Thursday, October 17, 2019, 7:29 pm | Randy Thomasson
These are your California pro-life heroes. They’ve exposed the murderous crimes of Planned Parenthood, and the Liberal Left has hauled them into a kangaroo court.
Center for Medical Progress (CMP) defendants David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt, on trial in federal civil court along with co-defenants Troy Newman and Albin Rhomberg
Right is wrong and wrong is right in the San Francisco federal court of an Obama fundraiser and judge, William Orrick, who served on the board of an organization that houses a Planned Parenthood clinic. And the judge’s wife? She “liked” a National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) Facebook post that criticized CMP as “a sham organization run by extremists.” What’s more, in 2015, “Mrs. Orrick ‘pinkified’ her Facebook page and added ‘I stand with Planned Parenthood’ as a Facebook profile picture overlay.”
True to form, Judge Orrick has tried to hide the felony crimes of Planned Parenthood, which, beyond killing little human beings in the womb and after birth, is selling baby body parts, a blatant violation of federal law. In 2017, Orrick fined David Daleiden $195,000 for publicly releasing the final videos exposing the awful truth. And in this month’s trial, with rare exception, Orrick has forbade showing the jury videos of Planned Parenthood representatives describing money for baby body parts.
But this wall of deception is cracking. Because the rules of evidence mean that Planned Parenthood’s claim of “damage” (illegal recording, trespass, etc.) can be cross-examined. So at this point, the judge has had to permit two Center for Medical Progress videos to be shown to the jury. One on October 11, and another on October 16.
The latest video is the most shattering to Planned Parenthood’s credibility. The nearly 5-minute video showed Planned Parenthood’s top abortionist Deborah Nucatola “speaking on video about liver, lungs, hearts, muscle, and calvarium (baby heads) that were harvested from the bodies of aborted babies.” Reportedly stunning the jurors and causing tears to flow down faces, this revelation could actually lead to the jury rejecting the abortion giant’s claim of unfair play by the investigative journalists of the Center for Medical Progress.
Here are the 3 big wins for truth in court so far:
1. On October 11, Planned Parenthood abortionist Leslie Drummond-Hay claimed on the witness stand that nobody could hear her conversation with David Daleiden (posting as a baby body parts buyer) and that he brought up the matter of money; however, once the hidden video clip was played in court, the abortionist had to admit that others could hear them and that she had been first to bring up the topic of money.
2. On October 15, despite Judge William Orrick generally prohibiting the jury from seeing CMP’s undercover videos, Mary Gatter, “medical director” for Planned Parenthood abortion centers in Los Angeles and Pasadena, opened her mouth to bring out much-needed evidence. On the witness stand while being questioned by Planned Parenthood’s attorney, Gatter surprised both sides by opining about the “good parts and …. the worst parts of the conversation” that were depicted in the video. That allowed a pro-life attorney to quiz Gatter about what she said on the video. Under cross-examination, she admitted saying “I wanted a Lamborghini” and agreed it was in the context was discussing the price she would be paid for “fetal parts.”
3. On October 16, Deborah Nucatola, former medical director for Planned Parenthood Federation of America, who said “she performs an average of 200 per month, testified in court that she prefers to use the [euphemistic] term ‘tissue donation’ instead of ‘selling baby body parts for a profit’ … and Nucatola also described how ‘she was upset about the release of the videos, and again sobbed when relating how she and her family were ‘damaged’ by them.”
Yet then a pro-life attorney read from Nucatola’s earlier statements under oath at a disposition, where, “in deposition, Nucatola said that the release of the videos was ‘no big deal’ that ‘did not damage me’ … in addition, she had made sworn statements such as, ‘I did nothing wrong,’ ‘I don’t care if these videos are released.’ ‘There is nothing wrong with what I said.’” The video confirmed the cross-examination, destroying Nucatola’s credibility.
Do you agree with me that, under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, this case should have been thrown out of court at the get-go? Because remember, investigative journalism is protected under “freedom of the press,” right along with “freedom of speech” and “freedom of religion.”
Back in the 1990s, I remember how aggressive liberal reporters, with their hand recorders and video cameras, showed up unannounced at the pro-family organization where I used to work. But not once did I consider filing a lawsuit (but I did suggest increasing security, primarily by hardening our front door), because I knew about constitutional freedom of the press.
Ultimately, the outcome in the San Francisco courtroom is either going to permit the First Amendment or further destroy it, and will either hide the criminal behavior of Planned Parenthood or expose it.
Truly, the greatest crime in America is the American genocide of 61 million pre-born babies. Because Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in the U.S., they’re the the biggest criminals in America. And in the last few decades, Planned Parenthood has added to their crimes by selling baby body parts, in clear violation of federal law.
Everybody who supports what’s good and right ought to support the creative, investigative journalism of the Center for Medical Congress. These pro-life investigators shouldn’t be punished, they should be rewarded!
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Isaiah 5:20
Saturday, August 3, 2019, 8:42 am | Randy Thomasson
“It’s mine!” Remember hearing this from a young child or saying it yourself?
Little children know stealing is wrong — as long as they’re the victim of the theft. Otherwise, it’s all too easy to fall into self-deception and “justify” a little stealing here, a little pilfering there, nothing that will be easily noticed or missed. But God sees it all, doesn’t He?
Likewise, a liberal in an immoral city might claim there’s no absolute truth. But steal from him or lie to him and he’ll say that was absolutely wrong to do!
Because theft is rampant in our culture and our government, and because we’ve all stolen something (no matter how small), SaveCalifornia.com urges you to teach your children and grandchildren that stealing is absolutely wrong because:
1. Stealing always disrespects an owner. Instead of caring what the owner’s free will is, the thief will take what he wants, even if the owner has not given his voluntary, non-coerced consent. For this reason, stealing always devalues the person, deeming the thing to be taken more important than the person it’s being taken from.
2. Stealing always harms an owner. Theft always decreases a legal owner’s profit, use, or enjoyment; theft causes a rightful owner to suffer loss, no matter how small. Because stealing always subtracts from what an owner owns. Whether the owner knows or doesn’t know you stole from her, God sees and knows what you did.
3. Stealing always harms the character of the perpetrator. By agreeing to sin, and agreeing to harm an owner, a thief immediately lowers his standards, becomes untrustworthy, and finds it all the easier to steal more often, in greater amounts. This is the hardening of the heart, the scarring of the conscience, and the depravity of the soul.
4. Stealing always grieves Creator God. From Genesis to Revelation, the Word of God calls stealing a sin and prohibits it. This is why Western Civilization reflects God’s laws when it makes it punishable to steal, beginning with “petty theft” or “larceny,” whenever someone takes or uses property without the owner’s informed consent (the very definition of theft). As the Author of morality, God views any stealing as a crime against Himself, for He cannot fellowship with sin.
5. Stealing always begins with coveting. Security experts know that if a thief can’t see something or doesn’t know it exists, it’s less likely that theft will occur. In the same way, the Bible informs us that all sins start on the inside before they manifest on the outside.
As Christian writer Tim Challies writes, One way of looking at things is to see the tenth commandment as the internalization of the eighth commandment. Just as adultery of the heart is lust, and murder of the heart is hatred, so theft is the heart of covetousness. When Achan stole some of the devoted things from Ai, he first “coveted them” and then “took them” (Josh. 7:21). Likewise, James says, “You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel” (James 4:3).
Types of stealing
Petty theft Burglary Robbery Embezzlement Knowingly receiving stolen property Cooperating with thieves Identity theft Intellectual property theft Illegal Entry Shoplifting Looting Vandalism Dishonest business practices Cheating on taxes Refusing to pay debts Keeping property you found without making an effort to find the owner Claiming the work or knowledge of others to be your own When politicians defraud voters When union bosses coerce money from workers When stealing anything from your employer When stealing food or drink from a restaurant
The Early Church had a high moral standard against all forms of theft: “…they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so.”
Show your children and grandchildren this and then talk about it, especially what moral standard kept some people from stealing: LA Riot Looters: ‘A Colorblind Orgy Of Wrecking And Taking’ (national news report of 1992 Los Angeles riots)
David Pratte explains what the Bible says about stealing: “When I was about 6 years old, my family visited a neighbor down the street. I saw lying on the floor a toy Mickey Mouse watch — it didn’t really even tell time, but it looked like a wristwatch. I wanted it, so I picked it up, put it in my pocket, and took it home. Of course, I felt terrible, because I knew better. Besides, I couldn’t wear it without my parents asking me where it came from. Next time we visited that neighbor, I took it back and put it where I had found it. I never told anybody, and nobody ever said anything about it, but I learned my lesson. Most people do not want to think of themselves as thieves, because they know stealing is wrong.”
Unconstitutional California Attorney General Xavier Becerra versus constitutional U.S. Judge Roger Benitez
What a great victory for innocent families in California!
A federal judge in San Diego has ruled as unconstitutional a 2016 voter initiative limiting ammunition to 10 rounds in the magazines of handguns, shotguns, and rifles.
On March 29, U.S. Judge Roger Benitez, an anti-communism, Cuba-born, constitutional judge — who President George W. Bush nominated in 2003 — has ruled that the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America defeats the bad law passed three years ago by foolish or anti-family California voters.
Benitez ruled that in response to “a few mad men with guns and ammunition,” California’s law “turns millions of responsible, law-abiding people trying to protect themselves into criminals.” Benitez wrote that “Individual liberty and freedom are not outmoded concepts.”
The judge also said that Proposition 63 “hits at the center of the Second Amendment and its burden is severe.”
Prop. 63’s path to the ballot was led by Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom, who raised money and collected signatures statewide. His unconstitutional heart must be aching over his unexpected defeat. He must hate that this constitutional judge got here to California!
What’s next? You can expect that uber-liberal California Attorney General Xavier Becerra will appeal this just and constitutional ruling to the full Ninth Circuit federal appeals court. But win or lose, I expect this issue to ultimately go to the U.S. Supreme Court and win for family protection nationwide.
Meanwhile, you can still match bullet for bullet any home invasion attacker. He will never obey limits on guns and ammunition, and thanks to a pro-Second-Amendment judge who didn’t lie about his allegiance to the United States Constitution, you can have as many bullets as a would-be killer has, like in this KSG25 25-round shotgun. Because whoever has the most rounds in his gun — wins.
Personally, I’m relieved that I can keep my 15-round magazines that go with my home-defense handgun without fearing that firing it to save innocent lives could result in me going to jail for a year under Prop. 63. What nonsensical tyranny Gavin’s initiative is and was!
RSS 2.0 Feed