There’s no question that anti-abortion activist David Daleiden surreptitiously recorded healthcare and biomedical services employees across the state of California with the intent of discrediting the healthcare provider, Planned Parenthood — something his heavily edited videos failed to do. There’s also no question that it’s against state law to record confidential conversations without the consent of all the parties involved.
But that doesn’t mean that California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra should have charged Daleiden and his co-conspirator, Susan Merritt, with 15 felony counts — one for each of the 14 people recorded, and a 15th for conspiracy. It’s disturbingly aggressive for Becerra to apply this criminal statute to people who were trying to influence a contested issue of public policy, regardless of how sound or popular that policy may be. Planned Parenthood and biomedical company StemExpress, which was also featured in the videos, have another remedy for the harm that was done to them: They can sue Daleiden and Merritt for damages. The state doesn’t need to threaten the pair with prison time.
The videos — recorded in California and elsewhere — were published online nearly two years ago by Daleiden’s organization, the Center for Medical Progress. They caused an uproar, energizing anti-abortion activists and prompting threats against abortion providers. Officials of Planned Parenthood, whose staff members were seen on some of the recordings, denied any wrongdoing and were outraged that the tapes appeared edited to make it sound as if they were selling fetal tissue.
Daleiden describes the effort as journalism, although his methods were decidedly not those employed by respectable reporters. He and Merritt allegedly concocted fake identities and business records to dupe Planned Parenthood officials into taking the pair into their confidence, and misrepresented themselves throughout. Nevertheless, as misguided as they were, their aim was to change people’s views on important and controversial issues — abortion and fetal tissue research.
In similar cases, we have denounced moves to criminalize such behavior, especially in the case of animal welfare investigators who have gone undercover at slaughterhouses and other agricultural businesses to secretly record horrific and illegal abuses of animals. That work, too, is aimed at revealing wrongdoing and changing public policy.
That’s why the state law forbidding recording of conversations should be applied narrowly, and to clear and egregious violations of privacy where the motive is personal gain.
When the LA Times says you might have overreached, you have really overreached!
On the night the head of the Planned Parenthood abortion company is slated to speak to the Democratic National Convention, the man behind the undercover videos has been vindicated. Again.
As LifeNews reported last month, a Harris County, Texas judge dismissed the bogus misdemeanor charge against David Daleiden for allegedly trying to buy body parts from the Planned Parenthood abortion business he was exposing for selling them as a part of the Center for Medical Progress’ undercover investigation.
A Democratic Party proposal to amend the party’s platform to include more progressive language around abortion rights has outraged Democrats who oppose abortion, with some saying the issue has cost Hillary Clinton their votes.
The fallout centers around a proposal to repeal long-standing legislation that limits federal funds for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest or life-threatening pregnancies — the so-called Hyde Amendment. Some version of this ban has been included in annual federal spending bills since the late 1970s.
The draft platform says Democrats “will continue to stand up to Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood health centers” and “will continue to oppose — and seek to overturn — federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment.”
Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life, said the progressive language on the platform is making the party smaller. “This platform’s language just says (to abortion opponents) you are no longer welcome,” she said. “This has been the general message pro-life Democrats are receiving across the country.”
Day said ever since the Democratic National Committee released its 2016 platform draft July 1, she has gotten calls from Democrats that oppose abortion and say the language is keeping them from voting for Clinton.
Carol Crossed, 72, a retired elementary school professor from Rochester, N.Y., is one of those Democrats.“
They are pro-choice because they don’t want to be infringing their opinion on others,” she said. “Now their platform says if you don’t like abortions, too bad — you are going to pay for it anyway.” – Source: USA Today Anti-abortion Dems outraged by platform change
You have to understand something here; not all Democrats are pro-choice. There are some Christians, who are very devout to their Church. But, because of their background, they are committed Democrats. I know, I used to be one of those kind of people. So, I see where these people are coming from. I mean, these people are put into a very tough position; they are horrified by what the Republican Party is running for President. But, that the same time, they are also horrified at what the Democrats are doing with abortion.
This is what happens, when a political party goes very far to the left, of what it was founded as. The Democratic Party was not founded as a “Progressive Party” in the modern day sense. It was founded as a populist alternative to the Republican Party of old; which favored the businesses tycoons of old.
Needless to say, both political parties have changed greatly as whole. The Republican Party now has many factions; you have the movement grassroots faction, you have the elitist faction; it is a sight to behold. The Democrats, on the other hand; have become this “progressive socialist” party, that seems to be anti-white, anti-police and it is, quite frankly, unnerving to people like myself, who have a keen sense of history to watch a political party like that shift that far to the left.
The Democratic Party and it’s followers, have embraced a strain of progressivism that is intolerance of dissenting views and wishes to prosecute anyone who dares to disagree with them; either by discrediting them or by violence. This is nothing more than left-wing fascism. It is the hallmark traits of communism. I have always said, since about 2007; that the distance between the Democratic Party and the Communist Party and Communist themselves, used to be the width of the Grand Canyon. Now, with the infiltration of the progressive socialists in that political party; that distance is more like a small city block.
