Pro-Choice

niyad

(120,663 posts) Tue Jan 26, 2016, 10:10 PM Jan 2016

Rubio launches dubious (ie, lying) attack against Planned Parenthood after indictments

Rubio launches dubious attack against Planned Parenthood after indictments

Republican on the defensive after Texas grand jury investigating Planned Parenthood decided to indict anti-abortion activists who prompted the inquiry

?w=620&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=450a10a4d38afeaa2b71bd9fb5af6a38
Marco Rubio at Marshalltown Community College in Iowa on Tuesday. Photograph: Aaron P Bernstein/Reuters

Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio sought to raise questions on Tuesday about the indictment of two anti-abortion activists by drawing a dubious connection between a member of the prosecutor’s office and Planned Parenthood. “I think it’s pretty outrageous that Planned Parenthood was investigated by some lawyer or district attorney who apparently, according to some news reports, has actually been a board member of Planned Parenthood and donated to them,” Rubio said, responding to a voter question about abortion at an Iowa town hall. “They investigated Planned Parenthood and they said: ‘We found they did nothing wrong,” he added. “But we’re going to indict the people who filmed them talking about these things.’ That’s outrageous.”

Rubio’s comments referred to a Texas grand jury that concluded its investigation of Planned Parenthood by indicting not the women’s healthcare provider, but two of the anti-abortion activists who prompted the criminal inquiry. The activists, David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt, used false identities to film secret videos that accused Planned Parenthood employees of selling fetal tissue in violation of the law. Planned Parenthood of the Gulf Coast was cleared of any wrongdoing.

. . . . . .

Rubio’s attack was likely referring to a Harris County prosecutor in the criminal family law division, Lauren Reeder. Reeder was a member of the Planned Parenthood of the Gulf Coast board of directors at the time of the county’s investigation, a connection that the anti-abortion website LifeNews.com has sought to highlight.

But Reeder was not, as Rubio stated, the district attorney who handed down Monday’s indictments, nor was she involved in the broader investigation. According to news reports from the time, Reeder disclosed that she was a Planned Parenthood board member shortly after Harris County began its investigation in August. The district attorney, Devon Anderson, made Reeder’s affiliation public and stated that Reeder would not have any involvement in the investigation.
. . . . .

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/26/marco-rubio-launches-dubious-attack-planned-parenthood-indictments

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Rubio launches dubious (ie, lying) attack against Planned Parenthood after indictments (Original Post) niyad Jan 2016 OP

Unlike little pols like Rubio, I remember when Vogon_Glory Jan 2016 #1

a most excellent post. would you consider making it its own op for visibility, and so niyad Jan 2016 #2

Gosh, I'm flattered, and yes you may Vogon_Glory Jan 2016 #3

love your grandmother!!! niyad Jan 2016 #4

I second that! brer cat Jan 2016 #5

Vogon_Glory

(9,596 posts)

1. Unlike little pols like Rubio, I remember when

Reply to niyad (Original post)

Tue Jan 26, 2016, 10:21 PM

Jan 2016

Unlike little pols like Marco Rubio, I remember when supporting women's reproductive health was a non-partisan matter, and support came from BOTH parties.

It makes me angry that religious zealots and opportunistic, mendacious little pandering politicians have decided that women should be deprived of access to reproductive and pre-natal care because a coterie of fanatics wishes to punish women for being poor or for having sex for pleasure.

Supporting public health should be a bi-partisan no-brainer, and sacking politicians and hacks who put public health at risk is the civic duty of every American of voting age.

niyad

(120,663 posts)

2. a most excellent post. would you consider making it its own op for visibility, and so

Reply to Vogon_Glory (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 26, 2016, 10:22 PM

Jan 2016

we can rec it?

Vogon_Glory

(9,596 posts)

3. Gosh, I'm flattered, and yes you may

Reply to niyad (Reply #2)

Tue Jan 26, 2016, 10:39 PM

Jan 2016

Gosh, I'm flattered and yes you may.

A bit about my family history. My paternal grandmother helped found a Planned Parenthood branch in Texas back in the 1930's. My family has supported PP since then.

My grandmother was anything BUT a liberal, even by today's diluted standards when even many conservative Democrats are labelled "left-wing liberals" by the unhinged Right.

There are some things that ought to remain non-partisan--public health, clean drinking water, a literate, educated population ( The list could continue), and I see no reason why such things should be sacrificed to advance the political fortunes of historically-illiterate and economically-illiterate social and political reactionaries.

And another thing. I don't believe you HAVE to be either a Democrat or a true progressive to support what I firmly believe are worthy, non-partisan ideals.

niyad

(120,663 posts)

4. love your grandmother!!!

Reply to Vogon_Glory (Reply #3)

Tue Jan 26, 2016, 10:42 PM

Jan 2016

I would love to see you combine your history and your first comment-- I think people would really enjoy reading it. and it will be my pleasure to rec it!!

brer cat

(26,495 posts)

5. I second that!

Reply to niyad (Reply #4)

Tue Jan 26, 2016, 11:01 PM

Jan 2016

Reply to this discussion