The former deputy director's FBI coddled Clinton and addled Trump. Now he seeks clemency ... even as he sues the Justice Department.
Hillary Clinton checked every box for a violation of the Espionage Act. So much so that, in giving her a pass, the FBI figured it better couch her conduct as "extremely careless," rather than "grossly negligent." The latter description was stricken from an earlier draft of then-director James Comey's remarks because it is, verbatim, the mental state the statute requires for a felony conviction. It wouldn't do to have an "exoneration" statement read like a felony indictment.
Despite boycotts, threats, and a slaughtered rat nailed to its front door, this Canadian women's shelter soldiers on.
This week, staff of the Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter (VRRWS) in British Columbia found messages such as "Kill TERFS," "F*** TERFS," and " what else? " "Trans women are women" scrawled across their windows and walls. ("TERF," for "trans-exclusionary radical feminist," is a generally derogatory term for feminists who do not believe certain things about transgenderism.) This is not the first time something like this has happened. Three weeks ago, a woman seeking the shelter's services was alarmed to find a dead rat nailed to the front door.
"The women who come to our support groups are rape victims and battered women," says Hilla Kerner, VRRWS's spokeswoman, who has worked at the shelter for 14 years. "One of them said to me, Haven't we suffered enough?'"
Americans have always argued about how our government should be run and what actions it should take. For the most part, we've settled our difference with ballots and not bullets " the Civil War being the worst exception, when irreconcilable differences over the immoral institution of slavery tore our nation in two and claimed the lives of an estimated 620,000 Americans.
Today it seems like we're fighting a small-scale civil war. Some angry people are claiming they have the right to harm and even kill others because of differences over political and public policy issues " or because they believe people belonging to a particular racial, religious, ethnic or other group are somehow evil or inferior and must be attacked.
This is a poisonous attitude that is dangerous and un-American...
The inclusion of elite transwomen athletes in sport is controversial. The recent International Olympic Committee (IOC) (2015) guidelines allow transwomen to compete in the women's division if (amongst other things) their testosterone is held below 10 nmol/L. This is significantly higher than that of cis-women. Science demonstrates that high testosterone and other male physiology provides a performance advantage in sport suggesting that transwomen retain some of that advantage. To determine whether the advantage is unfair necessitates an ethical analysis of the principles of inclusion and fairness. Particularly important is whether the advantage held by transwomen is a tolerable or intolerable unfairness. We conclude that the advantage to transwomen afforded by the IOC guidelines is an intolerable unfairness...
Over on the home page, my colleague Madeleine Kearns tells the disturbing story of Canadian trans activist, Jessica Yaniv, a Canadian biologically-intact man who identifies as a transgender woman and who is trying to legally coerce beauticians into waxing his scrotum. Yes, you read that correctly: He's trying to force unwilling women to handle his genitalia.
Madeleine covers the facts of the case very well. I'd like to focus a bit on how the edges of trans activism can put extraordinary strains on the law, placing elements of nondiscrimination statutes into irreconcilable conflict. The Yaniv case is an extreme example, and one would think that thoughtful trans activists would oppose the idea of forcing women to handle a scrotum, but let's look at mainstream American Democratic policy. Let's look at the conflict between Title IX, Title VII, and the Equality Act, a bill the Democrats passed through the House in May (so far, it's going nowhere in the Senate.)