Early on in the video, Gatter describes how the baby part program at Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles was set up. She says:

“So logistically it was very easy for us. We didn’t have to do anything. So there was compensation for this.”

We didn’t have to do anything, but there was compensation. Profit, anyone?

She hesitates to make the first offer for price with the current buyers because, after all, she says, “You know in negotiations the person who throws out the figure first is at a loss, right?”

At a loss? But I thought Cecile Richards insisted that Planned Parenthood made no profit whatsoever from selling baby parts. You haggle, negotiate, and refuse to be at a loss when you’re making a profit, Cecile.

While she says, “We’re not in it for the money,” Gatter makes it very clear what the real issue is: appearances. She clarifies, “We don’t want to be in a position of being accused of selling tissue and stuff like that.” If you look back at the first investigative video, Senior Director of Medical Services, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, made similar claims. Planned Parenthood didn’t want it to look like they were profiting.

But how many horrific things are done under pretense of them not being done? Isn’t this exactly how many human rights abuses work?

The buyer asks Gatter, “So $100 [per specimen] would make you happy?”

Gatter replies: “I think so – Well let me agree to find out what other affiliates in California are getting, and if they’re getting substantially more, then we can discuss it then.” She states that while “money isn’t the important thing,” it still “has to be big enough that makes it worthwhile for me.” Gatter agrees with the buyer that money is one of the first things she brought up in their meeting for drinks.

Note that Gatter is planning to set the price not based on the actual costs to her or on any actual reimbursement (the only thing federal law allows), but on what other clinics are getting. Simply put, she’s basing the price on the market – something else that proves profit.

Gatter also discusses how she will talk to “Ian,” the abortion doctor at what we assume is Planned Parenthood of Pasadena. She thinks he will be able to switch abortion methods (without notifying the women, of course) so that 10-12 week old babies come out intact and can be purchased for $100 or more apiece.

This is a direct violation of federal law.

Gatter is advocating for a change in abortion method – and a fairly significant one, as an entirely different machine would be used. The whole purpose? To collect whole, intact baby bodies that can be sold.

Gatter calls the requirement for a woman to consent to a different abortion procedure a “specious little argument,” and one she clearly objects to. If Gatter wants to change up procedure on women, she will.

She states that she’s throwing it out there “as a concern because the patient is signing something and we’re signing something that’s saying we’re not changing anything with the way we’re managing you just because we agree to give tissue.” Yet, when the asks how Gatter herself feels about this concern, she responds, demonstrating what small value she places on Planned Parenthood’s word to women:

“I think they’re both totally appropriate techniques…I don’t think the patients would care one iota. So yeah, I’m not making a fuss about that.”

Basically, because Gatter has set herself up as the god, lord, and judge over what women would care about, she has decided that she will not “make a fuss” over the law.

Bad move, Planned Parenthood, bad move.

The reason for all the haggling over profit is revealed at the end of the video. Gatter decides, “if it’s still low [the price per baby], then we can bump it up. I want a Lamborghini.”

Editor’s Note: This article was first published at The Christian Post on July 21, 2015, and is reprinted here with permission.

Early on in the video, Gatter describes how the baby part program at Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles was set up. She says:

“So logistically it was very easy for us. We didn’t have to do anything. So there was compensation for this.”

We didn’t have to do anything, but there was compensation. Profit, anyone?

She hesitates to make the first offer for price with the current buyers because, after all, she says, “You know in negotiations the person who throws out the figure first is at a loss, right?”

At a loss? But I thought Cecile Richards insisted that Planned Parenthood made no profit whatsoever from selling baby parts. You haggle, negotiate, and refuse to be at a loss when you’re making a profit, Cecile.

While she says, “We’re not in it for the money,” Gatter makes it very clear what the real issue is: appearances. She clarifies, “We don’t want to be in a position of being accused of selling tissue and stuff like that.” If you look back at the first investigative video, Senior Director of Medical Services, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, made similar claims. Planned Parenthood didn’t want it to look like they were profiting.

But how many horrific things are done under pretense of them not being done? Isn’t this exactly how many human rights abuses work?

The buyer asks Gatter, “So $100 [per specimen] would make you happy?”

Gatter replies: “I think so – Well let me agree to find out what other affiliates in California are getting, and if they’re getting substantially more, then we can discuss it then.” She states that while “money isn’t the important thing,” it still “has to be big enough that makes it worthwhile for me.” Gatter agrees with the buyer that money is one of the first things she brought up in their meeting for drinks.

Note that Gatter is planning to set the price not based on the actual costs to her or on any actual reimbursement (the only thing federal law allows), but on what other clinics are getting. Simply put, she’s basing the price on the market – something else that proves profit.

Gatter also discusses how she will talk to “Ian,” the abortion doctor at what we assume is Planned Parenthood of Pasadena. She thinks he will be able to switch abortion methods (without notifying the women, of course) so that 10-12 week old babies come out intact and can be purchased for $100 or more apiece.

This is a direct violation of federal law.

Gatter is advocating for a change in abortion method – and a fairly significant one, as an entirely different machine would be used. The whole purpose? To collect whole, intact baby bodies that can be sold.

Gatter calls the requirement for a woman to consent to a different abortion procedure a “specious little argument,” and one she clearly objects to. If Gatter wants to change up procedure on women, she will.

She states that she’s throwing it out there “as a concern because the patient is signing something and we’re signing something that’s saying we’re not changing anything with the way we’re managing you just because we agree to give tissue.” Yet, when the asks how Gatter herself feels about this concern, she responds, demonstrating what small value she places on Planned Parenthood’s word to women:

“I think they’re both totally appropriate techniques…I don’t think the patients would care one iota. So yeah, I’m not making a fuss about that.”

Basically, because Gatter has set herself up as the god, lord, and judge over what women would care about, she has decided that she will not “make a fuss” over the law.

Bad move, Planned Parenthood, bad move.

The reason for all the haggling over profit is revealed at the end of the video. Gatter decides, “if it’s still low [the price per baby], then we can bump it up. I want a Lamborghini.”

Editor’s Note: This article was first published at The Christian Post on July 21, 2015, and is reprinted here with permission.

Newsbreak

ERA deadline change passes House, but Justice Ginsburg may have sounded its death knell