows them the wiggle room to get out of it. So we need to tighten up the law so it's clear to them that this is not an acceptable practice.

Nucatola matter-of-factly explains how the tissue is collected, but she also explains that the tissue is donated by the woman having an abortion, that not all the organization’s clinics participate in the program and that Planned Parenthood charges between $30 and $100 for, but does not profit from, the gathering of tissues.

This is the supposed “gotcha” proof of illegal activity the filmmakers tout. Except it’s not.

In 1993 Congress passed a law allowing a woman to consent to donating fetal tissues after an abortion and allowing the charging of “reasonable” fees to cover the costs of collecting tissues.

The nine-minute video is a highly edited version of a nearly three-hour conversation in which the posers try to get Nucatola to admit to selling fetal tissue for profit. She doesn’t. PolitiFact Texas reviewed the 60-page transcript and found “Put simply, there’s no clear gotcha.”

http://www.statesman...thood/72994738/

And other directors have said it was around $200 a specimen. Perhaps that's a fully intact one. But regardless, that is almost pure profit for the clinic. It's completely turnkey. They don't pay for the shipping containers or the shipping cost or the dry ice. They don't have to do anything they weren't already doing in terms of separating the parts of the baby's body because that has to be done to make sure there's nothing still in the uterus otherwise a deadly infection can develop. So the sum total of what they have to do that they weren't doing before is 1) put the parts in a bag and the bag in the shipping container, and 2) seal it and allow UPS or similar company to come pick it up. Something that takes all of 3-5 minutes of extra work beyond what you already do every single day makes you $30-200 a pop.

Covering reasonable costs my ass.

[DKW 86 7,977]

I disagree. PP was not even on your radar until the edited videos were released. You continue to talk about what you believe to true rather than what you know to be fact. I disagree with your methods.

PP has always been on my radar in the sense that I detest organizations that valorize baby killing. I'm funny that way. But when the videos (which were released in full, and two forensic audits have confirmed were not altered in any significant way) were released and I realized how much federal funding they pull down that keeps them in business, I was incensed.

I am not sure this is completely factual. There seems to be some difference of opinion and, beneficial use of semantics.

http://www.statesman...thood/72994738/

http://mediamatters....y-edited/205264

I see, and appreciate your emotion. I do not feel that emotion, or the cause, gives anyone license, or justification, to misrepresent, amend, or conceal the truth.

See DKW's post. From the forensic audit Planned Parenthood commissioned:

A report commissioned by Planned Parenthood has found that the sting videos targeting its tissue donation practices contain intentionally deceptive edits, missing footage and inaccurately transcribed conversations. But there is no evidence that the anti-abortion group behind the attack made up dialogue.

…But the firm also wrote that it is impossible to characterize the extent to which the edits and cuts distort the meaning of the conversations depicted and that there was no “widespread evidence of substantive video manipulation.”

http://www.politico....ion-121800.html

PPFA conveniently declined to mention those statements in any of their press releases. It has been concluded that the full videos are authentic.

The latest forensic audit says:

According to a news report, the extensive report finds answer is no and the only edits in the videos consisted of bathroom breaks and time eating meals.

"This conclusion is supported by the consistency of the video file date and time stamps, the video timecode, as well as the folder and file naming scheme," the report states. "The uniformity between the footage from Investigator 1's camera and Investigator 2's camera also support the evidence that the video recordings are authentic." The report also confirms that "edits made to the Full Footage videos [for the shorter YouTube videos] were applied to eliminate non-pertinent footage, such as restroom breaks, meals, and other similar periods lacking pertinent conversation."

Again, I have not questioned the authenticity of the full length versions. I ask again, are they misleading/deceptive? Do they suggest criminal activity that, to this point and, after investigation, has proven to be absent.

First, as the audit shows, the stuff that was edited was non-pertinent stuff - bathroom breaks and such. It doesn't change the tenor or meaning of the conversation.

And no, I don't think they mislead. They say what they say, in full unedited glory. And as I've stated before, the loophole in the law is so ginormous, it may as well not exist. Basically all it accomplishes now is to keep the PP from selling them for extravagant amounts. But anyone with some common sense and a calculator can see that the clinics that partner with businesses like StemExpress to supply them with parts are making a nice chunk of change on the deal. They are not merely "covering costs" associated with the practice of gathering the needed parts. The buyers make it turnkey for them - supplying the boxes and dry ice for shipment. There's no need for the clinic to devote more resources to separating parts for shipment as they already do that for every abortion. They have to so they can be sure the procedure got out all of the baby. Anything left inside the womb can cause a life threatening infection to the once-to-be mother. The only added work is bagging the parts, placing them in the dry ice container, slapping some packing tape on it and letting the UPS or FedEx guy pick it up. Yet they get paid hundreds of dollars per specimen in many cases. It's not hard to figure out.

So they are breaking the law?

I think they are breaking the law. They aren't supposed to be making money off of this, but they are. But the law is vague and allows them the wiggle room to get out of it. So we need to tighten up the law so it's clear to them that this is not an acceptable practice.

I feel sure you are aware of the investigations and, the results? You still believe they are breaking the law?

here ichy, let me help you:

<clears throat>

"What difference, at this point, does it make?" You are one of the most partisan hacks on this forum. Titan answered the question already, several times. You just don't want to admit the truth. PP is making bank selling baby body parts and they are going to get away with it just like the Dems let the Wall Street bunch get away with the 2008 ripoff...because it benefits them financially and in other ways as well.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

I disagree. PP was not even on your radar until the edited videos were released. You continue to talk about what you believe to true rather than what you know to be fact. I disagree with your methods.

PP has always been on my radar in the sense that I detest organizations that valorize baby killing. I'm funny that way. But when the videos (which were released in full, and two forensic audits have confirmed were not altered in any significant way) were released and I realized how much federal funding they pull down that keeps them in business, I was incensed.

I am not sure this is completely factual. There seems to be some difference of opinion and, beneficial use of semantics.

http://www.statesman...thood/72994738/

http://mediamatters....y-edited/205264

I see, and appreciate your emotion. I do not feel that emotion, or the cause, gives anyone license, or justification, to misrepresent, amend, or conceal the truth.

See DKW's post. From the forensic audit Planned Parenthood commissioned:

A report commissioned by Planned Parenthood has found that the sting videos targeting its tissue donation practices contain intentionally deceptive edits, missing footage and inaccurately transcribed conversations. But there is no evidence that the anti-abortion group behind the attack made up dialogue.

…But the firm also wrote that it is impossible to characterize the extent to which the edits and cuts distort the meaning of the conversations depicted and that there was no "widespread evidence of substantive video manipulation."

http://www.politico....ion-121800.html

PPFA conveniently declined to mention those statements in any of their press releases. It has been concluded that the full videos are authentic.

The latest forensic audit says:

According to a news report, the extensive report finds answer is no and the only edits in the videos consisted of bathroom breaks and time eating meals.

"This conclusion is supported by the consistency of the video file date and time stamps, the video timecode, as well as the folder and file naming scheme," the report states. "The uniformity between the footage from Investigator 1's camera and Investigator 2's camera also support the evidence that the video recordings are authentic." The report also confirms that "edits made to the Full Footage videos [for the shorter YouTube videos] were applied to eliminate non-pertinent footage, such as restroom breaks, meals, and other similar periods lacking pertinent conversation."

Again, I have not questioned the authenticity of the full length versions. I ask again, are they misleading/deceptive? Do they suggest criminal activity that, to this point and, after investigation, has proven to be absent.

First, as the audit shows, the stuff that was edited was non-pertinent stuff - bathroom breaks and such. It doesn't change the tenor or meaning of the conversation.

And no, I don't think they mislead. They say what they say, in full unedited glory. And as I've stated before, the loophole in the law is so ginormous, it may as well not exist. Basically all it accomplishes now is to keep the PP from selling them for extravagant amounts. But anyone with some common sense and a calculator can see that the clinics that partner with businesses like StemExpress to supply them with parts are making a nice chunk of change on the deal. They are not merely "covering costs" associated with the practice of gathering the needed parts. The buyers make it turnkey for them - supplying the boxes and dry ice for shipment. There's no need for the clinic to devote more resources to separating parts for shipment as they already do that for every abortion. They have to so they can be sure the procedure got out all of the baby. Anything left inside the womb can cause a life threatening infection to the once-to-be mother. The only added work is bagging the parts, placing them in the dry ice container, slapping some packing tape on it and letting the UPS or FedEx guy pick it up. Yet they get paid hundreds of dollars per specimen in many cases. It's not hard to figure out.

So they are breaking the law?

I think they are breaking the law. They aren't supposed to be making money off of this, but they are. But the law is vague and allows them the wiggle room to get out of it. So we need to tighten up the law so it's clear to them that this is not an acceptable practice.

I feel sure you are aware of the investigations and, the results? You still believe they are breaking the law?

here ichy, let me help you:

<clears throat>

"What difference, at this point, does it make?" You are one of the most partisan hacks on this forum. Titan answered the question already, several times. You just don't want to admit the truth. PP is making bank selling baby body parts and they are going to get away with it just like the Dems let the Wall Street bunch get away with the 2008 ripoff...because it benefits them financially and in other ways as well.

LOL! Nice rant. What about the investigations? Perhaps you and Titan should have volunteered to assist the investigators who found no violations of the law? Perhaps only Democrats investigated PP and Wall St. Right?

[homersapien 12,387]

I disagree. PP was not even on your radar until the edited videos were released. You continue to talk about what you believe to true rather than what you know to be fact. I disagree with your methods.

PP has always been on my radar in the sense that I detest organizations that valorize baby killing. I'm funny that way. But when the videos (which were released in full, and two forensic audits have confirmed were not altered in any significant way) were released and I realized how much federal funding they pull down that keeps them in business, I was incensed.

I am not sure this is completely factual. There seems to be some difference of opinion and, beneficial use of semantics.

http://www.statesman...thood/72994738/

http://mediamatters....y-edited/205264

I see, and appreciate your emotion. I do not feel that emotion, or the cause, gives anyone license, or justification, to misrepresent, amend, or conceal the truth.

See DKW's post. From the forensic audit Planned Parenthood commissioned:

A report commissioned by Planned Parenthood has found that the sting videos targeting its tissue donation practices contain intentionally deceptive edits, missing footage and inaccurately transcribed conversations. But there is no evidence that the anti-abortion group behind the attack made up dialogue.

…But the firm also wrote that it is impossible to characterize the extent to which the edits and cuts distort the meaning of the conversations depicted and that there was no "widespread evidence of substantive video manipulation."

http://www.politico....ion-121800.html

PPFA conveniently declined to mention those statements in any of their press releases. It has been concluded that the full videos are authentic.

The latest forensic audit says:

According to a news report, the extensive report finds answer is no and the only edits in the videos consisted of bathroom breaks and time eating meals.

"This conclusion is supported by the consistency of the video file date and time stamps, the video timecode, as well as the folder and file naming scheme," the report states. "The uniformity between the footage from Investigator 1's camera and Investigator 2's camera also support the evidence that the video recordings are authentic." The report also confirms that "edits made to the Full Footage videos [for the shorter YouTube videos] were applied to eliminate non-pertinent footage, such as restroom breaks, meals, and other similar periods lacking pertinent conversation."

Again, I have not questioned the authenticity of the full length versions. I ask again, are they misleading/deceptive? Do they suggest criminal activity that, to this point and, after investigation, has proven to be absent.

First, as the audit shows, the stuff that was edited was non-pertinent stuff - bathroom breaks and such. It doesn't change the tenor or meaning of the conversation.

And no, I don't think they mislead. They say what they say, in full unedited glory. And as I've stated before, the loophole in the law is so ginormous, it may as well not exist. Basically all it accomplishes now is to keep the PP from selling them for extravagant amounts. But anyone with some common sense and a calculator can see that the clinics that partner with businesses like StemExpress to supply them with parts are making a nice chunk of change on the deal. They are not merely "covering costs" associated with the practice of gathering the needed parts. The buyers make it turnkey for them - supplying the boxes and dry ice for shipment. There's no need for the clinic to devote more resources to separating parts for shipment as they already do that for every abortion. They have to so they can be sure the procedure got out all of the baby. Anything left inside the womb can cause a life threatening infection to the once-to-be mother. The only added work is bagging the parts, placing them in the dry ice container, slapping some packing tape on it and letting the UPS or FedEx guy pick it up. Yet they get paid hundreds of dollars per specimen in many cases. It's not hard to figure out.

So they are breaking the law?

I think they are breaking the law. They aren't supposed to be making money off of this, but they are. But the law is vague and allows them the wiggle room to get out of it. So we need to tighten up the law so it's clear to them that this is not an acceptable practice.

I feel sure you are aware of the investigations and, the results? You still believe they are breaking the law?

here ichy, let me help you:

<clears throat>

"What difference, at this point, does it make?" You are one of the most partisan hacks on this forum. Titan answered the question already, several times. You just don't want to admit the truth. PP is making bank selling baby body parts and they are going to get away with it just like the Dems let the Wall Street bunch get away with the 2008 ripoff...because it benefits them financially and in other ways as well.

So why haven't they been indicted? Why have they been cleared of violating the law in every investigation?

(BTW, insults do not strengthen your arguments.)

[TitanTiger 21,682]

So why haven't they been indicted? Why have they been cleared of violating the law in every investigation?

(BTW, insults do not strengthen your arguments.)

Because even though any thinking person can see they are violating the spirit of the law, and that it would be reasonable to conclude they are also violating the letter of it, they tread just close enough to the line to make it a difficult case for a prosecutor (assuming the state prosecutor in their state isn't already sympathetic to PP) to pursue. A lack of an indictment isn't always an indication that investigators don't think something untoward is going on. It's also a matter of what they can prove and how much of a slog the case would be to get a conviction.

And all of this is assuming that the clinics in question are being totally honest and above board with their records.

What it highlights is the need to make the law more explicit and the requirements to demonstrate compliance with it more granular than they currently are.

[homersapien 12,387]

So why haven't they been indicted? Why have they been cleared of violating the law in every investigation?

(BTW, insults do not strengthen your arguments.)

Because even though any thinking person can see they are violating the spirit of the law, and that it would be reasonable to conclude they are also violating the letter of it, they tread just close enough to the line to make it a difficult case for a prosecutor (assuming the state prosecutor in their state isn't already sympathetic to PP) to pursue. A lack of an indictment isn't always an indication that investigators don't think something untoward is going on. It's also a matter of what they can prove and how much of a slog the case would be to get a conviction.

And all of this is assuming that the clinics in question are being totally honest and above board with their records.

What it highlights is the need to make the law more explicit and the requirements to demonstrate compliance with it more granular than they currently are.

And no, it's not true that "any thinking person can see they are violating the law". The law allows for the collection of fetal tissue and for charging of reasonable fees to cover the cost.

You want to have it both ways: the are clearly guilty, but they can't be indicted because they are skirting the line.

If your only argument is the fees that PP charges sound unreasonably high, it's a very weak argument. This is exactly the sort of question that an investigation would consider. I have worked in the medical device and pharmaceutical industry and even the high numbers that have been mentioned do not sound out of line for whatever materials and procedural costs might be involved.

This whole "profit" argument is exactly the sort of thing than can be fully determined in an investigation auditing the books. And the idea that it would be conducted covertly without being detected is just not plausible. Besides, where would all these profits be going except to provide more women services?

This whole situation reminds me of the McCarthy hearings, lots of sound and fury but very few facts. This is not about a search for the truth, it's pure political theater.

[homersapien 12,387]

So why haven't they been indicted? Why have they been cleared of violating the law in every investigation?

(BTW, insults do not strengthen your arguments.)

Because even though any thinking person can see they are violating the spirit of the law, and that it would be reasonable to conclude they are also violating the letter of it, they tread just close enough to the line to make it a difficult case for a prosecutor (assuming the state prosecutor in their state isn't already sympathetic to PP) to pursue. A lack of an indictment isn't always an indication that investigators don't think something untoward is going on. It's also a matter of what they can prove and how much of a slog the case would be to get a conviction.

And all of this is assuming that the clinics in question are being totally honest and above board with their records.

What it highlights is the need to make the law more explicit and the requirements to demonstrate compliance with it more granular than they currently are.

Furthermore, you talk as if you know what they are doing. If you or anyone else knew this was the case, they have some evidence to back it up.

If these fees are much higher than "reasonable" then demonstrate why and how.

[TitanTiger 21,682]

But you say it's self-evident.

It is. As are many cases that prosecutors end up not pursuing an indictment for. It might be obvious that shady stuff is happening but if the law has vague language or you know that you're going to expend enormous amounts of time and effort and it's a toss up whether you can get a conviction, you may not pursue it. And again, this assumes an unbiased prosecutor.

And no, it's not true that "any thinking person can see they are violating the law". The law allows for the collection of fetal tissue and for charging of reasonable fees to cover the cost.

And if you look at the particulars of what "extra" work the collection requires, you a thinking person can see that the fees aren't reasonable to cover costs. They easily cover costs and go into money making.

f your only argument is the fees that PP charges sound unreasonably high, it's a very weak argument. This is exactly the sort of question that an investigation would consider. I have worked in the medical device and pharmaceutical industry and even the high numbers that have been mentioned do not sound out of line for whatever materials and procedural costs might be involved.

It might not be in some medical and pharmaceutical fields. But in this case, they aren't having to do hardly anything beyond what they already do. Bagging parts, placing them in a provided container and sealing it up takes less than 5 minutes of time. No way the fees they charge reflect the real costs of that extra step.

This whole "profit" argument is exactly the sort of thing than can be fully determined in an investigation auditing the books. And the idea that it would be conducted covertly without being detected is just not plausible. Besides, where would all these profits be going except to provide more women services?

I question how thoroughly the books have been audited. Most (if not all) of these investigations have occurred in states where the clinics don't happen to donate any tissue at all, even for free. One of the ones that do (California) has had a legislature of PP allies block a proposed audit of their books. If they are so sure they are operating above board, why would they oppose them being audited? Seems like if they have nothing to hide, they should welcome the chance to clear their good name.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

So why haven't they been indicted? Why have they been cleared of violating the law in every investigation?

(BTW, insults do not strengthen your arguments.)

Because even though any thinking person can see they are violating the spirit of the law, and that it would be reasonable to conclude they are also violating the letter of it, they tread just close enough to the line to make it a difficult case for a prosecutor (assuming the state prosecutor in their state isn't already sympathetic to PP) to pursue. A lack of an indictment isn't always an indication that investigators don't think something untoward is going on. It's also a matter of what they can prove and how much of a slog the case would be to get a conviction.

And all of this is assuming that the clinics in question are being totally honest and above board with their records.

What it highlights is the need to make the law more explicit and the requirements to demonstrate compliance with it more granular than they currently are.

No offense intended but, I think you are seeing what you wish to see so clearly that, you cannot see what is clear. The PP investigations were initiated in states that had governors and legislators sympathetic to your cause. Unless they are complicit or, completely disingenuous, they would have made much stronger statements that were more aligned with what you are saying. Wouldn't they? Please understand, I am not attempting to argue that you are completely wrong. I am suggesting your objectivity has been compromised by the emotional nature of the issue.

[TitanTiger 21,682]

So why haven't they been indicted? Why have they been cleared of violating the law in every investigation?

(BTW, insults do not strengthen your arguments.)

Because even though any thinking person can see they are violating the spirit of the law, and that it would be reasonable to conclude they are also violating the letter of it, they tread just close enough to the line to make it a difficult case for a prosecutor (assuming the state prosecutor in their state isn't already sympathetic to PP) to pursue. A lack of an indictment isn't always an indication that investigators don't think something untoward is going on. It's also a matter of what they can prove and how much of a slog the case would be to get a conviction.

And all of this is assuming that the clinics in question are being totally honest and above board with their records.

What it highlights is the need to make the law more explicit and the requirements to demonstrate compliance with it more granular than they currently are.

No offense intended but, I think you are seeing what you wish to see so clearly that, you cannot see what is clear. The PP investigations were initiated in states that had governors and legislators sympathetic to your cause.

The only investigations thus far were in states where the clinics actually don't donate any tissue. The places where they are donating tissue and charging "reasonable" fees to cover costs, such as California, an audit of their books is being blocked by Democrats in the state legislature.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

So why haven't they been indicted? Why have they been cleared of violating the law in every investigation?

(BTW, insults do not strengthen your arguments.)

Because even though any thinking person can see they are violating the spirit of the law, and that it would be reasonable to conclude they are also violating the letter of it, they tread just close enough to the line to make it a difficult case for a prosecutor (assuming the state prosecutor in their state isn't already sympathetic to PP) to pursue. A lack of an indictment isn't always an indication that investigators don't think something untoward is going on. It's also a matter of what they can prove and how much of a slog the case would be to get a conviction.

And all of this is assuming that the clinics in question are being totally honest and above board with their records.

What it highlights is the need to make the law more explicit and the requirements to demonstrate compliance with it more granular than they currently are.

No offense intended but, I think you are seeing what you wish to see so clearly that, you cannot see what is clear. The PP investigations were initiated in states that had governors and legislators sympathetic to your cause.

The only investigations thus far were in states where the clinics actually don't donate any tissue. The places where they are donating tissue and charging "reasonable" fees to cover costs, such as California, an audit of their books is being blocked by Democrats in the state legislature.

Interesting. Why didn't you say so four pages ago?!!! Is it fair to say that, PP only harvests and donate fetal tissue in states with the "proper" political climate?

[TitanTiger 21,682]

So why haven't they been indicted? Why have they been cleared of violating the law in every investigation?

(BTW, insults do not strengthen your arguments.)

Because even though any thinking person can see they are violating the spirit of the law, and that it would be reasonable to conclude they are also violating the letter of it, they tread just close enough to the line to make it a difficult case for a prosecutor (assuming the state prosecutor in their state isn't already sympathetic to PP) to pursue. A lack of an indictment isn't always an indication that investigators don't think something untoward is going on. It's also a matter of what they can prove and how much of a slog the case would be to get a conviction.

And all of this is assuming that the clinics in question are being totally honest and above board with their records.

What it highlights is the need to make the law more explicit and the requirements to demonstrate compliance with it more granular than they currently are.

No offense intended but, I think you are seeing what you wish to see so clearly that, you cannot see what is clear. The PP investigations were initiated in states that had governors and legislators sympathetic to your cause.

The only investigations thus far were in states where the clinics actually don't donate any tissue. The places where they are donating tissue and charging "reasonable" fees to cover costs, such as California, an audit of their books is being blocked by Democrats in the state legislature.

Interesting. Why didn't you say so four pages ago?!!! Is it fair to say that, PP only harvests and donate fetal tissue in states with the "proper" political climate?

Because as this thing about "investigations found no wrongdoing" kept being thrown out, I dug deeper and that's when I figured it out.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

So why haven't they been indicted? Why have they been cleared of violating the law in every investigation?

(BTW, insults do not strengthen your arguments.)

Because even though any thinking person can see they are violating the spirit of the law, and that it would be reasonable to conclude they are also violating the letter of it, they tread just close enough to the line to make it a difficult case for a prosecutor (assuming the state prosecutor in their state isn't already sympathetic to PP) to pursue. A lack of an indictment isn't always an indication that investigators don't think something untoward is going on. It's also a matter of what they can prove and how much of a slog the case would be to get a conviction.

And all of this is assuming that the clinics in question are being totally honest and above board with their records.

What it highlights is the need to make the law more explicit and the requirements to demonstrate compliance with it more granular than they currently are.

No offense intended but, I think you are seeing what you wish to see so clearly that, you cannot see what is clear. The PP investigations were initiated in states that had governors and legislators sympathetic to your cause.

The only investigations thus far were in states where the clinics actually don't donate any tissue. The places where they are donating tissue and charging "reasonable" fees to cover costs, such as California, an audit of their books is being blocked by Democrats in the state legislature.

Interesting. Why didn't you say so four pages ago?!!! Is it fair to say that, PP only harvests and donate fetal tissue in states with the "proper" political climate?

Because as this thing about "investigations found no wrongdoing" kept being thrown out, I dug deeper and that's when I figured it out.

Cool. We are all learning. Objective achieved! I will now take two steps back from my claims about your emotional bias. Clearly though, your fault for not having the information sooner.

I looked up the move by CA Democrats to block the PP investigation. They apparently will not support unless CMP is also investigated.

[DKW 86 7,977]

I disagree. PP was not even on your radar until the edited videos were released. You continue to talk about what you believe to true rather than what you know to be fact. I disagree with your methods.

PP has always been on my radar in the sense that I detest organizations that valorize baby killing. I'm funny that way. But when the videos (which were released in full, and two forensic audits have confirmed were not altered in any significant way) were released and I realized how much federal funding they pull down that keeps them in business, I was incensed.

I am not sure this is completely factual. There seems to be some difference of opinion and, beneficial use of semantics.

http://www.statesman...thood/72994738/

http://mediamatters....y-edited/205264

I see, and appreciate your emotion. I do not feel that emotion, or the cause, gives anyone license, or justification, to misrepresent, amend, or conceal the truth.

See DKW's post. From the forensic audit Planned Parenthood commissioned:

A report commissioned by Planned Parenthood has found that the sting videos targeting its tissue donation practices contain intentionally deceptive edits, missing footage and inaccurately transcribed conversations. But there is no evidence that the anti-abortion group behind the attack made up dialogue.

…But the firm also wrote that it is impossible to characterize the extent to which the edits and cuts distort the meaning of the conversations depicted and that there was no "widespread evidence of substantive video manipulation."

http://www.politico....ion-121800.html

PPFA conveniently declined to mention those statements in any of their press releases. It has been concluded that the full videos are authentic.

The latest forensic audit says:

According to a news report, the extensive report finds answer is no and the only edits in the videos consisted of bathroom breaks and time eating meals.

"This conclusion is supported by the consistency of the video file date and time stamps, the video timecode, as well as the folder and file naming scheme," the report states. "The uniformity between the footage from Investigator 1's camera and Investigator 2's camera also support the evidence that the video recordings are authentic." The report also confirms that "edits made to the Full Footage videos [for the shorter YouTube videos] were applied to eliminate non-pertinent footage, such as restroom breaks, meals, and other similar periods lacking pertinent conversation."

Again, I have not questioned the authenticity of the full length versions. I ask again, are they misleading/deceptive? Do they suggest criminal activity that, to this point and, after investigation, has proven to be absent.

First, as the audit shows, the stuff that was edited was non-pertinent stuff - bathroom breaks and such. It doesn't change the tenor or meaning of the conversation.

And no, I don't think they mislead. They say what they say, in full unedited glory. And as I've stated before, the loophole in the law is so ginormous, it may as well not exist. Basically all it accomplishes now is to keep the PP from selling them for extravagant amounts. But anyone with some common sense and a calculator can see that the clinics that partner with businesses like StemExpress to supply them with parts are making a nice chunk of change on the deal. They are not merely "covering costs" associated with the practice of gathering the needed parts. The buyers make it turnkey for them - supplying the boxes and dry ice for shipment. There's no need for the clinic to devote more resources to separating parts for shipment as they already do that for every abortion. They have to so they can be sure the procedure got out all of the baby. Anything left inside the womb can cause a life threatening infection to the once-to-be mother. The only added work is bagging the parts, placing them in the dry ice container, slapping some packing tape on it and letting the UPS or FedEx guy pick it up. Yet they get paid hundreds of dollars per specimen in many cases. It's not hard to figure out.

So they are breaking the law?

I think they are breaking the law. They aren't supposed to be making money off of this, but they are. But the law is vague and allows them the wiggle room to get out of it. So we need to tighten up the law so it's clear to them that this is not an acceptable practice.

I feel sure you are aware of the investigations and, the results? You still believe they are breaking the law?

here ichy, let me help you:

<clears throat>

"What difference, at this point, does it make?" You are one of the most partisan hacks on this forum. Titan answered the question already, several times. You just don't want to admit the truth. PP is making bank selling baby body parts and they are going to get away with it just like the Dems let the Wall Street bunch get away with the 2008 ripoff...because it benefits them financially and in other ways as well.

LOL! Nice rant. What about the investigations? Perhaps you and Titan should have volunteered to assist the investigators who found no violations of the law? Perhaps only Democrats investigated PP and Wall St. Right?

The Dems had Both Houses, The White House, The DOJ, The SEC, etc and did absolutely nothing.

You know, the Jury couldnt FIND OJ guilty either. The Baby Body parts are being sold. We KNOW that. PP admits that. The Shill for PP was sizing her up a Lambor-Ghoulie with the profits thereof.

[homersapien 12,387]

I disagree. PP was not even on your radar until the edited videos were released. You continue to talk about what you believe to true rather than what you know to be fact. I disagree with your methods.

PP has always been on my radar in the sense that I detest organizations that valorize baby killing. I'm funny that way. But when the videos (which were released in full, and two forensic audits have confirmed were not altered in any significant way) were released and I realized how much federal funding they pull down that keeps them in business, I was incensed.

I am not sure this is completely factual. There seems to be some difference of opinion and, beneficial use of semantics.

http://www.statesman...thood/72994738/

http://mediamatters....y-edited/205264

I see, and appreciate your emotion. I do not feel that emotion, or the cause, gives anyone license, or justification, to misrepresent, amend, or conceal the truth.

See DKW's post. From the forensic audit Planned Parenthood commissioned:

A report commissioned by Planned Parenthood has found that the sting videos targeting its tissue donation practices contain intentionally deceptive edits, missing footage and inaccurately transcribed conversations. But there is no evidence that the anti-abortion group behind the attack made up dialogue.

…But the firm also wrote that it is impossible to characterize the extent to which the edits and cuts distort the meaning of the conversations depicted and that there was no "widespread evidence of substantive video manipulation."

http://www.politico....ion-121800.html

PPFA conveniently declined to mention those statements in any of their press releases. It has been concluded that the full videos are authentic.

The latest forensic audit says:

According to a news report, the extensive report finds answer is no and the only edits in the videos consisted of bathroom breaks and time eating meals.

"This conclusion is supported by the consistency of the video file date and time stamps, the video timecode, as well as the folder and file naming scheme," the report states. "The uniformity between the footage from Investigator 1's camera and Investigator 2's camera also support the evidence that the video recordings are authentic." The report also confirms that "edits made to the Full Footage videos [for the shorter YouTube videos] were applied to eliminate non-pertinent footage, such as restroom breaks, meals, and other similar periods lacking pertinent conversation."

Again, I have not questioned the authenticity of the full length versions. I ask again, are they misleading/deceptive? Do they suggest criminal activity that, to this point and, after investigation, has proven to be absent.

First, as the audit shows, the stuff that was edited was non-pertinent stuff - bathroom breaks and such. It doesn't change the tenor or meaning of the conversation.

And no, I don't think they mislead. They say what they say, in full unedited glory. And as I've stated before, the loophole in the law is so ginormous, it may as well not exist. Basically all it accomplishes now is to keep the PP from selling them for extravagant amounts. But anyone with some common sense and a calculator can see that the clinics that partner with businesses like StemExpress to supply them with parts are making a nice chunk of change on the deal. They are not merely "covering costs" associated with the practice of gathering the needed parts. The buyers make it turnkey for them - supplying the boxes and dry ice for shipment. There's no need for the clinic to devote more resources to separating parts for shipment as they already do that for every abortion. They have to so they can be sure the procedure got out all of the baby. Anything left inside the womb can cause a life threatening infection to the once-to-be mother. The only added work is bagging the parts, placing them in the dry ice container, slapping some packing tape on it and letting the UPS or FedEx guy pick it up. Yet they get paid hundreds of dollars per specimen in many cases. It's not hard to figure out.

So they are breaking the law?

I think they are breaking the law. They aren't supposed to be making money off of this, but they are. But the law is vague and allows them the wiggle room to get out of it. So we need to tighten up the law so it's clear to them that this is not an acceptable practice.

I feel sure you are aware of the investigations and, the results? You still believe they are breaking the law?

here ichy, let me help you:

<clears throat>

"What difference, at this point, does it make?" You are one of the most partisan hacks on this forum. Titan answered the question already, several times. You just don't want to admit the truth. PP is making bank selling baby body parts and they are going to get away with it just like the Dems let the Wall Street bunch get away with the 2008 ripoff...because it benefits them financially and in other ways as well.

LOL! Nice rant. What about the investigations? Perhaps you and Titan should have volunteered to assist the investigators who found no violations of the law? Perhaps only Democrats investigated PP and Wall St. Right?

The Dems had Both Houses, The White House, The DOJ, The SEC, etc and did absolutely nothing.

You know, the Jury couldnt FIND OJ guilty either. The Baby Body parts are being sold. We KNOW that. PP admits that. The Shill for PP was sizing her up a Lambor-Ghoulie with the profits thereof.

In 1993 Congress passed a law allowing a woman to consent to donating fetal tissues after an abortion and allowing the charging of “reasonable” fees to cover the costs of collecting tissues.

[TitanTiger 21,682]

Wish I could get paid $30-200 for 5 minutes of work. Y'know...just to cover my costs. Sounds reasonable to me.

[DKW 86 7,977]

I disagree. PP was not even on your radar until the edited videos were released. You continue to talk about what you believe to true rather than what you know to be fact. I disagree with your methods.

PP has always been on my radar in the sense that I detest organizations that valorize baby killing. I'm funny that way. But when the videos (which were released in full, and two forensic audits have confirmed were not altered in any significant way) were released and I realized how much federal funding they pull down that keeps them in business, I was incensed.

I am not sure this is completely factual. There seems to be some difference of opinion and, beneficial use of semantics.

http://www.statesman...thood/72994738/

http://mediamatters....y-edited/205264

I see, and appreciate your emotion. I do not feel that emotion, or the cause, gives anyone license, or justification, to misrepresent, amend, or conceal the truth.

See DKW's post. From the forensic audit Planned Parenthood commissioned:

A report commissioned by Planned Parenthood has found that the sting videos targeting its tissue donation practices contain intentionally deceptive edits, missing footage and inaccurately transcribed conversations. But there is no evidence that the anti-abortion group behind the attack made up dialogue.

…But the firm also wrote that it is impossible to characterize the extent to which the edits and cuts distort the meaning of the conversations depicted and that there was no "widespread evidence of substantive video manipulation."

http://www.politico....ion-121800.html

PPFA conveniently declined to mention those statements in any of their press releases. It has been concluded that the full videos are authentic.

The latest forensic audit says:

According to a news report, the extensive report finds answer is no and the only edits in the videos consisted of bathroom breaks and time eating meals.

"This conclusion is supported by the consistency of the video file date and time stamps, the video timecode, as well as the folder and file naming scheme," the report states. "The uniformity between the footage from Investigator 1's camera and Investigator 2's camera also support the evidence that the video recordings are authentic." The report also confirms that "edits made to the Full Footage videos [for the shorter YouTube videos] were applied to eliminate non-pertinent footage, such as restroom breaks, meals, and other similar periods lacking pertinent conversation."

Again, I have not questioned the authenticity of the full length versions. I ask again, are they misleading/deceptive? Do they suggest criminal activity that, to this point and, after investigation, has proven to be absent.

First, as the audit shows, the stuff that was edited was non-pertinent stuff - bathroom breaks and such. It doesn't change the tenor or meaning of the conversation.

And no, I don't think they mislead. They say what they say, in full unedited glory. And as I've stated before, the loophole in the law is so ginormous, it may as well not exist. Basically all it accomplishes now is to keep the PP from selling them for extravagant amounts. But anyone with some common sense and a calculator can see that the clinics that partner with businesses like StemExpress to supply them with parts are making a nice chunk of change on the deal. They are not merely "covering costs" associated with the practice of gathering the needed parts. The buyers make it turnkey for them - supplying the boxes and dry ice for shipment. There's no need for the clinic to devote more resources to separating parts for shipment as they already do that for every abortion. They have to so they can be sure the procedure got out all of the baby. Anything left inside the womb can cause a life threatening infection to the once-to-be mother. The only added work is bagging the parts, placing them in the dry ice container, slapping some packing tape on it and letting the UPS or FedEx guy pick it up. Yet they get paid hundreds of dollars per specimen in many cases. It's not hard to figure out.

So they are breaking the law?

I think they are breaking the law. They aren't supposed to be making money off of this, but they are. But the law is vague and allows them the wiggle room to get out of it. So we need to tighten up the law so it's clear to them that this is not an acceptable practice.

I feel sure you are aware of the investigations and, the results? You still believe they are breaking the law?

here ichy, let me help you:

<clears throat>

"What difference, at this point, does it make?" You are one of the most partisan hacks on this forum. Titan answered the question already, several times. You just don't want to admit the truth. PP is making bank selling baby body parts and they are going to get away with it just like the Dems let the Wall Street bunch get away with the 2008 ripoff...because it benefits them financially and in other ways as well.

LOL! Nice rant. What about the investigations? Perhaps you and Titan should have volunteered to assist the investigators who found no violations of the law? Perhaps only Democrats investigated PP and Wall St. Right?

The Dems had Both Houses, The White House, The DOJ, The SEC, etc and did absolutely nothing.

You know, the Jury couldnt FIND OJ guilty either. The Baby Body parts are being sold. We KNOW that. PP admits that. The Shill for PP was sizing her up a Lambor-Ghoulie with the profits thereof.

In 1993 Congress passed a law allowing a woman to consent to donating fetal tissues after an abortion and allowing the charging of “reasonable” fees to cover the costs of collecting tissues.

And what are reasonable charges to acquire a Lambor-ghoulie?

[icanthearyou 4,468]

Wish I could get paid $30-200 for 5 minutes of work. Y'know...just to cover my costs. Sounds reasonable to me.

In all fairness, is that not a gross over-simplification? Are you thinking only about the cost of the action or, are you including the associated overhead and administrative costs?

[homersapien 12,387]

In 1993 Congress passed a law allowing a woman to consent to donating fetal tissues after an abortion and allowing the charging of “reasonable” fees to cover the costs of collecting tissues.

And what are reasonable charges to acquire a Lambor-ghoulie?

Facetious response = I got nothing.

You want to debate this or just swap insults and one-liners?