To Disincentivize Dishonesty, Planned Parenthood Should Sue

Right-wing activists released a video today dishonestly claiming that Planned Parenthood is "selling body parts" of aborted fetuses in violation of federal law. You can watch the dishonest video here and the full footage here. In the deliberately deceptive video, the video editors repeatedly refer to laws banning the sale of organs from aborted fetuses and refer to one of the undercover people as the "buyer," suggesting that they were planning a transaction with Planned Parenthood and started a twitter hashtag #ppsellsbabyparts.

However, in the full video, the faux "buyer" actually says, regarding the purpose of the meeting,  (2:27) "I wanna pick your brain..." which suggests an informal conversation rather than any plans for a transaction.  And at (4:22) the "buyer" says "I'd really like to connect with people who...they don't know that we're out there" which again clearly suggests that they are not asking Planned Parenthood to sell body parts. At no point in the video does the Planned Parenthood employee suggest that they are open to selling body parts.

Moreover, in the video, Dr. Nucatola of Planned Parenthood makes it very clear that Planned Parenthood providers are not going to be making money off of these procedures. Here's what she says at the 5:00 mark:

 Every provider has had patients who want to donate their tissue, and they absolutely want to accommodate them...they just want to do it in a way that is not perceived as 'this clinic is selling tissue. this clinic is making money off of this.' I know in the Planned Parenthood World, for example, they're very very sensitive to that and for an affiliate that's going to do that, they need to...some might do it for free...[but] they want to come to a number where it doesn't look like they're making money.  They want to come to a number that looks like it is a reasonable effort for the effort that is allotted on their part.

And during a longer conversation at the end (2:22:26-2:27:00 ), you can see that the phonies are trying to push payments, and Dr. Nucatola is giving them the message that aside from not losing money, the clinics will not do the procedures in exchange for money.  She says, at various times:

• 2:22:26: "At the end of the day, if you're going to take money out of the equation, which is what most affiliates are trying to do, how can we do this for you in the most beneficial way"
• 2:24:52 "Anything you can do to explain who's benefitting, the benevolence of what they're doing, I think that holds as much value as any cash prize." 
• 2:26:00 "Perhaps the difference is affiliates are looking to benefit in very different ways than just dollars and cents. Again, they're not going to do it in a way that costs them money. They want to break even. They want to be compensated for time and space and whatever impact that it has."

In fact, just to underlie how willfully dishonest the "Center for Medical Progress" is being, both of the "buyers" acknowledge in the video that Planned Parenthood is not selling tissue.

• Buyer #1 (1:29:05): "I never see that. I don't look at it that way.  We're not selling tissue."
• Buyer #2 (1:29:29): "The researchers are paying for procurement...they're not buying a brain."

Gawker explains the covering of expenses in more detail:

Except that, as Planned Parenthood told The Hill, its affiliates “can legally receive reimbursement from a tissue donation procedure for the ‘additional expenses related tissue donation, which can vary based on individual circumstance,’ but it does not go to staff members or providers.” These “additional expenses” might be the $10-30 it costs to transport the tissue being donated, which Planned Parenthood notes is “standard across the medical field.” And no, the patient donating the tissue doesn’t receive any financial reimbursement either.

The "Center for Medical Progress," the group behind this video, was clearly being intentionally dishonest in implying that Planned Parenthood was "selling body parts" in violation of federal law.  Planned Parenthood should sue them for everything they're worth, and should find out through the process of discovery who else was involved in this dishonest campaign.  If our legal system is even remotely adequate, this type of nonsense should be punishable to an extent that makes it clear that these dishonest tactics are not worth it.

James O'Keefe Caught in the Act

Good segment on Chris Hayes exposing James O'Keefe's dishonest editing:



This isn't a surprise for those of us who paid attention, but it is a particularly nice example.

And why is this relevant for St. Louis?  The local tea party fever that came and went (but which still has a pernicious influence on politics) was based in large part on emulation of the dishonest tactics employed by Breitbart and O'Keefe.  Any immoral action was justified as long as it was in service of their "WAR".

Loesch Knowingly Lies About Van Jones At CPAC

Student Life, the student newspaper at Washington University, asked me a couple days ago what I thought about Loesch being hired by CNN. Here is part of my response:

In contrast, Adam Shriver, a graduate student in Philosophy-Neuroscience-Psychology at the University and the leader of the St. Louis Activist Hub, believes that Loesch’s credibility as an analyst is questionable at best.

“Hiring Dana Loesch as an election analyst severely damages the credibility of CNN as a news organization, not because of the fact that she’s extremely conservative, but rather because she is a proponent of the Andrew Breitbart approach to journalism which is fundamentally dishonest when it comes to the gathering and presentation of information,” Shriver wrote in an e-mail to Student Life.

Shriver cited Loesch’s recent comments regarding Bristol Palin’s guest speaker controversy last week as an example of her dishonesty.

“Loesch was completely dishonest about the Bristol Palin controversy at Wash. U.…she claimed that Wash. U. paid Van Jones $20,000 to speak at the school,” Shriver said. “Actually, Van Jones usually speaks for $20,000, but agreed to speak at Wash. U. for only $5,000. Green Action applied for a small amount more for a panel, but they were turned down.”

Shriver concluded by addressing what, he believes, made this hiring controversial.

“There are plenty of honest people out there who can effectively communicate a conservative message,” he said. “I see no reason why CNN should hire a person with Loesch’s track record of pushing blatant misinformation.”

Just to elaborate on the Van Jones point, here's a video where Loesch claims that Jones was paid $20,000 to speak at Washington University:


Van Jones was actually only paid $5,000 although he usually speaks for $20,000, and this fact is a matter of public record. I contacted one of the student organizers of the event who verified that the final amount was only $5,000.

So Loesch was making false claims. But not only that, she was knowingly making false claims, since she herself had tweeted that Jones was paid $5,000 from Washington University back on January 30:

Basically, as long as CNN has her on as a guest, they will be promoting not just things with an extreme conservative slant, and not just out-of-context misinterpretations, but nonstop, blatantly false claims like the one above. Loesch knew the truth, but she changed it to make her story more dramatic.