DNC Chair Schultz Accidentally Lists Hillary Among GOP Alternatives to Bernie Sanders

By Washington Free Beacon. Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.) may have committed a Freudian slip Sunday when she named Hillary Clinton at the end of a list of Republican alternatives to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) in the presidential race.

Meet The Press host Chuck Todd had asked Schultz to explain the rise of Sanders, who has drawn huge crowds on the campaign trail and galvanized the left-wing base of the party. (Read more from “Schultz Accidentally Lists Hillary Clinton Among GOP Alternatives to Bernie Sanders” HERE)

___________________________________________________________

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Can’t Tell Difference Between Democrats and Socialists

By Joe Newby. While appearing on Thursday’s edition of MSNBC’s “Hardball,” Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the current head of the Democratic National Committee, was stymied when host Chris Matthews asked her to tell the difference between a Democrat and a socialist. The question was asked as part of a discussion about Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Vermont socialist running for the White House as a Democrat.

“What is the difference between a Democrat and a socialist?” he asked directly in a tone normally reserved for conservatives and Republicans. Wasserman Schultz was at a clear loss for words.

“I used to think there is a big difference. What do you think it is?” he asked again. “A Democrat like Hillary and a socialist like Bernie Sanders.” Again, the Florida Democrat was unable to answer the question directly and tried to change the question.

“The more important question is what is the difference between being a Democrat and being a Republican,” she said. But that didn’t work on Matthews, who pressed the point further.

“What’s the big difference between a Democrat and a socialist?” he asked a third time. “You’re chairman of the Democratic Party. Tell me the difference between you and a socialist.” Once again, Wasserman Schultz dodged the question, apparently unaccustomed to being asked real questions from someone like Matthews. (Read more from this story HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Seattle CEO Who Set Firm’s Minimum Wage to $70G Says He Has Hit Hard Times

The Seattle CEO who reaped a publicity bonanza when he boosted the salaries of his employees to a minimum of $70,000 a year says he has fallen on hard times.

Dan Price, 31, tells the New York Times that things have gotten so bad he’s been forced to rent out his house.

Only three months ago Price was generating headlines—and accusations of being a socialist — when he announced the new salary minimum for all 120 employees at his Gravity Payments credit card processing firm. Price said he was doing it, and slashing his $1 million pay package to pay for it, to address the wealth gap.

“I’m working as hard as I ever worked to make it work,” he told the Times in a video that shows him sitting on a plastic bucket in the garage of his house. “I’m renting out my house right now to try and make ends meet myself.”

The Times article said Price’s decision ended up costing him a few customers and two of his “most valued” employees, who quit after newer employees ended up with bigger salary hikes than older ones. (Read more from “Seattle CEO Who Set Firm’s Minimum Wage to $70G Says He Has Hit Hard Times” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Blood on His Hands: Jeb Bush Was Director of Philanthropy That Gave Tens of Millions to Planned Parenthood

By Ben Johnson. Until the eve of his presidential campaign, Jeb Bush was director of a philanthropy that gave tens of millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood and financed its advocacy of “unrestricted access to abortion” around the world. The charity also approved money to global abortion providers while he sat on its board.

In 2010, Jeb was named one of the founding directors of the Bloomberg Family Foundation, established as a tax-exempt foundation to advance the vision of former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. He resigned from the board at the end of 2014 to prepare his presidential campaign.

While a Bush spokesman has responded to concerns by saying that Bush would not have voted on every initiative of the foundation, a pro-life leader told LifeSiteNews it “stretches credibility” that Bush was unaware of the foundation’s pro-abortion work, given the centrality of such work to the foundation’s mission, and its scope . . .

$50 million to ‘reproductive health’ and Planned Parenthood

In March of 2014, the Bloomberg Philanthropies announced a $50 million undertaking to expand “reproductive health,” including lobbying foreign nations to loosen restrictions on abortion. (Read more from “Jeb Bush Was Director of Philanthropy That Gave Tens of Millions to Planned Parenthood” HERE)

______________________________________________________________________

Hillary Clinton Attacks Jeb Bush on ‘Right to Rise’

By Laura Meckler. Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton sharply attacked one of the top Republicans in the presidential race, saying Jeb Bush’s “Right to Rise” slogan is empty given his policy positions.

“I don’t think you can credibly say that everybody has a ‘right to rise’ and then say you’re for phasing out Medicare or for repealing Obamacare,” she said Friday morning. “People can’t rise if they can’t afford health care. They can’t rise if the minimum wage is too low to live on.”

Her remarks came at a conference for the National Urban League, a group that advocates on behalf of African-Americans, shortly before Mr. Bush addressed the same audience. Mrs. Clinton enjoys strong support from African-American voters, but Mr. Bush is working to expand his support among minorities and to put himself forward as ready to broaden the Republican Party’s tent.

“I’m working for every vote,” Mr. Bush told the group. He didn’t reply to Mrs. Clinton’s critique, but a spokeswoman called her comments “more false, cheap political shots” meant to distract from Mrs. Clinton’s lack of accomplishments.

Mrs. Clinton and two other Democrats who addressed the group focused heavily on a string of deaths of black people at the hands of police or in police custody and on economic inequality. Mr. Bush didn’t mention the deaths or the “black lives matter” movement that activists have embraced, instead focusing on his record in Florida on expanding the economy and improving public schools. (Read more from this story HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Is the GOP on the Brink of Civil War?

Senator Ted Cruz voiced the unhappiness of many Republican conservatives when he took to the floor of the Senate last Friday and in a rare intraparty broadside accused GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell of lying. Veteran Republican senators quickly rallied to McConnell’s defense. . .

Cruz said McConnell had told Republican conservatives in the Senate that there was no behind-the-scenes deal to revive the controversial Export-Import Bank. Conservatives view the bank as corporate welfare, while the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and pro-business Republicans are big supporters of it. But rather than let the bank stand or fall on a separate vote, McConnell announced at the last minute that a measure allowing reauthorization of the bank would be attached to much more popular legislation for funding highways. This maneuver guaranteed the bank’s reauthorization.

Conservative senators hit the ceiling. “The American people elected a Republican majority believing that a Republican majority would be somehow different from a Democratic majority in the United States Senate,” Cruz said, comparing McConnell to his predecessor as Senate majority leader, Democrat Harry Reid. “Unfortunately, the way the current Senate operates, there is one party, the Washington party.”

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of Republican voters agreed with Cruz recently when he responded to Jeb Bush’s comment about the need for Americans to work harder by saying: “The problem is not that Americans aren’t working hard enough. It is that the Washington cartel of career politicians, special interests and lobbyists have rigged the game against them.” [Just 38% of Republicans agreed with Bush.] (Read more from “Is the GOP on the Brink of Civil War?” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

It’s Official: US Terror Threat Not Islamist, Only ‘Extremist’

Homeland Security chief Jeh Johnson announced the policy this past Friday at Aspen Institute’s annual security forum in Washington, D.C. He explained that though it was a Muslim terrorist who shot to death four unarmed Marines in Tennessee two weeks ago, the government will call the attack, and other similar ones, “violent extremism” and not “Islamic terrorism” – out of respect for the Muslim community.

Johnson said it is “critical” to refrain from the “Islamic” label in order to “build trust” among Muslims.

The Tennessee murderer, Mohammad Abdulazeez, is officially a “homegrown violent extremist,” according to the government – even though he blogged about his Islamic religious motivations for the attack. He and his family also attended a local mosque controlled by a terror-tied Islamic trust.

Johnson explained that if officials called Islamic terrorism “Islamic,” they’d “get nowhere” in gaining the “cooperation” of the Muslim community.

The moderator of the panel tried to protest: “Isn’t [the] government denying the fundamental religious component of this kind of extremism by not using the word Islamic?” (Read more from “It’s Official: US Terror Threat Not Islamist, Only ‘Extremist'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Baltimore’s Freddie Gray Case Against Cops May Have Just Blown Up With 2 HUGE Claims

Baltimore State’s prosecutor, Marilyn Mosby, may have a huge problem, if not an explosive scandal, on her hands if defense claims in just-filed court papers prove to be true.

The Baltimore Sun reports that defense attorneys for the “Baltimore Six” police officers charged by Mosby’s office in the Freddie Gray case have raised serious questions about whether the prosecution has properly turned over relevant evidence that could exonerate their clients.

The most shocking defense claim brought to the attention of the court on Thursday, according to the newspaper account, is that Mosby’s office is intentionally withholding “information indicating that Freddie Gray ‘attempted to injure himself’ during a previous arrest.”

Gray died in April after suffering a severe spinal cord injury, supposedly while being transported in a police van. Six officers who were involved face charges that range from misconduct to second-degree murder. The prosecution’s case against the six rests largely on the belief that Freddie Gray suffered his fatal injury because of police misconduct.

The newspaper report says the bombshell the defense just dropped could undermine the case that Mosby has prominently put herself out in front of since day one:

In their filing Thursday, the defense attorneys said prosecutors have withheld “multiple witness statements from individuals who stated that Mr. Gray was banging and shaking the van at various points” after his arrest April 12, as well as “police reports, court records, and witness statements indicating that on prior occasions, Mr. Gray had fled from police and attempted to discard drugs.”

(Read more from “Mosby’s Freddie Gray Case May Have Just Blown up in Her Face With 2 HUGE Claims” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Says He Could Win Again – True or False?

In a recent speech criticizing African political leaders who stay too long in office, President Obama said he could win a third term if he ran for president again but acknowledged that U.S. law does not allow it. Could Obama win again?

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 30% of Likely U.S. Voters say they would vote for the president if he ran for a third term. Sixty-three percent (63%) would not. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Most Democrats (57%) would vote to give Obama a third term. Ninety-three percent (93%) of Republicans, 68% of voters not affiliated with either major party – and 32% of Democrats – would not.

Obama defeated Republican nominee John McCain by a 53% to 46% margin in 2008 and was reelected with 51% of the vote against GOP candidate Mitt Romney in 2012.

An amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits presidential candidates from being elected to more than two four-year terms. Nineteen percent (19%) of all voters believe that amendment should be changed so presidents can serve longer. Seventy-eight percent (78%) oppose such a change. (Read more from “Obama Says He Could Win Again – True or False?” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Texas Congressman Offers Bill Temporarily Halting Refugee Resettlement

This week, Rep. Babin introduced the Resettlement Accountability National Security Act (H.R. 3314), which places an immediate moratorium on the refugee resettlement program until Congress reauthorizes it with a joint resolution. The idea behind this legislation is to give the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the legislative arm of Congress, time to research the cost and scope of the program so that the people’s representatives can finally audit this unaccountable, costly, and security-challenged program.

America has served as a beacon of freedom for millions of people who have come as refugees since World War II to escape tyranny and seek the American dream. In the past, refugees from Europe, the former Soviet Union, and Southeast Asia – just to name a few – have contributed immensely to our culture and economy.

But in recent years, much like the rest of our immigration system, the refugee resettlement program has become an insidious tool used by the elites to remake American society and burden the states with a huge fiscal drain. Worse, it has in many ways become a refugee resettlement program for thousands of national security risks from predominantly Muslim countries from volatile parts of the world without a proper vetting system in place. With Obama seeking to fundamentally remake America during his final 18 months in office, and with the increasing pressure to bring in more Muslim refugees from Syria, Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX) has stepped up to the plate by introducing the first piece of legislation to reinsert the people’s voice into the refugee process.

Every year, America admits roughly 70,000 (the cap since 2013) foreign nationals and grant them green cards under the refugee resettlement program. Our government has brought in a total of 448,463 refugees since FY 2009 and there are still another 24,000 refugees left before the ceiling is reached for this fiscal year. The selection of these refugees are largely influenced by the United Nations and a few bureaucrats in the State Department while the resettlement decisions are placed almost exclusively in the hands of rent-seeking private “charitable” contractors – with little regard for the priorities of the local residents.

In recent years, most of the refugees have come from Somalia, Iraq, Burma, and Bhutan. Those involved in the process have given little thought to the cultural and security issues some local communities might be confronted with in the coming years. Just take a look at the “success story” in the greater Minneapolis area for proof of where this is heading.

America has admitted 135,545 refugees from Iraq alone since FY 2007, according to State Department data. As Conservative Review has noted before, the Iraqi refugee program has been of particular concern because both Shia and Sunnis have claimed persecution in sectarian wars, but America has granted refugee status to elements of both that represent a security risk.

Rep. Babin is right to note that Texas has taken in more refugees than any other state thus far for this fiscal year. By my count, Texas has been the recipient of more refugees than even California since 2011. Shouldn’t the people of Texas have a say in such consequential and transformational decisions?

While it is hard to pull exact data on the religious affiliation of refugees, it is quite evident that in recent years there’s been an explosion in refugees belonging to the Muslim faith. Most of the refugees from Iraq are Muslim, as are almost all of the over 100,000 Somali refugees the U.S. has admitted since 1993. And although Burma is not a predominantly Muslim country, 2,484 of the refugees from there this fiscal year have been Muslim. Also, 94% of Syrians admitted since FY 2013 have been Muslim, and the pace appears to be picking up by the month.

Most tellingly, according to the State Department, Arabic is the most common language spoken by refugees and that has been the case for over a decade. Since FY 2008, 98,370 refugees have been native Arabic speakers and 38,868 have been native Somali speakers.

As if Americans aren’t struggling enough under this economy, in recent years, refugees have increasingly become more of a fiscal burden. According to a memorandum from the Congressional Research Service to the Senate Judiciary Committee, 74.2% of all refugees in 2013 were receiving Food Stamps – up from 50% in 2008. Fifty-six percent received some sort of medical assistance. And according to a 2013 report to Congress from the Office of Refugee Resettlement, an even larger percentage of refugees from Africa and the Middle East were on welfare strong. Among refugees from the Middle East, 91.3% received Food Stamps and 73.1% received Medicaid.

Brian Babin is right to demand a temporary moratorium on the program. There is no reason Americans should continue to incur such societal transformation without representation. Instead of starting out every year with an expectation of admitting 70,000 refugees every year – irrespective of their security, fiscal, or cultural considerations – we should begin with 0. From there, Congress needs to prioritize those who do not represent a true danger AND do not pose a security risk. Among the ruling elites and John Boehner, who controls the floor process, this legislation will be considered appalling. But among the American people, given the terrorism threats and the growing fiscal burden, this is just plain common sense. (Re-posted with permission from the author, “Texas Rep Offers Bill Temporarily Halting Refugee Resettlement”, originally appeared HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

New Leak Confirms the Secretive Trans-Pacific Partnership Is a Horror Show

At a luxury hotel in Maui, representatives from the 12 countries participating in the highly controversial and secretive Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal are negotiating behind closed doors. Thanks to a secret letter from a 2013 meeting, released today by WikiLeaks, we now have a clearer idea of what they’re discussing.

Unsurprisingly, based on what we know about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, so far, the letter is mostly about limiting the power of government in favor of private commercial development.

The TPP is a massive free trade deal that is set to impact everything from the cost of medicine in Australia, to milk production in Canada, to internet governance the world over. The letter was drafted for a ministerial meeting of the TPP countries in early December, 2013, and seeks guidance on key topics relating to the negotiations. Namely, how state-owned enterprises (SOEs) [like telecommunication services and public utilities], should be treated under the trade deal. . . [The letter contends TPP should] require SOEs to “act on the basis of commercial considerations” [and that] governments should regulate both state-owned businesses and private enterprises with impartiality. State-owned businesses would also not be allowed to discriminate against private companies when purchasing or selling goods. . .

A 2013 report from the European Center for Economic Policy Research found that, globally, SOEs included in the Forbes Global 2,000 list of companies had combined sales of $3.6 trillion, about the size of Germany’s GDP. That’s nothing to sniff at. (Read more from “New Leak Confirms the Secretive Trans-Pacific Partnership Is a Horror Show” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Big Business and Bad Government: DC Has Known About the Buying and Selling of Baby Parts for Years, but Has Failed to Fix It

After the end of each day’s business, an inconspicuous unmarked van pulls up to the back of the neighborhood abortion clinic. Carrying an orange plastic cooler, the driver enters through an unlocked back door and exits moments later, cooler full. Inside the ice chest are opaque, heavy-duty sealed plastic bags.

One bag contains the relatively intact body of a mid-term human fetus. The mother’s general health and statistics are noted on the bag along with the baby’s blood type. Several other bags hold the bloody slurry of early term abortion remains; some contain various body parts — brains, livers, kidneys, eyes, umbilical cords — and others have a random mix of tissue, detached limbs and heads.

These details are obtained from a physician who operated a late term abortion clinic in Maryland. I approached him in 2009 as a journalist doing an article on the life sciences industry. He was in the process of selling out to another doctor and leaving the abortion center. While he asked me not to use his name in my report, he was very forthcoming about the process for fetal tissue harvesting and transport. He made clear that what is described above is business as usual in the fetal body parts industry in America. Many a child is slaughtered in the womb and then rendered, packaged and brokered to a multitude of industries, whose products and projects comprise the aftermarket for the roughly 1.2 million U.S. abortions annually.

Big Business

It’s big business and getting bigger. To all indications it operates relatively free of regulatory oversight, and this not from a lack of scandal: Not long after I interviewed the unnamed doctor above, Dr. Leroy Carhart took over the clinics, and in 2013 a woman died from a 33-week abortion in the clinic described above.

Now, this month, the first videos in what the Center for Medical Progress promises will be a rolling barrage of undercover videos has put this dark business back into the public spotlight. In response to the first sting video, Planned Parenthood stated that “similar false accusations have been put forth by opponents of abortion services for decades” and “these groups have been widely discredited.” What Planned Parenthood does not mention is that many of the accusations they dismiss have come not from “opponents of abortion services” but from the abortion industry’s own employees and proponents.

Prior to 1993, use of fetal tissue for medical research or any other application was illegal, excepting if the tissue was derived from an ectopic pregnancy or spontaneous abortion (miscarriage). Then in 1993, President Bill Clinton ordered the end of the moratorium on federal funds for research using fetal tissue. Later in 1993, Congress passed the NIH Revitalization Act, which permits the use of fetal tissue from any type of abortion for biomedical research, with a stipulation limiting payment to “reasonable fees for obtaining and delivery of tissue.” And so began the abortion aftermarket industry, with fetal tissue retrieval companies delivering fetal material from abortion clinics to tissue repository banks, who in turn listed their wares with brokers who then sold baby body parts to laboratories and commercial concerns throughout the world. The industry was off and running.

By the late ’90s, the sale of “services” in the procuring and processing of aborted fetal body parts became a thriving, though somewhat primitive private industry. Tissue labs forged partnerships with public and private abortion clinics to provide baby body parts for both commercial business concerns and National Institute of Health-funded laboratories.

How profitable was this new industry? The consulting firm of Frost and Sullivan reported that “the worldwide market for cell lines and tissue cultures brought in nearly $428 million in corporate revenues in 1996. It (was) further predicted that between 1996 and 2003, the market would grow at an average annual rate of 13.5 percent and, by 2002, would be worth nearly $1 billion.”

Bad Publicity

This abortion aftermarket was in full swing by 1999 when Dean Alberty, Jr., an abortion tissue retrieval technician working for Anatomic Gift Foundation, a Maryland-based fetal tissue company, sparked a public outcry by speaking out about the atrocities he had witnessed on the job.

Alberty had grown disgusted with his involvement in what he called “the rendering of baby bodies for parts.” Missy Smith, founder of the watchdog organization WAKEUP in Washington, D.C., recalls what Alberty cited to her as the incident that drove him over the edge:

Dean was a simple man who had a rather gruesome job. At that time the tissue retrieval companies would rent space in the back rooms of abortion clinics so that they could process the fetal tissue while it was still as fresh as possible. One day in a D.C. metro area abortion clinic Dean was doing his job of dissecting a just-aborted fetus. The abortion doctor came in with a square metal tub. In the tub was a set of twins, about six or so months of gestation, still moving, still alive.

Dean refused to process the fetuses, telling the doctor, ‘I will not murder those babies!’ The doctor proceeded to fill the tub with water and drown the twins. He handed the tub back to Dean, telling him he could ‘get on with his job now.’”

Dean’s allegations came to the attention of Mark Crutcher, head of Life Dynamics, in Denton, Texas. Dean ultimately produced copies of over fifty orders for fetal body parts from laboratories throughout the U.S. and Canada, along with a price list from Open Lines, Inc., Dr. Jones’ human tissue processing company based in West Frankfort, Illinois. Crutcher sent the information he had gathered to all the members of Congress in late 1999.

The information was also leaked to media outlets such as ABC and CNN. The Orange County Register, The Washington Times and several Canadian publications began investigating and exposing macabre and inhumane practices in fetal tissue labs and abortion clinics. Soon ABC’s 20/20 produced a program about the baby body parts industry presented by journalist Connie Chung. The 20/20 exposé aired on March 8, 2000, focusing attention on a congressional hearing the following day before the Sub-Committee for Health and Environment. There Alberty gave emotional testimony about his involvement in the industry and its impact on his life:

Upon taking the job as a fetal tissue procurement tech, I was under the impression that what I was going to do would make life better for Parkinson’s patients, Alzheimer’s and cancer patients. Never was I led to believe that the tissue would be anything but helpful for those in need … What changed my mind was watching late-term abortions, seeing their eyes looking at me as I cut through their skull to extract their brain for Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s patients, cutting open their chest cavity, only to see a beating heart moving ever so slowly until it stopped … Night after night in my sleep, the (drowned) twins always were there. Hearts were beating … mothers screaming. The respect for myself was gone. How could the heroes of my life understand what I witnessed?

Congress Fails to Fix the Problem

Ultimately many in Congress concluded that the fetal tissue supply segment of the industry needed greater oversight, and HR3980 “Human Fetal Tissue Reporting and Disclosure Act of 2000” was proposed. Spearheaded by Oklahoma Rep. Tom Coburn, M.D., the bill called for an Amendment to the Public Health Service Act to require entities that distributed and received fetal tissue for any purpose, other than solely for purpose of pathological examination, to file a detailed disclosure statement with the Secretary of Health and Human Services enumerating everything from the type and condition of the fetal parts in a given transaction to the amount paid. Violation of the section would be punishable by a fine of not less than $10,000 per incident.

The hope was that the bill, if made into law, would make it next to impossible for the fetal industry in the United States to get rich off of aborted babies since the 1993 NIH Revitalization Act already appeared to stipulate that fees should be set no higher than was needed to cover preservation and shipping costs. The paper trail on the way to any financial funny business would simply be too easy to follow, and the potential financial penalty for failing to file accurate paperwork too steep to risk.

Many pro-lifers assumed the Congressional attention had taken down the baby body part brokering industry. Unfortunately, that wasn’t the case. The year 2000 was Rep. Coburn’s last year in the House (he voluntarily term-limited himself out, keeping a promise from his original run for the seat in 1994), and without his oversight the bill that would have regulated the activities of the maverick abortion aftermarket industry died in committee. Coburn returned to the Hill as a Senator in 2004, but by then the bill was ancient history.

Unfinished Business

A decade later in 2009, with the help of several pro-life organization watchdogs, I took a fresh look into the abortion aftermarket industry. The investigation reveled that a new, more sophisticated breed of tissue laboratories had evolved. The industry that had begun by supplying fetal tissue for NIH research had expanded to offering it for private biomedical laboratories in the United States and other countries. Many of the companies that brokered fetal tissue were global biomedical conglomerates that generate many billions of dollars in revenues annually. And my best estimate at the time was that the abortion aftermarket had grown into an $85 billion industry.

The raw material for this industry comes from only one place — abortion clinics such as Planned Parenthood. What is their cut in these enormous profits? Since there is precious little statutory oversight into the harvesting, processing, transporting, sale and end use of commercially brokered baby body parts, it’s hard to know.

What is known is that the fetal aftermarket industry has been with us now for at least 22 years and makes billions of dollars a year off the bodies of the unborn. All the attention at the moment is on the sting videos showing Planned Parenthood’s calloused and profitable involvement in this industry. What the public needs to recognize is that others have spoken out from inside the industry without the need of a sting video to draw out the truth. These include nurses who were made to let aborted babies born alive die alone in cold metal tubs.

What the public also needs to know is that a season of short-lived outrage is not enough. The public was outraged in 2000, and many people thought something was done about the baby body shop industry. But the industry’s lobbyists went to work, the politicians went on summer break, football season started, attentions wandered and now here we are, watching videos exposing what we should have known all along — there is a burgeoning and thriving baby body market here in the United States, where flesh is bought and sold and none of the people on the auction block get out alive. (Re-posted with permission from the author, “Big Business and Bad Government: Washington Has Known About the Selling of Baby Parts for Years, but Has Failed to Fix It”, originally appeared HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.