Prolly cut a plea deal, though
A business card is one thing. A California driverâs licence is another.
Heh!
3 Likes
âbuying fetal tissue requires a seller as well.â
But there was no seller, was there? Your offer to buy fetal tissue for a profit, a lot more than would cover the cost of collecting and shipping which is entirely legal, was ignored. So to try to claim that there were other people as guilty as you is dishonest as hell and wonât do you any good at all.
3 Likes
No, they werenât. PP was providing fetal tissue to laboratories that could show that they had a legitimate use for it at cost. The âbuyerâ had to pay only what it cost to collect and ship the tissue as is written into the law. To make an offer way above the cost of sending it is entirely illegal and amounts to bribery. And no âsellerâ is involved.
1 Like
Facts donât matter to you much, do they? By your argument an illegal immigrant with forged SS card and other documents should not be prosecuted because they are engaged in Free Speech. And to call this an âinvestigationâ is the same as calling the Onion a news source.
4 Likes
God, I wish all the defense lawyers I dealt with as a prosecutor (including appellate work) had made arguments as risible as that one. Would you seriously make that argument to an appellate court? Not even the most liberal panel of the 9th Circuit would buy that shit.
3 Likes
The state of Texas has a fetish about photo IDs, although it is usually in regards to the âwrongâ people not having them so they can take away their voting rights.
2 Likes
It is well past time to stop referring to these types as âactivistsâ, they are, in fact, propagandists.
4 Likes
âCenter For Medical Progress Argues It Is Using Traditional Journalistic Techniquesâ
âTraditional Journalistsâ seek to uncover facts,not misrepresent them. What they where doing was the polar opposite of what âTraditional Journalistsâ do.
2 Likes
No, they attempted to purchase fetal tissue (a crime) by using fake IDs. Itâs no different than trying to prove voter fraud exists by committing voter fraud. If itâs okay to break this law, then whatâs the next law thatâs okay to break? Who gets to decide? Who actually qualifies as a journalist?
That moron (canât remember his name) that did the Acorn videos tried to get into a government office building to tap the phones and got busted for it. Is that okay in the name of journalistic enterprising? The law is the law, donât break the law. If you are trying to ferret out lawbreakers, itâs a bit ironic that itâs okay to then break the law, right?
4 Likes
Itâs not even close. Otherwise all those people who hired undercover agents posing as hit men could just keep trying until they found a real one.
The âstandard journalistic practiceâ thing is such baloney. Iâve worked on the fringes of investigative reporting for 30+ years, and thereâs actually even a school of thought in the journalistic ethics field that says you shouldnât even deny youâre a journalist. (Not universally subscribed to, but not uncommon.)
Speaking from experience, itâs pretty amazing what people will say even to someone they know is a reporter. One of the ironies in this case is that with a different corporate name these jerks probably could have posed as journalists/writers/documentary filmmakers doing a story on all the good things PP was doing to help medical science by supplying samples for stem-cell research and gotten pretty much the same footage they got. And edited it misleadingly just the same way. But their psychological projections (and maybe some other kinks) made them decide to go all cloak and dagger.
3 Likes
âWhat harm did the activists do?â
3 families in Colorado Springs could probably clue you in.
2 Likes
The video was edited to make it appear that PP was selling body parts, which is a crime. PP co-operated in the GJ investigation, giving access to their records, computers and having their employees interviewed. The email from the fake company offering to buy body parts would have turned up in this investigative process. PP did not respond to the email, and they ceased any communication with the fake company making the offer. So, the investigation turned up evidence of a crime, but no evidence of PP doing anything wrong. I would think that is where the investigation had to pivot to the real criminals. The surprising aspect is that this whole caper was a political stunt, and the call for an investigation was also a political stunt, but the investigation turned out to be authentic. I did not expect that.
2 Likes
Is David Daleiden Trey Gowdyâs secret love child? Theyâve got the same hair.
1 Like
The fake ID law is really a law against tampering with govt. issued documents. Undercover operatives are generally not in the business of presenting documents.
The Ag gag laws are especially heinous because here in NC it states that if you WORK FOR or are EMPLOYED BY the people you want to report, you are not able to take photos, etc. You are legally allowed to be there, they know who you are and what you do. You just canât prove to anybody with photos, etc. that they are doing illegal things. NO IDs are required.
1 Like
The difference is that tampering with a govt. document is NOT free speech, itâs actually using false govt. speech to further your goals. Govt. issued IDs would be considered the speech of the state - They are testifying that you are who you say you are. Falsifying IDs is essentially causing the govt. to lie on your behalf, especially if folks believe you are who you say you are and act accordingly based on your false govt. ID.
You cannot make the state lie for you and think youâre protected from the state. They have to protect themselves from liability at the very least, and from outright fraud at the most.
2 Likes
Dude read United States v. Alvarez. SCOTUS bought the argument, so yeah Iâm pretty sure an appellate court would buy the argument too.
No need. Thereâs enough circle-jerking, tunnel-vision tribalism right here in the TPM comments apparently