Former Planned Parenthood Director Discusses Profiting via “Bonuses” From Aborted Baby Donations…

There’s a seriously grotesque aspect to discussing these articles, and the awakening they bring forth.  But this, well, evil has to be exposed and understood in common terms if the U.S. is ever going to confront and stop this level of inhumanity…

Coexist anti-abortion poster(Via Daily Caller) Abby Johnson quit her job as a Texas Planned Parenthood clinic director in 2009 after witnessing an ultrasound abortion. This is how she and her co-workers would convince women to donate their aborted babies for research, and, she says, profit from their consent.

“We never discussed, [researchers] may want just a leg, or an arm, or these specific organs,” Johnson told The Daily Signal in an interview published Monday. “That would create a sense of humanity in their unborn child.”

“And really, we would even shy away from calling it fetal tissue research because just calling it tissue sanitizes it — the women don’t necessarily think about the body of their baby, they’re just thinking about blood and tissue.”

She and her co-workers received a bonus of between $5 and $20 for every woman they personally convinced to donate to the clinic, depending on the value of that particular unborn baby. Once the woman agreed to have an abortion and signed the paperwork, clinic staff would bring up a “research opportunity”.  (read more)

a-prayer-for-times-like-these

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Choose Life, Christian Values, Death Threats, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

62 Responses to Former Planned Parenthood Director Discusses Profiting via “Bonuses” From Aborted Baby Donations…

  1. ECM says:

    So if they’re just trying to cover costs, as the story goes, why the need to pay bonuses? I certainly wouldn’t add to my overhead and expenses if some business I’m engaged in is, effectively, a money loser.

    Like

    • Monroe says:

      I’m not saying PP is right.

      I want to clarify the “bonus”. When conducting research, the research team on site gathering data and the company sponsoring the research, sign a contract. The contract outlines the responsibilities or the researcher and the sponsor and who owns the intellectual property. There is also an amendment outlining compensation. Every “milestone” or task outlined in the research study is broken out and a reimbursement amount is detailed.

      I’m guessing that the “bonus” is actually the reimbursement amount for the task of obtaining consent to participate in the study. This process includes reviewing the consent form in detail with the participant, answering questions, multiple signatures, and making a copy for the participant. If done correctly, meaning legally and ethically, the process can take an hour or more to complete and involves multiple individuals. My fee to drug companies for the consent process is at least $100 and still does not cover all the time and resources I expend on the effort.

      Federal guidelines do not permit the payment of “bonuses” in the conduct of research. There are even limitations on “gifts” and “meals”.

      I suspect that a non-research layperson is mislabeling or misunderstanding the payment for consent as a “bonus”.

      Like

      • Concerned says:

        This is a clinic director and her workers who received the bonus. They were given a monetary incentive to persuade (pressure) patients into donating their aborted fetus parts. The work required to secure signatures and make copies should be included in their salaries. A bonus would cause an unscrupulous clinic worker to put an undue amount of pressure on the patient at a time when the patient is likely struggling just with the fundamental decision to have an abortion let alone sell the body parts to researchers. We’re not talking about selling a car, we’re talking about ripping apart a human being that hasn’t yet been born.

        Like

        • Monroe says:

          Concerned…

          .1. Without more specifics, it is uncertain if this “bonus” was indeed a “bonus” with the intent to incentivize workers to consent patients for profit. There is considerable investigation that needs to be conducted to make that determination. The clinic director could be a person unfamiliar with detailed research guidelines that exist from several Federal agencies and International agencies and may not understand that this is not a bonus. It could be. But with the info available it is unknown.

          .2. The work required to obtain consent for research is not part of most medical staff’s job description. It requires specific training and carries a considerable legal and ethical responsibility. The consent process can also be very time consuming to explain and requires considerable regulatory administration and oversight.

          .3. Research is heavily regulated for the very reason you state about attaching a monetary incentive to induce participation in research. This monetary inducement also applies to the patient. A research study has to be careful about offering money to participants because some people may consent solely for the money. For instance, you can’t offer a homeless man $10,000 to remove a testicle and then implant a prosthetic testicle implant to research the effects of the new implant.

          .4. Another point to consider is whether the patient is part of a vulnerable population based on circumstances such as financial, emotion, age, incarceration or others. In this situation, it appears that by waiting until after the patient has provided consent for the abortion before broaching the topic of research consent, the facility bypasses the vulnerable patient argument.

          Like

          • Concerned says:

            I believe you are assuming a far more complex situation than actually exists. The patient herself is not participating in research. What she considers waste material which would otherwise be disposed is being donated. The Center for Medical Progress has a consent form on their web site. There is nothing complex about it. I sincerely doubt that it requires any special training beyond what the clinic director and workers would normally have for them to present generic consent forms to a patient.

            http://www.centerformedicalprogress.org/human-capital/document-vault/

            Like

            • TheLastDemocrat says:

              It does require special training.
              It requires the special training to recognize at least two things:
              One: it is not “tissue” being “donated,” except in the most broad sense; it is a matter of specific organs being sold distinctly because they are human organs.

              I could not agree to donate “human tissue” to a research study, get $20 for my troubles, and then hand over my 3-year-old child, who, literally, is just a pile of “tissue.” Or, is actually a pile of chemicals. Or, a fluke of chance, as per the theory of evolution.

              The second thing is that at least SOME of these women AT THE TIME OF ABORTION believe that the blob being aborted is an actual human, not just tissue.

              Like

              • wanthetruth says:

                You reply to Concerned as though these were her thoughts. She was clarifying the abortion directors aims re: patients / tissue donation.

                PP purposefully referred to fetal tissue in terms that dehumanized all aspects to keep mother from thinking in terms of anything but research to help /heal/ cure others through donation of abstract tissue. She’s trying to explain that to Monroe.

                The fact that the $ amount varied with the usability of the corpse puts paid to Monroe’s supposition that it was a reimbursement for time spent to someone other that the coercive PP workers.

                Don’t understand how he arrived . at his conclusions, but if you want to keep yourself blind to truth, I guess you can achieve it.

                Like

  2. Eskyman says:

    May God have mercy on their souls. They have lost their humanity.

    Liked by 3 people

    • ZurichMike says:

      I pray for the millions of aborted children when I say my Rosary. Their deaths make me weep with profound, soul-rending sadness.

      Liked by 6 people

    • Matt Musson says:

      I could not oppose Abortion or the Slaughter of Native Americans. But this time I can be on the Right Side of History. I can oppose Abortion.

      Like

  3. ZurichMike says:

    As I saw in a post on another site, a perfect encapsulation of the jaw-dropping hypocrisy of the spittle-spewing left regarding current events, including Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood::

    Cecil the lion, butchered.
    Cecile the butcher, lionized.

    Liked by 11 people

    • czarowniczy says:

      Whew, thought you were going to go off the reservation and say: Cecil the butcher, Cecilized. Ah well, I’m sure that at some point FDR’s cohabitants will be able to return Cecil’s favors in spades – or in pitchforks.

      Like

  4. jakeandcrew says:

    “We would tell the client that we are participating in a study and she has an opportunity today to donate the tissue that’s removed from her uterus to a research laboratory where they will be working on life-saving treatments for various diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s or other types of medical studies,” she added. “We would tell her this is an opportunity for her to possibly save the life of someone else by donating this tissue.”

    They have absolutely no idea what the baby parts will be used for. To say to the mother that she may help save lives by donating – another outright lie. And note the language they use- “the tissue that’s removed from your uterus.” It’s not tissue – it’s a baby they’re removing from her uterus!

    Liked by 4 people

    • Monroe says:

      I would be very interested in seeing the consent form. I wonder if it clearly states the procedure, meaning that it should state “fetal tissue” or something along those lines. In the consent process, many staff just talk to the participant and then have the form signed.

      I talk about the study and then will go page by page highlighting every point because I want to make sure the participant knows everything and doesn’t blindly sign the form. Sadly, some researchers hand the consent form to the participant to sign without going page by page. Many of my consent forms were at least 15 pages long.

      By Federal law, consent forms must be very detailed and must also clearly outline the risks, including psychological adverse reactions.

      Like

      • bofh says:

        I’m sure that their high-priced legal talent made sure that the verbiage is legally correct. I’m equally sure that 95+% of the patients don’t read or understand even a small percentage of that verbiage. That’s just human nature, it’s how most humans behave under pressure.

        Once they’ve made the enormous decision, someone stuffs a clipboard in their face and says “sign this so we can help you”, and they sign it.

        Like

        • seabrznsun says:

          Monroe doesn’t want to read the info you provided on the link or they would have read it already. It won’t matter how many times you post it, they’re biggest issue is defending research. I read it the first time. Thanks for posting the link.

          Like

          • Monroe says:

            seabrznsum

            You are making assumptions. How would like me to ask if you plan to blow up an abortion clinic to stop this practice?

            Now back to civility.

            I was not aware that a copy of the consent form was available. Now that I am aware, I will review the information. I will also need to research more Federal regulations in regards to this matter as it is not straight forward. I do this because surely PP and StemExpress must be violating regulations for such actions to occur. If the specific regulations can be matched with information obtained in the videos, a stronger fact based case can be made that has more standing in the court of law.

            If there not any regulations then this issue needs to be addressed. If you give me a chance you might discover that even if stopping PP seems impossible, there is a way to stop research facilities from purchasing from StemExpress by contacting the facilities’ IRBs and the physicians that review research for these boards.

            The legal and ethical conduct of research is very important to me. I take great offense when individuals conduct shady research and I work to gather information to stop shady research.

            Like

            • wanthetruth says:

              Monroe, I don’t want to be rude but I am afraid I will be. You say, “Because surely PP and StemExpress must be violating regulations for such actions to occur.” No sh*t Sherlock!

              Have you not watched a single one of these videos? CMP didn’t spend 3 years undercover to share questionable facts that are not pertinent to what is shown? Perhaps seeing the PP doctors and workers picking through baby leftovers in a pie pan might open your mind up to the illegalities of ALL that they do.

              When you see the little detached arm with beseeching hand laying on the edge of that pie pan perhaps you won’t feel it so necessary to argue “contracts” and “reimbursement for time. I certainly hope so.

              Like

              • Monroe says:

                You’re letting your emotions over rule any logic. Choose to stay ignorant and you will be doomed to fail to make productive change. You can’t even see an ally when it smacks you in the face.

                Like

                • jakeandcrew says:

                  Monroe,

                  I’m not sure what other folks are thinking , but what I hear you saying is – if they’re breaking some laws in the way they’re conducting their tissue procurement and/or research, then that’s another weapon to be used against them. Just as the CMP is going after them with the laws against selling human body parts.

                  Yes, abortion is an atrocity, but it’s legal. Until that changes, we have to fight it at any and every opportunity.

                  We’re you able to find the transcript? My notes were very sloppy – sorry about that.

                  Like

          • Monroe says:

            seabrznsun,

            Why don’t you fix the problem by blowing up a few clinics.

            Like

    • Concerned says:

      Greedy clinic worker’s thought: “I can add $100 per day to my pay if I convince 5 patients to donate their aborted fetus parts. I mean TISSUE. Whoops.”

      Really great idea. NOT.

      Liked by 1 person

    • jakeandcrew says:

      This is from the original interview with the Daily Signal –

      Were Planned Parenthood employees told about the “life-saving treatments” they were supposedly collecting tissue for?

      We had absolutely no idea what the tissue was going to be used for. We weren’t told that information. We simply had a contract with a research facility, and they said, “Hey, we need to buy specimens from you, how many can you provide? We’ll give you ‘X’ amount of dollars for each specimen you send.”

      http://dailysignal.com/2015/08/10/former-planned-parenthood-clinic-director-explains-the-tissue-donation-process/

      Liked by 1 person

  5. georgiafl says:

    Abby Johnson, director of Planned Parenthood in College Station, TX, had a ‘change of heart’ because of faithful praying Christians, who approached and interacted with her lovingly and often over a long period of time. Eventually, her heart and conscience began to be aware that a human life was being extinguished. They were able to pray with and for her and lead her to Jesus Christ when she ran to them in panic over her sin.

    Those loving praying people in College Station founded 40 Days For Life, a world-wide peaceful prayer movement, that has saved many babies from death and helped a number of abortion workers to come out of the industry. – https://40daysforlife.com/

    Liked by 4 people

  6. Well, here we are folks. Another Tuesday.

    Time for video #6?

    Like

  7. tnwahm says:

    “She and her co-workers received a bonus of between $5 and $20 for every woman they personally convinced to donate to the clinic, depending on the value of that particular unborn baby.”

    This is what God says about the value of unborn babies.
    “For you formed my inward parts;
    you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.

    “I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.
    Wonderful are your works;
    my soul knows it very well.

    “My frame was not hidden from you,
    when I was being made in secret,
    intricately woven in the depths of the earth.

    “Your eyes saw my unformed substance;
    in your book were written, every one of them,
    the days that were formed for me,
    when as yet there was none of them.” Psalms 139:13-16

    Liked by 5 people

  8. TheLastDemocrat says:

    The Abby Johnson-reported sales pitch is misleading, but in a sense is just accurate enough to be in the used-car salesman realm of honest.

    However, contrast this approach with the approach that would be used by a bona fide medical researcher to gather tissue specimens for a specific study. 1 there would have to be one, specific research study. 2 it would have to be approved by the research institution’s IRB board, who would be quite cognizant of all applicable federal laws. 3. a specific consent form that was approved by the IRB would have to be signed by the patient, who would get a copy to take home, with a contact name and phone number. 4 the consent forms would have to be retained and would be subject to audit.

    All medical research with these preborn body parts was and is most likely done under this system – but the IRB-approved research study would include a budget line and a statement that the fetal tissue necessary for the study would be purchased from StemExpress, or whatever company.

    If any researcher has duped an IRB, and broken federal law regarding trafficking in body parts. this is a big deal. Institutions caught flaunting federal laws have had all federally-supported research -all of it across the entire campus – suspended immediately as the situation is investigated.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Monroe says:

      I am a clinical research coordinator and agree with all of the above points.

      An IRB or even a researcher may not be aware of how StemExpress procures its specimens. In fact, until a consent form is viewed, we don’t really know how the specimen is obtained.

      I always investigated the companies before I signed contracts for studies. But I’m not sure I would have caught StemExpress’ procurement practices.

      Like

      • jakeandcrew says:

        They talked about this during that first meeting that was released on video. They are not going through an IRB, and not using an IRB consent form. I’ll find the relevant parts of the transcript and post them.

        Like

        • jakeandcrew says:

          The transcript is in a format that I can’t copy, and I don’t have time to type out, but I will list page numbers and a brief summary of what was said. The transcript can be downloaded from the website of the Center for Medical Progress. This is from the first video that was released.

          Page 47 – The buyer (CMP person posing as buyer) asks for a copy of PP’s tissue procurement guidelines. The answer from the PP doctor is that there are none – nothing written down. She says there are guidelines for research, but not tissue procurement. The national office is not involved in this. For the first couple of years, it was treated as research, “…and then we realized that this was kind of overkill, because we didn’t have a particular IRB approved study, it just didn’t fit into our framework. So we just kind of backed off of it.”

          Page 55 – They use a PP consent form, not a consent form from an IRB

          Page 56 – Discussion of how PP used to go through IRB’s, it was a nightmare, and they’ve now taken themselves out of that equation…”It’s just a decision between you (tissue procurement company) and the patient, and we’re not going to be a part of it.”

          Pages 8-10 – Discussion about consent, and how what they’re doing doesn’t fall into the “research bucket”.

          A lot of this just doesn’t make sense to me – is it research or not? It sounds like on the patient side, they’re calling it research. On the research side, with all the pesky regulations and forms, it’s not research.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Monroe says:

          Thanks for the info. I apologize for not doing due diligence.

          Like

  9. remmy says:

    Just think if they tried this to some unborn lion. The people would be in an uproar.

    Like

  10. czarowniczy says:

    Mengele, Brack, Heim, Wirths and others, all pursued by the Allies as war criminals, conducted their horrific works as experiments for what they saw as the greater good. Pee Pee’s people are complicit in feticide (BTW, MS Word doesn’t have ‘Moslem’ or ‘feticide’ in its spellcheck) or child murder for a blood fee of $5 to $20 and they are hailed as heroines. Go figure…
    At some point if this is allowed to continue I can see legally forced abortions coming on line as they have in other progressive countries such as China. Why not – it’s for the greater good? Considering the escalation of themes for reality shows from the relatively innocuous to the totally naked-for-the-viewing-audience (remember when these were done on blue film?) I wouldn’t put it past the various cable channels to have one centered around feticide. We could even have those Big Box stores install discount abortion clinics as part of the rebranding process – you can drop off your prescription, leave the car for an oil change and…
    Come on Hillary, win that 2016 bid so that we can push on towards shaking off those outdated conservative moral values that hold us back.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Anubis says:

      They might be looking for the rare Europeans that are immune to HIV, from the last area to suffer from the plague

      Like

      • czarowniczy says:

        There’s a way to cure HIV, all you gotta do is not stick things that God didn’t intend to be stuck in places He didn’t intend them to be stuck. Morality and self-control are both inimical to progressive lifestyles sooooo…
        There were researchers looking at whether the Europeans were more immune to HIV than its African progenitors but it appears that research was not PC and is not being actively pursued.

        Like

        • Sandra says:

          It does seem to be a colossal waste to pursue a cure for what is primarily a lifestyle disease.

          Like

          • czarowniczy says:

            Less of a lifestyle now than a sacrament. POtuS seems to relish being hips-deep in the entire alternative lifestyle issue – promoting it like the Colonel does fried chicken. Seems that Africa’s just an unending vault of fatal viruses just waiting to make our lives more interesting – can’t wait to see what’s next in the Dark Continent viral supply line.

            Like

  11. CrankyinAZ says:

    Humans can rationalize anything… until judgment day. Then there will be no more rationalizing of sins.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Concerned says:

      I know this is true because I engaged in the rationalization many years ago. I thought I was pregnant. I was in college and could not afford to have a baby. It was very early, the fetus would have been more “tissue”-like at that stage than any later stage, but I’ll be honest, I didn’t care. My #1 goal was to not be pregnant and I justified the potential loss of life by thinking of the fetus as a non-sentient blob. Fortunately I was not pregnant after all. And I made sure I would never be in that position ever again.

      Like

      • seabrznsun says:

        I’m happy to hear you didn’t actually get an abortion. The problem I hear so often is the one you bring up, not being able to afford a child. If the vast majority of people waited until they could afford a child, there would be few precious children.

        Like

  12. barbi says:

    Donald was totally unprepared for a discussion of PP today. I read the transcript. Very disappointed and it appears he’s begun equivocating. It was dsiappointing to see how unprepared he was–sounded as if he didn’t know what services PP provided nor how money is moved around.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jack Long says:

      Trump said he was not going to fund PP abortions. The host said that PP claims only 3% of their services are abortions. Trump replied to that by saying he would have to look at their services and then decide what to cut, but abortions would be cut.

      Not knowing what percentage of services, or even what services are available off the top of one’s head at a time when he can’t do anything about anyway is the crux of the issue, here. When the time comes to make the decision and he has the authority to do so is what counts.

      He said no funding for PP abortion.

      He said woman’s health is an important issue and he isn’t going to make statements about how much money is appropriate or not like Jeb did.

      No funding of PP abortions was pretty clear, though.

      Like

      • manickernel says:

        Umm, federal money is already prohibited from being used for this. Trump is already waffling.

        Like

        • Jack Long says:

          I’ve read Obamacare circumvents Hyde amendment rules for elective abortions, and I don’t believe the Hyde amendment covers state funding. Trump just said no PP funds for abortion.

          Look at the books was a good answer, I think. He avoided the woman’s health minefield and I don’t think he can categorically deny PP offers other health benefits until he has his people look at the books.

          Like

        • Jack Long says:

          I’ve read that Obamacare circumvents a lot of Hyde amendment restrictions, and I don’t believe it applies to state funding. He just said No PP funding for abortions.

          Look at the books was a good answer, I think. He avoided the women’s health minefield and rather than categorically denying that PP offers important women’s health services he can make a rational decision after his people look into PP’s activities.

          Like

    • TheLastDemocrat says:

      I suggest that this is the trap to be avoided.
      You can take any candidate and pester them about details on something on which they are not expert, and make them look incompetent.

      You could pester half of these candidates on details of the Keystone Light Pipeline, EPA coal regulation, NAFTA, ARRA, etc., pick out one niggling aspect, and play gotcha.

      This is one of the ways that the one-party system rules over us.

      Frankly, I can almost guarantee that within one Planned Parenthood, most staff do not know the breakdown of services provided by numbers, or revenue sources by percentage, or with whom they have which contracts.

      We are not hiring a technocrat for a specific technocrat job. We are hiring a leader. The figurehead of our nation in the international community, and the leader of one of our three branches of government, ruled-over by the Constitution.

      Stay on message.

      Liked by 1 person

    • jakeandcrew says:

      He talked about PP on Hannity last night. I wrote a response on another thread about this – I’ll copy it here to save time ~

      He’s being very smart. He’s saying absolutely no to abortion – it’s an atrocity. That’s great. But he’s not coming down completely against Planned Parenthood. That’s smart – because it takes away the war against women/women’s health accusations. He’s drawing a much needed line between women’s health and abortion. They’re going to have to defend abortion in light of what was seen on those videos.

      He also said that it might take withholding their funds to get them to shut down the abortion mills.

      He’s not waffling. He’s doing what everyone keeps asking for – explaining how he would get things done.

      Like

  13. rmnewt says:

    PP has one HELL of a business!

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Monroe says:

    Can someone get a copy of a consent form.

    I can break down any potential violations of Federal and International law.

    This could get larger in scope depending on the consent form. If it is a genuine medical research consent form approved by an IRB then one must question the integrity of the IRB. There are a couple of specialty companies that serve as IRBs for organizations that do not have their own. These companies also service Universities who often collaborate with the VA to conduct research.

    Like

  15. A very well conceived plan of destruction, this also proves the utter contempt they have for the woman seeking genocide cleansing or aka abortion… After you sign for your abortion please consider agreeing to the ulterior motive of donating ( legally ) your child’s whole being, body & soul to research.. While we make a bonus of $5 to $20 to spend on ourselves ( because we are alive & were not aborted ) mothers or would be mothers everywhere, take note..

    Like

  16. Concerned says:

    Newsweek article from July 30 of this year pressured women into donating the fetal “tissue”. Time had a similar article, as did numerous web sites. Lib media trying to recover from shock of undercover PP videos. I suspect women who have abortions are going to have them regardless, but this reminds me of Girls Gone Wild. The patients ought to negotiate compensation, because they are making other people rich by just giving it away. (Please do not construe my comment as heartless, I am anti-abortion and wish women wouldn’t have them.)

    Liked by 1 person

  17. crispyjoe says:

    $5-$20…. Of all the times humanity has killed over money, this has to be among the cheapest. 5 bucks can’t even get you a Happy Meal even in 2009.

    Like

    • Sandra says:

      What’s really sad is that some of those clinics are veritable abortion factories, Imagine a clinic worker, just two times per day, persuading patients to donate their aborted fetuses. Let’s say the clinic worker works 260 days per year and makes $5 for each signed consent form. That’s an extra $2600 per year. And if the clinic worker makes $20 for each signed consent form, the total is $10400. Increase the rate to 5 times per day and $20 for each the total is $26000. Nice bonus.

      Does the clinic director get a special extra year-end bonus ? You can imagine how easily this system is corrupted. A clinic pledges to sell the fetuses to a single research company and the director gets paid for the loyalty. A nice vacation in Hawaii or a new car, something like that. Or just cold hard cash. This is grotesquely immoral.

      Liked by 1 person

  18. barbi says:

    Donald essentially supported PP on Hannity tonight. I’m afraid Limbaugh is right–he jumps on people who attack him but is soft on “friend.” He “essentially gave the Democratic talking points on PP tonight.” Very disappointed–even w/out abortions, PP has shown itself to be corrupt and is a redundancy for services.

    Like

    • joshua says:

      no one really pays attention anymore….how did everyone get through school? Trump said that planned parenthood preforms some needed services for women…and he does not like planned parenthood providing abortions…but never did he support PP…he supports WOMEN’s NEEDS….that is political nuance….when you make CONCLUSIONS based on a short sound bite nuanced comment…you fall into a big trap….now, Trump gets to talk about it and get shouted out by the media about his SUPPORT FOR PP…and he gets to show on the media afterwards how they DID NOT LISTEN and UNDERSTAND…so he looks smart, and they look petty and stupid. IT IS HOW TRUMP PLAYS THE LIBS AND THE MEDIA…..

      Liked by 1 person

  19. joshua says:

    How much FENCE at the southern border could we build at 500,000 dollars per year for 4 years instead of paying for abortions and for healthcare services that were supposed to be paid for by Obamacare anyway? Trump does not have to get Mexico to pay for all of the border….cutting down on illegals might also cut down on illegals getting free abortions too.

    Like

  20. Pingback: Planned Parenthood video #6 – “fetal body parts were obtained without consent” | Grumpy Opinions

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s