Doctor Simon Bramhall, 53, was in a Birmingham Crown Court admitting a truly heinous act this week: burning his initials on the livers of two unconscious patients during transplant operations. While denying assault involving actual bodily harm, he pleaded guilty to two counts of assault by beating.
We have previously discussed the alarming rollback on free speech rights in the West, particularly in France (here and here and here and here and here and here) and England ( here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here). Much of this trend is tied to the expansion of hate speech and non-discrimination laws. Once allowed to criminalize speech, individuals and groups demand more and more prohibitions. England is in a free fall over free speech and this week is yet another example. The police have indicated that they are considering making wolf whistles the latest category of hate speech.
Continue reading “UK Moves To Make Wolf Whistles and Misogynistic Speech A Hate Crime”
After an appalling performance during the election that handed Roy Moore a desperately needed claim of misrepresentation by an alleged victim, attorney Gloria Allred appeared on CNN for a victory lap — an interview that only briefly touched on the debacle over her press conference with Beverly Young Nelson. Allred ignored the fact that Jones won despite her blundering during the campaign. Putting aside the obvious lack of responsibility, Allred did agree with Nelson that this is not over because there is still the matter of defamation to address on behalf of Nelson. That sounds like a threat of a Nelson defamation action, which is precisely what my column today is calling for. Let’s find out who is lying in Alabama. Both Moore and Nelson should stop threatening lawsuit and actually sue.
Continue reading “Allred Appears To Threaten Defamation Action In Moore Controversy”
Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on the surprising move of the Republican House of Representatives toward a contempt action against officials in the Trump Administration. While some have called for the appointment of a second special counsel to investigate the dossier controversy, I continue to question the necessity of such an appointment even though I believe that there is a need for an investigation. I believe that Congress can fully investigate the allegations of political influence in the federal investigation into the matter. However, that will only be the case if congressional committees can secure the information that they require (and are entitled to) as part of their oversight authority. Any such effort will have to deal with a long history of contempt by the Justice Department for congressional oversight investigations.
Here is the column:
I have been writing and speaking about the movement to remove statues that range from confederate leaders to Columbus to Supreme Court justices to Founders (here and here and here and here). I specifically wrote about the call for the removal of monuments to George Washington and others as the list lengthens of figures to be cleansed from public historical displays. In a particularly concerning development, hundreds of professors have now joined this movement in signing a letter calling for New York City to remove monuments honoring Theodore Roosevelt and Christopher Columbus. The open letter to New York’s Mayoral Advisory Commission on City Art, Monuments and Markers declares such historical figures as representing “white supremacy” and “objects of popular resentment.” The letter is an embarrassment for higher education as these academics adopt over-simplified and ahistorical approaches to this controversy.
There is an interesting lawsuit in Ohio against Oberlin College by a small family-owned bakery over a racially charged case of shoplifting. Gibson’s Bakery alleges that school officials encouraged a boycott over false accusations of racism after three Oberlin students were arrested at the business. What is curious is that the students pleaded guilty to the charges and the Oberlin police found no evidence of racism, but the bakery is still be accused of racial profiling and running a “racist establishment.”
To the relief of many (including many Republicans), Roy Moore was defeated tonight in a very close election. Almost 2 percent of voters elected to vote for write-in candidates. That margin may have been the determinative factor for Doug Jones to prevail. I have been a critic of Moore for many years and obviously did not hide my view that he represented both a legal and moral hazard. In my view, his defeat was far better for the GOP than his victory. His presence in the Senate would have presented a constantly corrosive and divisive element for the GOP in seeking to defend the Senate majority in 2018.
Even as a long-standing critic of Roy Moore, it has been painful to watch the embarrassing defenses of his lawyers, the truly bizarre statements of his spokesman, and defenses of his supporters. Last night however was like entering a truly twisted alternative universe as Moore’s friend countered multiple claims of Moore’s pursuit of young girls and his wife defended against his alleged anti-Semitism. The proof? Moore once turned down underaged prostitutes and one of his lawyers is a Jew. The optics and rhetoric coming from the campaign seem to struggle to fulfill stereotypes like riding to the polls on a horse named “Sassy” as reporters pursue you to answer questions over sexual misconduct.
There is a brewing controversy at Fordham University where students were thrown out of a coffee shop called Rodrigue’s Coffee House simply because they were wearing pro-Trump “Make America Great Again” hats. The manager of the shop insisted that the hats violated its “safe space” policy as if being conservative is now a de facto threat to other students. We recently discussed an increase in such conflicts in coffee shops targeting conservatives and Trump supporters. In this case, the encounter was captured on tape (below) and raises serious questions about the function of some “safe spaces” and whether it is code for an area protected from conservative views or voices.
The GW Hatchet, our award-winning student newspaper, has another interesting article this week on the establishment of a new group on campus, the Internationalist Students’ Front, an anti-fascist, anti-nationalist organization. They are advocates of internationalism, a position similar to the prior world socialist movement. The addition of such groups are a good thing for our university in bringing diverse and passionate views to our campus debates. However, it is worrisome that the first organized effort of the group is reportedly to ban a book on campus.
It was one of the most disturbing crimes in recent memory in Chicago. A white mentally disabled man was tortured live on Facebook by a group of African American attackers shouting racist epithets. We discussed the case as a possible hate crime. Charges were brought against David Rahman, 20, and Eli Smith, 20, and Elizabeth Haela, 17. The men are accused of dragging the 23-year-old victim around the house, punching him, kicking him, burning him with a lighter and sexually assaulting him. They were charged with rape, kidnapping and multiple counts of assault and battery. Haela was charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon for kicking the victim. She has now been sentenced to only probation for four years.
Below is my column in the Hill Newspaper on a little known case involving Trump attorney John Dowd and the broader issue of conflicts among key players in the Russian investigation.
Here is the column:
Conservative commentator Lucian Wintrich was arrested recently after he grabbed a protester who stole his speech notes during an event at the University of Connecticut. The video however shows Wintrich trying to stop a woman who acted to prevent him from speaking and grabbed his notes. That led to many asking why the woman was not arrested. Now she has been identified and it is worse than thought. Her name is Catherine Gregory and she is associate director of career services and advising at Quinebaug Valley Community College. It is particularly disturbing to see someone associated with an institution of high education acting to silence opposing speakers and actually stealing material. Update: the charges against Wintrich have been dropped and Gregory has turned herself in for charges based on her outrageous conduct.
I recently criticized Gloria Allred for giving Roy Moore a badly needed boost in her belated admission that her client wrote some of the words that she attributed to Moore in the now infamous yearbook press controversy. Now CNN and other media outlets have given critics the most compelling evidence that they are seeking to allege that our media is rife with “fake news.” Trump himself pounced on the false report. CNN went all in on a report from Congressional reporter Manu Raju that Wikileaks gave the Trumps early access to undisclosed hacked emails before they were made public. The story was wrong on the key date and failed to note that the source was just some unknown character encouraging the campaign to look at the publicly available material. Brookings Institution’s Ben Wittes and others joined in the spasm of “bombshell” reporting, as detailed by Glenn Greenwald. This follows the Washington Post reporter David Weigel tweeting a false image of empty seats at a recent rally to contradict Trump’s latest crowd assertions — a picture that was found before Trump spoke. Trump called for Weigel’s firing, which I have said would be excessive (even though Weigel has made past controversial statements against conservatives before the Post hired him). Weigel withdrew the tweet and apologized. I think that that is sufficient and the Trump Administration should be the most sympathetic with wayward tweets. The more serious issue is the CNN coverage of the Wikileaks story and the eagerness to pounce on any story damaging to the Trump Administration. That is a legitimate basis for criticism and review. If this were not Trump, would CNN have run with the “bombshell” without more scrutiny? The alleged lack of circumspection and caution on the story has been raised as characteristic of much of the Trump coverage. (Notably, Fox was also criticized for a headline on the yearbook disclosure, though the objection was to the use of “forgery” in the headline not the content of the reporting).
Continue reading “Boom or Bust: How The Media Fulfilled Trump Narrative On “Fake News””