Why Is Live Action Doctoring Its Planned Parenthood Audio?

by Jeremy Schulman

When the anti-abortion rights propagandists at Live Action began releasing their Planned Parenthood smear videos earlier this week, we explained that their claim that Planned Parenthood was covering-up "child sex trafficking" was clearly a lie.

That's because way back on January 18, Planned Parenthood's president wrote to Attorney General Eric Holder about the incidents and requested an FBI investigation into the possibility that "an individual or individuals are engaged in activities that violate several federal criminal statutes relating to sex trafficking involving minors."

So Planned Parenthood obviously wasn't covering up anything; they were fulfilling their obligation to keep children safe.

We also warned that media should be skeptical about the heavily edited video footage released by Live Action.

As it turns out, we were right to raise concerns.

Yesterday, Live Action released a video that it claimed showed a Richmond, Virginia, Planned Parenthood's supposed "willingness to aid and abet sexual exploitation of minors."

In reality, it showed nothing of the sort. ABC News reported that the Planned Parenthood employee "appears to act professionally and appropriately" and that "[l]egal experts ... said the clinic worker's advice on how a minor could obtain an abortion without her parents' consent is consistent with state law." According to Planned Parenthood, the employee "immediately notified her supervisor, who subsequently notified members of Planned Parenthood's national security team, who are working with the FBI, which is investigating these visits."

But Live Action also appears to have doctored the audio of its Richmond "sting," moving audio from one portion of their video to a different portion.

Take a look at the 7-minute, heavily edited video that Live Action promoted. Go to the portion of the video where the camera's timestamp reads "10:32:58" (frame number 21125). The "pimp" asks how they could "set up" an abortion for a "15 year old." From off-screen, the employee apparently asks, "Well, I mean the judicial bypass?" The employee apparently goes on to explain the process. (I say "apparently," because you can't actually see the employee talking; it's just a video of the wall.)

Now look at what Live Action says is the "full" 14-minute video of the Richmond encounter. Again, go to the portion of the video where the camera's timestamp reads "10:32:58" (frame number 21125). This time, the audio is different; the employee appears to be discussing the cost of birth control and STD screenings.

In the "full" video, the portion of the exchange about the judicial bypass process discussed above begins when the camera's timestamp reads "10:34:28" (frame number 22604) -- a minute-and-a-half later than in the heavily edited video.

The only explanation is that someone at Live Action moved around the audio in one of the versions of the video.

All of which leads to this question: If Live Action is doctoring audio of their Richmond sting, what else are they lying about?