Last week, Sen. Rand Paul reintroduced his “Life at Conception Act,” an attempt to ban all abortion by granting legal “personhood” to zygotes and fetuses from “the moment of fertilization,” all without needing a constitutional amendment or Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade. Paul has been a staunch backer of such personhood efforts despite once claiming that he didn’t support “changing any of the laws” on abortion “until the country is persuaded otherwise.”
The bill Paul introduced last week varies slightly from the one he first introduced in 2013, specifically stating that it shouldn’t be construed as “a prohibition on in vitro fertilization, or a prohibition on use of birth control or another means of preventing fertilization.”
It’s especially interesting that Paul attempts to avoid the growing controversy within the anti-abortion movement about in-vitro fertilization and the rights that should be granted to the excess frozen embryos that are often a byproduct of the process. It’s unclear if Paul is saying that embryos that are the result of in-vitro fertilization should not be granted the personhood rights that his bill would grant to all other embryos or if the bill would simply require that those embryos never be destroyed.
Both Paul’s 2013 bill and his 2016 version state that they shouldn’t “be construed to require the prosecution of any woman for the death of her unborn child,” an important exemption because under such a law, ending a pregnancy at any stage would be the legal equivalent of murder. Already, an experiment in personhood-style laws in Alabama has led to the arrests of hundreds of womenfor using drugs while pregnant or otherwise contributing to the “chemical endangerment” of a fetus.
All of this, of course, is purely hypothetical at this point. Paul's bill is the product of a theory, which is controversial even within the anti-abortion movement, that there is a magic loophole in Roe v. Wade that would allow legal abortion to come tumbling down if Congress were simply to define fertilized eggs as “persons” under the law. Most likely, however, such a strategy would collapse in the courts: One prominent anti-choice attorney has called the personhood loophole an “urban legend.”
Ted Cruz has comeunderfire from Mike Huckabee and a super PAC linked to Huckabee’s campaign for his failure to tithe sufficiently, an awkward political attack at a time when Cruz is boasting of his own personal religiosity in an effort to coalesce evangelical support behind his candidacy.
He explained to David Brody of the Christian Broadcasting Network that he didn’t tithe because he was “newly married” and “just started a family.” However, as Mediaite pointed out, Cruz has been financially well-off for years.
One of the people who believes Cruz is on a God-appointed mission to become president is his father, Rafael Cruz, a top campaign surrogate and fiery preacher of bunk Christian nationalist history and anti-gay rhetoric who speaks about his son in almost messianicterms. Interestingly enough, as BuzzFeed pointed out, he has also “preached fervently to evangelical crowds about the blessings God will rain down on those who tithe mightily.”
Indeed, the elder Cruz has told crowds that God will withhold blessings from those who don’t tithe because they are stealing from Him. In a 2012 sermon dug up by Warren Throckmorton today, Rafael Cruz said that Satan would come after all those who fail to tithe and that financial struggle is no excuse not to do so.
The first thing I ask someone that comes to me and asks me, ‘Oh, I need you to pray for my finances because I don’t have enough, I can’t pay my rent,’ first thing I ask is, ‘Are you tithing?’ If you’re not, why should God bless you? You read Malachi 3:7, he says if you’re not tithing, you’re stealing from God. Why should God bless you?
So when you don’t have any money, that’s when it is the most important that the first thing you do is an offering unto the Lord because that offering sanctifies the rest and opens up the windows of heaven. As a matter of fact, Malachi 3:11 says that when you do that, he rebukes the Devourer. But you know, the opposite is also true. If you do not do it, the Devourer is going to eat everything you’ve got. And you know, ‘If God is for you then who can be against you?’
While whether or not a candidate tithes normally wouldn’t be a matter of discussion on the campaign trail, Cruz has forced the issue by trying to tell voters that they should vote for him if they want to be on the right side of God.
“By fashioning himself as the candidate of ‘the body of Christ,’ Cruz is trying to make it seem that he is the candidate of Christians writ large, when there are millions of American Christians who don't agree with Cruz's take on biblical values or politics,” our colleague Peter Montgomery has written. “This kind of rhetoric also sends a clear message to non-Christians that Cruz sees them as some kind of lesser Americans who have no real role in building our shared future.”
As we noted this morning, Sen. Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign has launched a new “Pro-Lifers for Cruz” coalition, led by the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins along with 10 co-chairs, including radical anti-abortion activist Troy Newman. Another co-chair of the new coalition is anti-abortion filmmaker Jason Jones, who joined a call for coalition members today, where he warned that electing Cruz is essential because America can’t “survive another 40 years of Roe v. Wade.”
“You know, the right to life is the founding principle not only of this country but of our civilization,” Jones said on the call, “and we are fighting to preserve our nation for our posterity. We are fighting in a real way for our posterity. And I don’t believe our country can survive another 40 years of Roe v. Wade because Roe v. Wade undermines the idea that we are endowed by God with inalienable rights. We’ll see our religious freedom leave, we’re seeing that. We’ll see our economic freedom leave, we’re seeing that. We’ll see our political freedom leave, we’re seeing that with the most recent case with David Daleiden. So let’s fight to defend the pre-born child from the bounds of abortion, let’s fight for our republic, and let’s call everyone in Iowa and let’s expand this pro-life caucus.”
The loss of “political freedom” that he was referring to was the recent indictments brought against David Daleiden, who was accused of breaking laws in Texas when he and his Center for Medical Progress infiltrated Planned Parenthood, a project concocted with the help of Newman.
While Huckabee thanked Christian News Wire, which just posts press releases from different groups and activists, the statement actually came from Andrew.
In his press release, titled “5 Reasons Why Mike Huckabee is #1 for Traditional Marriage,” Andrew warned that “Christians could be jailed with Donald Trump, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Carly Fiorina, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden. The reason is they think same-sex marriage is law.”
“We know the founders made homosexual sin illegal so God would bless the USA,” he continued. “They would agree with Huckabee and no one else.”
Last year, Andrew suggested that God was supporting Huckabee’s campaign, explaining that “voting for Huckabee will bring God's economic recovery and protection, since God rewards obedience.” He claimed in 2012 that God was backing Rick Santorum because President Obama and Mitt Romney worship “demons,” elaborating in a “God’s State of the Union” address that he delivered last year that Obama wants “to follow Satan” by “forcing people to have death panels” and promoting “homosexual sin.” Andrew even called for a boycott of Nike, Google, Microsoft, Amazon and Starbucks because of their support for marriage equality, accusing the companies of “doing the devil’s work” and “leading people to sin and to possibly go to hell.”
He reacted to the Supreme Court’s “unAmerican and unconstitutional” decision to strike down bans on same-sex marriage by asserting that “the court is committing treason” and warning that “history shows that no homosexual societies remain because the Supreme Judge has destroyed them for rebellion.”
This morning, Rafael Cruz returned to “Breitbart News Daily,” where he had previously warned that the public school system was a part of a communist plan to “brainwash” kids to hate America.
Cruz, the father of presidential candidate Ted Cruz, once again issued a dire warning to listeners, alleging that the Supreme Court may soon do away with American principles and that President Obama is bringing in ISIS terrorists to the U.S. through the refugee resettlement program.
“The decay, the deterioration of America in the last seven years has been at an accelerated pace,” he said. “We are seeing the destruction of America before our very eyes.”
He went on to falselyclaim that “Obamacare is destroying millions of jobs” and that the Iran deal “puts us at the brink of war.”
Schlafly started things out by alleging that the political problems of conservatives stem from the fact that “we’ve taken in millions of people who have no concept of the whole idea of limited government” and who “don’t even know what it means or have a desire to be American.”
Pratt agreed that we are “bringing in people who have never had any tradition of, never been schooled in what it means to have a limited government” and that “folks coming abroad are all natural Democrats, they’re looking, as you say, for big government, that’s their whole idea of what government is about, it’s there to give them more and more things.”
He added that Democrats are “eagerly bringing in these immigrants who at best don’t have an idea of what it means to be an American if they were to become one and may well be terrorists.”
“You know, I have friends who came in long ago,” Schlafly said, “and they told me with pride that after they got off the boat at Ellis Island to immigrate, their parents would stand them up and say, ‘And now we’re in America and we’re going to be Americans and we’re going to learn English and we’re going to learn a whole new set of laws and this is our country now, we’re going to be American.’ But you don’t find these immigrants saying this today.”
Now, she said, “anybody can come, no matter how much you hate us, no matter how you have no concept about limited government and the rule of law and the things that we believe in.”
Pratt added that this problem was especially acute with Muslim immigrants because “they’re taught from the Koran, they’re taught to hate people like us, they’re taught to want to kill people like us, and to the extent that they don’t, that’s taqiyya, that’s just a temporary lying to get along until they are tactically and strategically in a position to strike.”
Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign launched a “Pro-Lifers for Cruz” coalition yesterday, which is to be chaired by the leader of an anti-gay hate group and a radical anti-choice activist who has written that a just society would execute abortion providers.
Stunningly, in its short biography of Newman, the Cruz campaign mentions that he is the author of a book called “Their Blood Cries Out”:
Troy Newman is the president of Operation Rescue, one of the leading pro-life Christian activist organizations in the nation and a founding board member for the Center for Medial Progress. He has been involved in the pro-life community for over 20 years, starting in 1991 as the Operation Rescue West president. He is also a published author, having written Their Blood Cries Out and his most recent book Abortion Free.
We have reviewed both “Abortion Free” and “Their Blood Cries Out” here at Right Wing Watch. In “Their Blood Cries Out,” written in 2000 and revised in 2003, Newman lays out the case for churches to oppose abortion rights, saying that by failing to follow what he says is the biblical response to abortion — executing abortion providers and treating women who have abortions as “murderers” — the country is mired in “bloodguilt” and is awaiting the judgment of God. In the meantime, Newman writes, the U.S. has experienced “warnings” from God about legal abortion, including the HIV/AIDS epidemic and the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Yesterday, far-right radio host Michael Savage spoke with Donald Trump about how he would defeat Bernie Sanders in a potential general election matchup and “overcome the poor and immigrants who hate the rich.”
Trump told Savage that he “would be very happy” if Sanders won the Democratic nomination, saying that the Vermont senator is “probably a communist” who will “destroy the fabric of what we are.”
“I just can’t believe that this country is ready for socialism or communism, because it’s pretty close to communism, some of the things he wants to do,” Trump added.
Savage, in turn, said he is praying for a Sanders nomination because “it’d be the greatest landslide in history,” predicting that Trump would take 85 percent of the vote.
In her weekly column for WorldNetDaily yesterday, Mission America’s Linda Harvey railed against “the GOP establishment” for “‘going gay,’” warning that doing so “will eviscerate the GOP.”
Harvey said that gay peoples’ “aberrant sexual conduct is a blight on America” that’s “sinful, unhealthy and immoral, and there is no need for anyone to engage in it” since “people are not constructed for these bizarre behaviors.” This “behavior,” she wrote, is “tearing our country – and families – apart.”
Angry that gay conservative commentator Guy Benson is making an appearance at CPAC in March, Harvey warned that Republicans are “becoming willing tools of the gaystapo” whose leaders are “full of pink testosterone” and bent on promoting “child-endangering, changeable deviance.”
Jeb Bush and John Kasich hired them for key campaign staff positions.
John Boehner and others campaigned for them.
Speaker Paul Ryan said he would vote to grant them special rights.
Chris Christie happily signed a key bill granting their New Jersey leaders full access to children in public schools under the guise of preventing “bullying.”
And Nikki Haley pledged that a future Republican president “… would respect differences in modern families” while respecting religious freedom, which many see as irreconcilable objectives.
I’m talking, of course, about those involved in proud homosexual behavior. It’s true there’s nothing foundationally different about these people. Each is made in the image of God and shares constitutional rights with every other American. But their aberrant sexual conduct is a blight on America. It’s sinful, unhealthy and immoral, and there is no need for anyone to engage in it. People are not constructed for these bizarre behaviors.
And regarding establishment GOP leaders, it seems they’re becoming willing tools of the gaystapo, the same revolutionaries who routinely bully bakers, florists, photographers and innkeepers without batting an eyelash.
The Human Rights Campaign and others are now so full of pink testosterone that they boldly advocate denial of First Amendment religious freedoms to anyone who resists the required obeisance: bowing before homosexual and transgendered demands – which is why no open homosexuals, even if they claim affinity with conservative values, deserve a key platform, like Townhall’s Guy Benson will get at the upcoming CPAC meeting March 2-5. Benson is an advocate of same-sex “marriage.”
Our future president should respect two “moms” who happily omit a father figure? Haley and others are pledging support for behavior tearing our country – and families – apart, conduct God calls an abomination.
Respect from the “gay rights” movement toward other views? There is none. This movement divides and destroys, all because of unhealthy, deviant behavior, and it will eviscerate the GOP if they embrace child-endangering, changeable deviance.
At Mass Convergence on Washington, D.C., People Will Demand That Policymakers Address Barriers to Voting, Curb the Influence of Wealthy in Elections
WASHINGTON, D.C – Thousands of people will converge on Washington, D.C., this spring as part of an unprecedented movement to demand a democracy that works for all Americans, one in which everyone has an equal voice and elected officials are accountable to the people, not the wealthy.
The landmark three-day mobilization, called “Democracy Awakening” and scheduled for April 16-18, brings together two advocacy communities in one movement. Together, they will press for reform proposals focused both on restoring and expanding voting rights protections, and curbing the influence of wealthy interests and corporations on elections. Polls show that the public overwhelmingly agrees on the need for reforms in both arenas, but this will mark the first mass demonstration calling for change on both these fronts.
More than 100 groups representing a diverse array of issues are organizing Democracy Awakening. Lead organizations include the American Postal Workers Union, Common Cause, Communications Workers of America, Democracy Initiative, Every Voice Center, Food & Water Watch, Franciscan Action Network, Greenpeace, NAACP, People For the American Way, Public Citizen, Student Debt Crisis and U.S. PIRG. A list of all endorsing organizations is available here.
Democracy Awakening will feature a rally and march on Sunday, April 17, as well as targeted actions at the “Congress of Conscience” on Monday, April 18, that will call for voting rights protections, measures to curb the influence of money in politics and more. Democracy Awakening will include teach-ins and cultural events throughout the weekend.
For both money in politics and voting rights, the U.S. Supreme Court has eviscerated laws that once protected the voices and votes of everyday Americans. Congress has solutions in front of it, but has failed to pass them into law or even hold a hearing in the U.S. House of Representatives.
“That’s why it’s time for us to fight back on a scale that’s never been done before,” announces a video about Democracy Awakening created by Brave New Films.
City by city and state by state, a national movement is growing to ensure voters are fully heard. In communities throughout the country, voters have turned back efforts to impose discriminatory barriers to voting, won measures for public financing of local and state elections, and passed resolutions calling for a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision and other rulings.
Solutions being sought as part of Democracy Awakening include legislation to restore the protections against voting discrimination that were struck down by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shelby County, modernize voter registration, prevent deceptive practices that keep people from the ballot box and ensure equal access to voting for all.
Activists also will call for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and allow elected representatives to set commonsense limits on money in elections. They will press for increased disclosure of the source of election spending and public financing of elections.
Democracy Awakening will follow a march and demonstrations organized by 99Rise and Avaaz as part of a separate event called “Democracy Spring.” The march will go from the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia to the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., in early April.
Why It Matters
Representatives of some of the organizations participating in Democracy Awakening explain why they are involved:
“We’re not talking about the nostalgic disenfranchisement of 1965. Once again, states with the worst histories of discrimination are pushing for new barriers to block the young, the poor, the elderly and minority voters from the ballot in 2016,” said Cornell William Brooks, president and CEO of the NAACP. “We must answer the call for action.”
“Americans’ frustration – and despair – is reflected in countless polls that show staggering majorities of our citizens believe the system is rigged to favor the rich and powerful,” said Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen. “These views transcend party, region, race and gender. The American people know the system is not working for them, and that a broken system is blocking us from addressing our great challenges.”
“Protecting voting rights and pushing for money in politics reform are two sides of the same coin,” said Marge Baker, executive vice president of People For the American Way. “When people face barriers to casting a ballot, and when wealthy special interests can overpower the voices and priorities of everyday Americans, our democracy simply isn’t working.”
“A handful of wealthy and corporate donors are hijacking our political system through mega-contributions and a systematic assault on voting rights that can only result in a breakdown in democracy and the belief by the average person that her or his vote doesn’t matter,” said Christopher Shelton, president of Communications Workers of America. “This spring, CWA members are ready to join the millions of others in this movement and to do what it takes to win back our democracy.”
”Americans across the country are demanding a democracy where everyone has an equal voice and our elected officials are held accountable to the voters,”said Marissa Brown, executive director of the Democracy Initiative.“Thousands of people will join together in Washington, D.C., for a Democracy Awakening – a call to conscience for our elected officials.”
“People are fed up with a political system that too often works for big donors at the expense of everyone else,” said Nick Nyhart, president and CEO of Every Voice Center. “And at the Democracy Awakening this spring, in Maine, in Seattle, and in cities and states across the country Americans are coming together to demand a democracy in which one’s influence isn’t determined by the size of their wallet.”
“As long as our government is controlled by corporate interests, we’ll never be able to protect our food, ban fracking, or prevent disasters like we’ve seen in Flint,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch. “Our democracy is broken, and for the sake of our food, water, and climate, it’s time for us to fix it.”
“The Democracy Awakening mobilization will galvanize the emerging movement that’s challenging America to live up to its promise of government of, by, and for the people,” said Annie Leonard, executive director at Greenpeace USA. “That promise means politicians putting people first by supporting voting rights and rejecting the campaign contributions from fossil fuel companies which manipulate our political system.”
“Student Debt Crisis wholeheartedly believe that borrowers, students and young people are facing an uphill battle when it comes to higher education reform due to the influence of billionaires and corporations on our political system,” said Natalia Abrams, executive director of Student Debt Crisis. “Until we get money out of politics and restore voting rights, our voices will not have the power that we, the people, deserve. It is our hope that once we get rid of the corporate stronghold on our democracy we will see reforms such as free college and some form of student loan forgiveness.”
“As Franciscans and people of faith, we're working to remove the road block of unchecked money in politics as issues such as immigration, care for creation, and gun safety are not moving on Capitol Hill,” said Patrick Carolan, executive director of the Franciscan Action Network. “As we continue to advocate for these core issues, we must also work to alleviate the root of the problem in order to see real progress.”
“Voters want to be heard in our elections – they want a government that works for them instead of mega-donors,” said Dan Smith, democracy program director for U.S. PIRG. “As an independent voice for American consumers, U.S. PIRG has made voter empowerment a top priority. Democracy Awakening is a chance for us to push lawmakers for real election reforms.”
“Democracy Awakening is the American Postal Workers Union’s chance to become bigger than ourselves,” said Debby Szeredy, executive vice president of the APWU. “We are a union representing our members and all of America as we fight to provide a Postal Service that is prompt efficient, affordable, with decent living wage jobs and benefits that communities have valued for years. Democracy Awakening connects us to the political revolution that has become crucial.”
“Our democracy faces serious threats. Everyday Americans know our system is out of balance, and what’s worse, our constitutional right to free speech has been reduced to a whisper as a few wealthy special interests spend billions so their voices are heard over everyone else,” said Miles Rapport, president of Common Cause. “This spring, Common Cause’s 400,000 members join with Americans from all walks of life to lift our voices and demand change through a series of important actions during two weeks in April, highlighting the importance of voting rights and reducing money’s influence so together we create a 21st century democracy that works for every American.”
As we wrote several weeks ago when a group of armed militia members took over a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon, many antigovernment leaders were not on their side. This isn’t because these groups disagree with the occupiers’ cause — outrage at the arrests of two ranchers for arson on federal lands — but because they don’t have faith in the leadership of those who took over the building.
Now that eight of the occupiers — including their leader, Ammon Bundy —have been arrested and one has been killed in a clash with law enforcement, antigovernment groups are caught between a cause they agree with and a leader they don’t trust. These groups are obsessed with the idea of the federal government provoking a “civil war” with “patriots” like them, and they have been worried that they will now be forced to fight a civil war on behalf of Ammon Bundy.
Stewart Rhodes, head of the Oath Keepers, has from the beginning urged his followers to stay out of the Oregon standoff, but has nevertheless warned the government that “there will never again be a free Waco” and that any force against the occupiers could lead to a “bloody, brutal civil war.” Mike Vanderboegh, leader of the Three Percenters movement, similarly warned that Bundy and his allies had “written a check that they expect the rest of us to cash in our own blood in a ghastly civil war” and may have been infiltrated by federal "provacateurs" trying to provoke such a war.
These groups are, at least for now, sounding a note of caution.
The Pacific Patriots Network, an umbrella group of militia groups in the area, including members of the Oath Keepers and Three Percenters, wrote in a press release last night that it was urging its members to “stand by” and that “[n]o mobilization of any kind is to take place until every piece of speculation and hearsay have been verified or dismissed.” It repeated that call today, writing that the group is “working on maintaining a calm presence in town and are still acting as a buffer between the Refuge and the FBI.”
The post concludes ominiously: “We need more information and confirmation of what I have written, but it is apparent that the Feds are giving us all a choice.”
As the Anti-Defamation League’s Mark Pitcavage noted on Twitter, at this point the danger of backlash comes not from these larger groups but from rogue individuals who have been motivated by their ideology:
Anti-govt *groups* relatively unlikely to take action re #oregonstandoff. Real danger of violence is from volatile individuals & offshoots.
On Monday, the work of an anti-choice group called the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) backfired badly when its attempt to launch criminal proceedings against Planned Parenthood ended up with its leader, David Daleiden, along with a fellow activist getting indicted by a Texas grand jury, which in turn cleared Planned Parenthood of alleged wrongdoings.
A small number of Planned Parenthood clinics — "just 1% [of clinics] are involved with fetal tissue research," according to Planned Parenthood — donate fetal tissue for research that many scientistshavecredited with important breakthroughs in vaccines and other medical treatments.
CMP activists, posing as representatives of a biomedical company, claimed that they recorded Planned Parenthood officials admitting to making a profit off those donations, a criminal act. However, there is no evidence any official from the organization made such a statement, although they did mention fees covering the costs of storage and transportation.
CMP's videos, as it turned out, were manipulated to make it seem that the officials wanted to make money. FactCheck.org explained that "the full, unedited video they cite as evidence shows a Planned Parenthood executive repeatedly saying its clinics want to cover their costs, not make money, when donating fetal tissue from abortions for scientific research." Planned Parenthood has since stated that it will no longer accept such reimbursements at all.
Despite the flimsy evidence presented in CMP’s videos, Republican politicians in Congress and throughout the country seized on Daleiden’s claims and launched investigations into Planned Parenthood fetal tissue donation practices. Not a single investigation that has been completed so far has foundedanyevidenceofwrongdoings. Texas was one of several states where politicians called for investigations into Planned Parenthood's fetal tissue donation program.
Which brings us back to the indictments.
The New York Times notes that the case in Harris County, which includes the city of Houston, "started in August, when Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, a Republican and an outspoken opponent of abortion and Planned Parenthood, asked [Republican district attorney Devon] Anderson to open a criminal investigation into the organization."
In the end, the grand jury cleared Planned Parenthood but indicted CMP founder David Daleiden and his colleague Sandra Merritt on felony charges of tampering with government records. Daleiden also faces a misdemeanor charge of attempting to purchase human organs.
While the indictments further discredit CMP's work, abortion-rights opponents are relishing the opportunity to portray Daleiden as a martyr and hero of the cause. As Miranda pointed out yesterday, "arrest and jail time for violation of what they see as unjust laws is a badge of honor" for many in the anti-choice movement. And as expected, Daleiden’s supporters on the Right are using the indictments as an opening to spread even more misinformation.
1) Daleiden Is A Journalist
Following news of the indictments, Daleiden called himself an "investigative journalist," tweeting that Planned Parenthood's local affiliate is "trying to jail investigative journalism." (Never mind that it was actually an anti-Planned Parenthood politician who launched the probe that ensnared him).
Thank you everyone for all the support! Something smells rotten in TX: it's @PPGulfCoast trying to jail investigative journalism.
Sorry, but Daleiden isn't exactly aiming for a Pulitzer.
For starters, CMP did not originally describe itself as a journalistic outlet. It was only around the time the group started releasing its videos that it updated its website's “About Us” page to say that it was comprised of "citizen journalists."
Daleiden himself served as a staffer for the anti-abortion group Live Action, which has its own history of launching sham investigations of Planned Parenthood, and said he wanted CMP to emulate a similar 1999 anti-Planned Parenthood sting by the anti-choice organization Life Dynamics. That scheme fell apart because Life Dynamics paid a witness for their testimony.
Troy Newman, a CMP board member, is a longtime anti-abortion activist with the group Operation Rescue. He told fellow activists that when Daleiden approached him about the project, the goal wasn't to follow the facts where they lead, as journalists do, but to put Planned Parenthood officials behind bars and "destroy" the group. In fact, Newman said that CMP's venture would be a failure if it only succeeded in drawing the attention of members of the press and did not lead to prosecutions of Planned Parenthood officials.
Newman told a church audience in September: "We said, ‘Look, if we just get on Fox News’ — and we were on Fox News, we were on there a couple weeks ago — ‘if we just got a bunch of YouTube video hits or something, if, you know, people are talking about — we would consider it a failure.’ The first and foremost thing is we wanted prosecutions. We want prosecutions, want to defund them, and, finally, we want to completely destroy the entity called Planned Parenthood. And we’re well on our way."
About three years ago, David Daleiden came here to Wichita and actually visited us in our office, and he had discussions with Troy about his visions for this undercover project. … David was really motivated to conduct a long-term investigative study of Planned Parenthood and their practices regarding the buying and selling of aborted baby remains. And the reason that he came to us was because he shared our vision for obtaining criminal prosecutions and really doing something substantial to report these abuses, document and report them, and bring an end to not only these practices, but an end to the abortion industry in America. And he knew if he focused on Planned Parenthood that would be probably the most powerful way to do that.
Daleiden is not an “investigative journalist.” He is an anti-abortion activist who is now trying to pose as a journalist.
This detail is particularly important because the grand jury's felony indictment stemmed from the contention that Daleiden and his colleague used fake IDs with an "intent to cause harm."
2) Indictment Proves Planned Parenthood Was Selling Human Tissue
Anti-choice activists have jumped on the misdemeanor charge that Daleiden faces for attempting to purchase human organs, saying that the charge in turn proves that Planned Parenthood was selling organs.
The Resurgent, a right-wing blog, called the charge a "gift" to the anti-choice movement because it "proves" that Planned Parenthood was selling tissue all along.
This is a big distortion of the case.
Daleiden did send Planned Parenthood an email asking to purchase fetal tissue for $1,600.
"Whether Daleiden actually intended to buy tissue doesn’t matter in the eyes of Texas law," the Washington Post points out. "The inquiry alone could have spurred the misdemeanor charge. Authorities don’t need to see evidence of a deal or interest from another party to pursue the charge."
To say that Planned Parenthood is guilty of breaking the law simply because Daleiden asked them to break the law, without success, may be one of the most absurd claims that has emerged following the indictments.
Anti-choice groups used similar logic when Planned Parenthood announced that it would cease collecting legal reimbursements for fetal tissue, claiming that the move somehow proved that Planned Parenthood was collecting illegal reimbursements all along.
3) Planned Parenthood-Linked Attorney 'Tainted' The Investigation
Surprised by the indictments and still unable to prove that Planned Parenthood committed any wrongdoings, now anti-choice activists are contending that the district attorney's office that brought the grand jury investigation must be at fault. After all, the grand jury didn't accept the movement's narrative that, as Ted Cruz put it, Planned Parenthood "confesses to multiple felonies."
The conservative outlet the Federalist thought it found quite the scoop when it reported that one of the prosecutors working in the district attorney's office was a local Planned Parenthood board member, posting an image of her LinkedIn page as damning evidence of misconduct.
Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice, the conservative legal group founded by televangelist Pat Robertson, said that the case may been "tainted" by this alleged "conflict of interest."
Except that the assistant district attorney in question had nothing to do with the investigation, and she personally revealed her connection to the organization at the very beginning of the inquiry. No LinkedIn screenshot was needed, as a simple Google search would do.
When the Houston case started in August, the attorney who serves on a local Planned Parenthood board disclosed the connection herself and the district attorney announced that she would “not be involved in any manner in this investigation." At the time, one Texas Republican lawmaker praised the decision to "insulate that person from any involvement with the ongoing investigation."
Even the Blaze, the conservative website launched by Glenn Beck, reported on the non-issue back in August, noting that "office spokesman Jeff McShan told TheBlaze that approximately 300 prosecutors and 700 employees work for the Harris County DA’s office."
The smoking gun that may have "tainted" the investigation was actually disclosed from the get-go, and the attorney, one of around 300 in the office, had no involvement in the proceedings.
But none of these misleading and blatantly false claims should surprise anyone.
The CMP probe was always a sham, but that didn’t stop Republican politicians and conservative media pundits from running with the group's discredited "findings." Some, such as Carly Fiorina, even added a few of their own false claims to boot.
Since they appear to be immune to facts, including the outcomes of the many investigations from both government bodies and actual journalists that have already cleared Planned Parenthood, it is no wonder that CMP's defenders are twisting the truth now that it turns out that Daleiden and his CMP colleague, rather than Planned Parenthood officials, are facing indictments.
An Arizona sheriff best known for his human rights abuses, attacks on immigrants and birther conspiracy theories is heading to Iowa today to endorse Donald Trump, according to a report in the New York Times.
Last March, Arpaio admitted to violating a federal court order "by continuing to allow sheriff's deputies to make traffic stops based on suspicions about individuals' immigration status." A party held in Arpaio's honor included racist jokes about the sheriff pulling over drivers just for being Hispanic.
In an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network's David Brody on Monday, Ted Cruz said that conservative voters should back him over Donald Trump because "for seven years, we've had a president in the White House who has had a messiah complex."
Cruz went on to credit his presidential campaign with sparking a national movement to "bring this country back" and create "a spirit of revival" that's "sweeping this country."
"I fear for America," he said. "If we keep on this path there comes a point of no return and my prayer is that this awakening continues, that the body of Christ rise up to pull us back from the abyss."
After mentioning how campaigning has been "humbling," Cruz said that "we are going to, together with God's blessing and grace, pull America back from the abyss and it is this election that makes the difference." He then urged people who oppose gay marriage and abortion rights to back him in the Iowa caucuses.
After the interview with Brody, Cruz spoke to a pastors' event sponsored by right-wingextremist David Lane, where he told attendees that "the federal government daily wages a war on life, on marriage, on religious liberty, on the Judeo-Christian values that built this country."
He also urged pastors to "sound the alarm" and to make sure that "every member of your congregation will show up and caucus and caucus for someone who defends biblical values."
Cruz was very clear about who that someone might be: "If everyone in this room ensures that every member of your congregation comes out in votes in the Iowa caucus and votes for our values, we will win one week from today."
In an interesting turn of events yesterday, a Texas grand jury that had been convened to investigate Planned Parenthood based on the claims of anti-abortion activist David Daleiden instead indicted Daleiden and a colleague on charges relating to their infiltration of the women’s health care organization.
So far, Daleiden's attempt to "obtain prosecutions" has come up empty.
But pushing for the prosecution of Planned Parenthood officials was only part of Daleiden’s plan. In a statement following the indictment, Daleiden claimed that the “admissions” of Planned Parenthood were “captured on video for all the world to see.” Never mind that the videos show no such “admissions” of law-breaking. The point of the videos was not just to make a case to law enforcement, but to sway public opinion.
On a large scale, that hasn't been successful: One poll showed barely a flutter in the public’s views about Planned Parenthood between August and September of last year, in the height of the visibility of Daleiden’s videos. Planned Parenthood's favorability ratings had already dropped over the last two decades, Gallup found, but mostly among Republicans, a trend that the polling agency attributed to the growing “politicization of Planned Parenthood."
What Daleiden’s project has done is to galvanize support among those who were already opposed to abortion rights. Protests in front of Planned Parenthood offices, driven by the old guard of the anti-abortion “rescue” movement, expanded and multiplied, with the support of much more visible anti-choice groups. At this year’s March for Life, it was impossible to go five minutes without hearing a mention of Daleiden or his videos, with speaker after speaker saying that their movement finally had winning momentum. In the days leading up to the march, Daleiden crossed the city to speak to protesters holding gruesome signs outside a construction site for a new Planned Parenthood clinic; to talk with Americans United for Life lawyers working on strategies to restrict abortion rights; and to be prayed over by Russell Moore and Jim Daly, evangelical leaders who are trying to put a kinder, gentler face on their movement.
Speakers at nearly every event noted with hope that a bill defunding Planned Parenthood recently made it through a Republican Congress, allowing anti-choice activists to say that all they need now is to elect a president who would sign it.
Now that Daleiden is facing prosecution, he’s in the company of many fellow members of the “rescue” movement, which his work grew out of. Among those who protest outside of clinics, or try to infiltrate them, arrest and jail time for violation of what they see as unjust laws is a badge of honor. At a protest last week in front of a new Planned Parenthood that is being built in Washington, D.C., before Daleiden spoke, one “rescue” movement leader asked who there would be willing to “lay their body in front of the door” or “handcuff yourself to construction equipment” in order to stop the building from opening. Another touted the work of one of Daleiden’s mentors to train “a whole army of David Daleidens” to infiltrate Planned Parenthood clinics throughout the country.
Yesterday’s indictment is unlikely to dissuade these activists, who feel that they are on the cusp of a David-and-Goliath victory. In fact, at events connected to the March for Life last week, speakers expressed hope that a separate lawsuit against Daleiden by Planned Parenthood would instead turn up unflattering information about the women's health provider and land it in hot water instead. So far, the opposite has been true. But, to the anti-choice movement, that just makes Daleiden seem even more like David, closer than ever to slinging the winning shot.
Donald Trump has onceagain joined up with Texas pastor Robert Jeffress, this time inviting Jeffress to introduce him at an event at a Christian college in Iowa over the weekend.
"It’s becoming something of a regular gig: Jeffress, you may recall, also intro’d Trump at his American Airlines Center rally in September. And when he’s not introducing Trump, Jeffress is laying hands on the man," Robert Wilsonsky of The Dallas Morning News wrote, noting that Trump has returned the favor by lavishing praise on Jeffress...for boasting about Trump.
Jeffress insists that his appearances don't amount to an official endorsement, but has said that Trump has the best chance of defeating a Democratic opponent and "could be a very effective president of the United States."
However, courting Jeffress' support didn't end well for the last Republican presidential candidate who tried it: Rick Perry.
After a Holiday break, the Supreme Court returned to a full schedule of arguments and other activity in January. The crucial oral argument before the Court this month in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, as well as several cases that the Court agreed to review later this year, again show that on a variety of important issues, the Court has enormous influence but is closely divided. With the president elected in November likely to select as many as four new Supreme Court justices beginning as early as next year, the person we elect as president will be critical. That’s why Election Day 2016 will be Judgment Day for the Court and our rights and liberties.
Friedrichs is the latest battle in what the New York Times has called the “war on workers” and unions being waged by Justice Alito and other conservatives on the Court. A primary target of that war has been a decision almost 40 years ago inAbood v. Detroit Board of Education. In that case the Court determined that although workers cannot be forced to join a union or contribute to its political activities, since that would violate their First Amendment rights, they can be required to help pay for the costs of collective bargaining and related activities from which they benefit even if they are not union members. That solution to what would otherwise be a “free rider” problem is crucial to the ability of unions to effectively represent the interests of workers. Even though a unanimous Supreme Court recognized the principle of Abood as recently as 2009, subsequent 5-4 decisions written by Justice Alito have criticized that ruling and effectively invited attempts to overturn it. That is exactly what the plaintiffs in Friedrichs, a small group of California teachers, are attempting to do, claiming they should not have to join or pay “fair share” costs to the state teachers union and that Abood should be overturned.
The justices’ comments at the oral argument made clear that the conservative 5-4 majority remains hostile to unions and Abood, and may well be prepared to overrule it this year. (As usual, Justice Thomas did not speak at the argument, but his negative views in this area have been made clear in past opinions). Particularly troubling were some comments by Justice Kennedy, who is often the “swing” vote on the Court, but in this case maintained that “free riders” are really “compelled riders” who, he claimed, are forced to support unions on “issues on which they strongly disagree.” Regardless of the merits of that claim, on which many have disagreed, it strongly suggests that there may now be five votes to overturnAbood, with disastrous consequences for unions and workers.
It is impossible, of course, to predict the precise outcome of a Supreme Court case based on the oral argument, and the Court could issue a decision that does not completely overrule Abood. The Court could send the case back to a lower court for specific fact-finding on issues like the impact of eliminating “free rider” payments on unions, as was suggested at one point in the argument, or could limit its holding to the specific case in California. Particularly if the Court chooses one of those alternatives, the question of who will replace older justices like Kennedy, Ginsburg, and Scalia when they retire will be critical. That is why the election in November of our next president, who will nominate such replacements, is crucial for the Court and workers’ rights. Even an outright overruling of Abood could be softened or revisited, but only if a progressive president is elected and selects more progressives Justices for the Court.
During January, the Court also agreed to review several important cases on other subjects this year. The case that has generated the most controversy is United States v. Texas, where lower courts have put on hold the president’s executive orders on immigration that would defer deportation enforcement against millions of undocumented immigrants who have children who are citizens or legal permanent residents and would be able to apply for jobs and stay in the U.S. for three years. Twenty-six states led by Texas filed the challenge, and the huge partisan divide on the question almost guarantees that it will be an election issue this fall. The most extreme Justices on the Court (Scalia, Alito and Thomas) have voted against virtually every significant Obama initiative that has come before the Court, and the Court’s decision to add a question for the parties to address - whether the Obama order is consistent with the Constitution’s language that the president should “take care” that federal laws be “faithfully executed” -- suggests deep skepticism by some of the justices. The decision itself could have a huge impact not only on this specific issue, but also on the ability of a future progressive president to take other executive action in the face of a recalcitrant Congress. However this case is decided, there is also little question that these issues will return to the Court in 2017 or later, and the views of the president who will appoint future justices will be crucial to the results.
The Court also decided in January to review several other important cases this year. In one, the Court has been asked to decide whether a state constitution can more strictly separate church and state than the increasingly conservative Supreme Court has and can prohibit any direct state financial aid to religious institutions. Thirty-five states have such constitutional provisions, and the Court is very divided on such religion issues, which are very likely to come up in the future as well. And in another big business vs. consumers case, the Court will consider what must be proven to prosecute someone for illegally using inside company information for stock or other trading. This issue has divided lower courts, one of which has adopted a narrow interpretation that has dealt a significant setback to the efforts of Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara to crack down on insider trading in the $3 trillion hedge fund industry. The Court is likely to be divided on this issue as well.
The Court’s decisions in both these cases later this year will be important in and of themselves. But they are also very unlikely to be the last word on the significant big business, consumer, and religion issues they raise. The fact that these and other crucial issues will be decided by this divided Court in the future, and the fact that four justices on the current Court will be over 80 in the next president’s first term, is what makes the identity of the president who will appoint future justices so important. Statements this month by both Democratic and Republican candidates show that, even as they also discuss other issues, they clearly recognize the importance of the election for the future direction of the Court. In short, Election Day 2016 truly is Judgment Day for the Supreme Court and for all of our rights and liberties.
Winning video selected among entries submitted by Americans during nationwide video competition to be announced and used for national campaign to support Democracy For All amendment
WHAT: A panel of celebrity judges including Michael Moore, Norman Lear, Kathleen Turner and Dolores Huerta, selected one video from entries submitted by everyday Americans to raise awareness of big money in politics. The winning video will be announced and used to represent the voice of Americans in a national campaign to support the Democracy For All constitutional amendment currently being considered by Congress.
WHEN: Tuesday, Feb. 2, 2016, 12:15-1:15 p.m.
WHERE: National Press Club (Murrow room), 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC 20045
WHO: U.S. Senator Tom Udall (D-NM)
U.S. Representative Ted Deutch (FL-21)
Kathleen Turner, Academy Award-nominated actress
Jeff Haggin, president, Say No To Big Money
Marge Baker, executive vice president, People For the American Way
Winning video creators
AMENDMENT: The Democracy For All Amendment, currently being considered by Congress with 144 cosponsors in the House and 41 supporters in the Senate, would overturn cases such as Citizens United, the 2010 Supreme Court case that paved the way for unlimited political spending by corporations and the super wealthy.
ABOUT: The Democracy For All Video Challenge (www.democracyforall.com) is a project of Say No to Big Money and People For the American Way. People For the American Way is a progressive advocacy organization founded to fight extremism and defend constitutional values including free expression, religious liberty and the right to meaningfully participate in our democracy. More information is available at www.PFAW.org. Say No To Big Money is a nonprofit corporation with the mission of supporting the ratification of the Democracy For All Amendment that will regulate campaign contributions. More information is available at www.SayNoToBigMoney.com.