Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ultimately, there is no way to "stop" women from having abortions, even if it's made illegal. It will still go on. It's very futile to try and "stop" abortion. Women own their bodies, period.
This trial is not about whether Planned Parenthood is valid or not. This thread is not really about Planned Parenthood at all. It is about a biased Judge demanding a specific Verdict from a Jury based on his own viewpoint and Ideology.
No matter where you stand on issues ..... that is pretty scary.
Our Justice Branch is very broken. Our entire system of Government is slipping away.
Trust is Lost - when it becomes evident that people now must Prove their Innocence and a Jury of Peers is not allowed to even determine a verdict - we are in big trouble.
This trial is not about whether Planned Parenthood is valid or not. This thread is not really about Planned Parenthood at all. It is about a biased Judge demanding a specific Verdict from a Jury based on his own viewpoint and Ideology.
No matter where you stand on issues ..... that is pretty scary.
Our Justice Branch is very broken. Our entire system of Government is slipping away.
Trust is Lost - when it becomes evident that people now must Prove their Innocence and a Jury of Peers is not allowed to even determine a verdict - we are in big trouble.
Didn't read the thread before you posted, did you?
A Pyrrhic victory in a way. They won the first step in a civil lawsuit against him but brought a lot of extra attention to the fact that he recorded evidence of a conspiracy to engage in criminal behavior.
A Pyrrhic victory in a way. They won the first step in a civil lawsuit against him but brought a lot of extra attention to the fact that he recorded evidence of a conspiracy to engage in criminal behavior.
Actually, the trial bought a lot of attention to the fact that PP did not engage in criminal behavior, but that Daleiden was/is a deceptive editor.
Actually, the trial bought a lot of attention to the fact that PP did not engage in criminal behavior, but that Daleiden was/is a deceptive editor.
Nothing about the trial revealed that PP did not engage in criminal behavior. In case you missed it, PP was not the defendant. What it DID do was bring additional publicity to the vile and horrific acts PP participates in. Rather those acts are legal is something for another trial.
It's sad that an investigative journalist can be charged on such bogus, trumped up charges, simply for revealing the truth. Imagine if the NYT, CNN or MSNBC were held to the same standards.
Last edited by Toyman at Jewel Lake; 11-16-2019 at 04:42 PM..
Actually, the trial bought a lot of attention to the fact that PP did not engage in criminal behavior, but that Daleiden was/is a deceptive editor.
From the footnote on page 10: "6 In fact, the record reflects that OIG had submitted a report from a forensic firm
concluding that the video was authentic and not deceptively edited. And the plaintiffs did
not identify any particular omission or addition in the video footage."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
