This right here? This should be enough to Article II him. More than enough.
Trump: "I could've done very bad things to Hillary Clinton. I could've done very very bad things to Joe Biden. I could've done very bad things to Barack Hussein Obama … I can do whatever I want, if I want." pic.twitter.com/xN6hiFNTaX
Saying “I can do whatever I want” should get him impeached because it is wildly, blatantly, grotesquely unconstitutional – it’s like burying the Constitution in shit and then setting fire to it. No, dunghead, you can NOT do whatever you want. You’re not an absolute monarch, you’re a presider.
The fact that you spray us with this verbal incontinence every day demonstrates that you should be yanked out of that chair and that building right this second, because you are a lawless tyrannical reckless vindictive pile of shit.
Today BBC Radio 4 Woman’s Hour marks 80 years by broadcasting from Glasgow Women’s Library. A programme built on women’s voices, from a library that no longer means women.
GWL’s own policy is clear: trans and non-binary people are welcome, and “women-only” events include men who say they are women. In 2019 they walked away from the Audacious Women Festival rather than accept a women-only rule that followed EHRC guidance on single-sex spaces.
Eighty years of Woman’s Hour. A library founded so women’s history would not be erased. And the BBC chooses a venue that treats sex as optional.
Women are a sex class. Single-sex spaces, services and history exist because of that. Calling a man a woman does not make him one, and hosting the anniversary there does not make the erasure invisible.
Women exist as a sex. Single-sex spaces, services and history exist because of that. We were outside in April. We have not gone away.
There is a cover-up at the heart of Government. Ministers have been forced to admit that the “missing” Islamophobia definition documents do exist.
After pressure from the Free Speech Union and Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy, Angela Rayner’s Communities department has conceded that documents that helped shape the “anti-Muslim hostility” definition still exist, despite previously saying they had been destroyed.
It now seems almost certain that the Government tried to bury evidence that could show whether Islamist extremists helped draft what amounts to Britain’s de facto Islamic blasphemy law.
Wtf is a “communities department” anyway? Why are UK governments and institutions so obsessed with putative communities, and so intent on forcing everyone into them? People have things in common with other people on some axes while having nothing in common with them on other axes. Having one idea or project or motive for organizing in common does not automatically amount to a community. It’s stifling and presumptuous, all this shoving people into fake communities whether they like it or not.
The Free Speech Union has warned that this non-statutory definition will be used — and is already being used — by activists, public bodies and authorities to silence legitimate criticism and debate about Islam, its history and its practices.
Indeed it is. Of course it is. Bullying over putative “Islamophobia” has been a thing for decades.
Remember when it was stuffy conservatives who didn’t like “Monty Python’s Flying Circus” and its stars? Ah, those were the days.
No, seriously. Those really were the days, because whatever John Cleese and Co. endured from the establishment in the 1970s and 1980s, at least they weren’t trying to drag him into court. Not so much with the British left, which is now in thrall to radical Islamists.
…The hardcore Muslims are hopping mad. The problem is that in Merrie England, there’s not exactly robust protection for free speech — and now, one prominent Muslim group wants the law to intervene.
5 Pillars, an Islamist activist outlet in the United Kingdom, reported that there was a “referral to the government’s counter-extremism scheme Prevent concerning comedian John Cleese” because he made fun of Muslims.
Why so it did.
A referral to the government’s counter-extremism scheme concerning comedian John Cleese alleges that he has engaged in a sustained pattern of online activity which “demonises, dehumanises, and collectively attributes violence and criminality to Muslims and Islam.”… pic.twitter.com/4JOvgPTUpu
I can see why the more thoughts won’t be forthcoming until later this month. It must have taken him ages to produce the thoughts we’ve already been privileged to view. It’s dated! Full of harmful narratives! My god the level of insight and verbal dexterity is overwhelming.
The director of the company running the Eiffel Tower will step down at the end of the year, the company said, after an episode this month in which men replaced female employees while members of a prominent Hindu group visited.
The director, Patrick Branco Ruivo, has run the Eiffel Tower Operating Company since 2018. He is resigning after an internal inquiry “uncovered a series of problems and shortcomings” that “led to the exclusion of female staff” during the tour by members of the Hindu group, the company said in an emailed statement.
Mr. Branco Ruivo had been under fire since Sept. 5, when union leaders said that female employees had been told to wait out of sight during the tour. Monks of the group, Bochasanwasi Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha, take vows of celibacy that prohibit them from speaking to or touching women, according to its website.
Wait. Celibacy means not fucking. It doesn’t mean not speaking to.
What is the matter with these men that they can’t be in the same building as women without putting their vow of celibacy at risk?
Do these pious guys think women are nothing but objects to fuck? Nothing but that distracting hole?
Why do vows of celibacy translate to vows of total exclusion of women from everything if there happens to be a monk somewhere nearby? Why do men who take vows of celibacy get to exclude women instead of excluding themselves? What is all this crap? Anyone would think women are rocks or logs or coconuts – just objects to be thrown around by men, as opposed to being human beings just as men are. We’re not a little bit or sort of human like men, we are every bit as human as men. We’re not just walking penis-clutchers, we’re people, and we can talk and think just as men can.
The decision to sideline the female workers prompted a staff strike that closed the Eiffel Tower to tourists for a day. It also led to apologies from both the tower’s management and the Hindu group.
Good. Stop pampering these bros who think their religious promises mean that women have to be treated like vermin.
This year’s Green Party conference in Brighton, with its obligatory keffiyeh-wearing and performative bans on dissenting groups, was the complete opposite of the tolerant, kind and radical ethos that the Greens believe themselves to embody. The delusion is off the scale. They banned women for thinking that men are not in fact women. They banned a list of everyday words (mothers, fathers) from being uttered by members. They even banned journalists from being present at the actual vote on Israel.
Maybe by “green” they mean nausea.
There is no appeasing these people. Worst of all, the Green leadership seems scared of them. Gaza has become the central issue and, incredibly, this vote means that the Greens have gone further than the Palestinian Authority in wanting a one-state solution, which means, of course, the destruction of Israel. And all Israelis.
The events of this weekend are disgusting. But then this is a party that will not allow women to talk about women’s issues (pelvic health and incontinence) without a load of men protesting that this is not “inclusive”. This is a party in which a woman asked by the journalist Julie Bindel about her views on Hamas said they were simply a “resistance group”. Asked about the Jewish women raped by Hamas terrorists on October 7, the woman replied: “What rapes?” She said this three times.
The Jew hate has of course been laundered by Zack Polanski, who happily cites his Jewish heritage to help excuse his failure to root out anti-Semitism. He would it appears, betray his own Zionist family in order to cosplay as a political leader. Polanski – ever the coward – skipped the vote as his priority was getting elected in Holborn and St Pancras.
The belief in the Jewish homeland is core to much Jewish liturgy and the Greens’ new policy deeming that belief “racist” means declaring that the practices of most Jews, secular or believers, are racist.
No such purity test would ever be applied to Muslims or Christians and not one part of this saves a limbless child in Gaza. This combination of atavistic hatred with fashionable activism is deadly.
When access to female toilets is “inclusive” then it becomes non-inclusive of women. Access to female toilets should be “inclusive” of female people only.
A Labour-led council has claimed the furore over single-sex spaces is a ‘manufactured moral panic’ after it passed a motion stating ‘trans women are women.’
That’s a Trump-level stupid thing to say. No it is not a “manufactured panic” to want women’s spaces to continue to be women’s spaces. If women’s spaces have to include men then there are no longer any women’s spaces. The council might as well say workers have to share their unions with bosses.
Councillors in Oxford voted on Monday to ensure access to public toilets, community centres and homelessness services remains ‘trans inclusive’.
It comes despite a Supreme Court ruling in April 2025 defining ‘sex’ within the Equality Act as ‘biological sex’ and ‘sex at birth’.
The motion was proposed by a Green councillor, who dubbed the Supreme Court verdict ‘discriminatory’, passing with just two votes against and two abstentions.
It’s “discriminatory” in the way that knowing the difference between night and day, cold and hot, yesterday and tomorrow, carrots and apples, fish and horses, buses and bicycles is “discriminatory”. We’re allowed to know the differences between one thing and another thing, and it can be a matter of life and death to know such differences.
Speaking at the council meeting, Dr Max Morris, who proposed the motion, said: ‘Unfortunately the EHRC’s code of practice came into effect two months ago causing immense uncertainty.
‘We are living through a manufactured moral panic which has made being trans, non–binary or gender non–conforming in public life both online and offline a daily nightmare for many. This transphobic moral panic has a policing effect on anyone whose appearance or behaviour doesn’t meet the norm.’
Max joined Oxford Brookes University in 2022. Before this, they were based in the Department of Criminology, Politics and Sociology at Kingston University. They completed their PhD in Sociology and Social Policy at Durham University in 2019.
Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed a proclamation Monday establishing October 10, 2026, as “Alabama Girls in Sports Day.”
The proclamation begins by touting the positive impact athletic participation can have on young girls and celebrating female athletes’ achievements throughout sports history. However, it then fuels the growing antagonism toward transgender women’s participation in sports—an issue that has become a popular talking point among Republican politicians in recent years.
“Alabama recognizes that there are fundamental biological differences between males and females that create meaningful competitive and safety considerations in athletic competition, particularly in women’s and girls’ sports, and we will continue standing up for women’s opportunity to compete fairly, safely and on a level playing field,” the proclamation reads.
The document also specifies that October 10 was chosen because of its relationship to the Roman numerals “XX,” which reflect the “two X chromosomes that are characteristic of the female sex.”
In a separate statement, Ivey declared that “if the Good Lord made you a boy, you are a boy, and if He made you a girl, you are a girl.”
“We will continue standing up for the opportunity for girls to compete fairly and safely,” Ivey added.
I think the measure is reasonably worded. The choice of October 10 is perhaps over the top “cute”. Ivey has instigated or supported a number of reasonable measures. However, in general, she and the Alabama legislature have a terrible track record, and many measures, even reasonable ones, are clearly designed to “own the liberals” for political purposes in this deeply conservative state.
The Liberal Democrats have been forced to allow women’s rights campaigners who believe in biological sex to have equal footing with other groups after claims that they had been “vilified and censured” for their beliefs.
Sir Ed Davey’s party have agreed to “draw a line under this period of intolerance” and allow Liberal Voice for Women (LVW) — the gender-critical section of the party — to be allowed to hold events, have exhibition stands and place adverts after a previous ban.
Almost as if women are real people!
The party has been forced to back down after an extended legal fight through which LVW members claimed they had been victims of discrimination.
Not very liberal or very democratic of the party, was it.
Zoe Hollowood, the chair of the Liberal Voice for Women, said: “For too long gender-critical members have been vilified and censured in the party for their ordinary belief in the immutability and importances of sex.
The “belief” is about as ordinary and humdrum as you can get.
Hollowood said LVW wrote numerous letters to the party leaders over 2022 and 2023 detailing acts of discrimination by the party. However, their concerns were dismissed or ignored. The party finally acted when advised it would lose a costly legal case if it continued to ban the group from having a stall, she said, with the party’s treasurer overturning the decision to ban it.
Oh, money? We’d lose money? Well in that case we take it all back. Soz.
Hollowood added: “Many political parties are struggling with the tension between members with gender-critical beliefs and trans activist members. The Green Party for instance is facing several legal cases for expelling gender-critical members and is reportedly at risk of bankruptcy.”
Again…it’s so very self-refuting. If it were true he would never say what he’s saying when he says it. Saying it, especially saying it over and over again, in those silly words, underscores how wrong it is.
California leaders condemned President Trump on Monday night after he appeared to suggest that Iran could “take out” Los Angeles and San Diego if it develops a nuclear weapon.
Speaking at a Republican political rally in Nebraska, the president sought to justify the Iran war as necessary for “keeping the world safe.” He then suggested there could be strikes on the United States, including the Democratic-led Californian cities.
“They could take out a city,” he said. “Let them take — Let them take out Los Angeles. Let them take out San Diego.”
It was not immediately clear what Mr. Trump meant, but his comments were met with anger from officials in California, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, who called the president “deranged and dangerous.”
I blame the subjunctive. The only way it can possibly be unclear what Trump meant is if you’re taking into account the possibility that he was using the present subjunctive there – let them take out as is let them eat cake. Qu’ils mangent de la brioche. The present subjunctive is rarely used in modern English (especially by people like Trump who have somewhat meagre language skills) – it uses “let” not in the everyday sense as in “Oh let him have it, he’ll never shut up unless you do” but in that other, weird sense that is the present subjunctive. See also “May her memory be a blessing”.
Trump of course wasn’t using it that way, but then he wasn’t really using it the more familiar way, either, because who is the agent here? Who is doing this letting? Why is he telling us to let them take out LA and SD? Surely that’s his job, not ours. Really he should have said “I hereby give them permission to take out Los Angeles and/or San Diego.”
“After sending the National Guard and Marines to occupy California, Donald Trump is now saying our foreign enemies should ‘take out’ Los Angeles and San Diego,” Mr. Newsom posted on social media.
Mayor Todd Gloria of San Diego wrote on social media that his city was not “collateral damage” and not “expendable.”
“Keep our city out of your reckless war talk,” he added.
In Los Angeles, Mayor Karen Bass said that the president’s comments were “dangerous” and could “potentially compromise” the city’s safety.
“The role of a president is to protect the country, not to actively threaten it and encourage attacks on American lives,” she said in a social media statement.
Well, yes, you’d think so. FDR didn’t invite Hitler to take out New York and DC. But hey, autres temps, autres mœurs.
So I want to talk about public restrooms for a moment.
[long pompous wait while he pretends to think]
I’d say it’s been about [long meaningless pause while he counts] six months since I started using like whatever bathroom I find appropriate for me
And that’s where I hit the stop button for good. It doesn’t matter what bathroom/toilet he finds appropriate for him. What matters is which bathrooms/restrooms he must stay out of for the safety and privacy of other people. It’s not about him; it’s about other people.
That very simple very basic very obvious point seems to escape people like this bozo entirely. Who cares what rest rooms are appropriate for him? At least who cares about what he wants while he’s so blithely ignoring what people who don’t have a willy want and need?
A referral to the government’s counter-extremism scheme concerning comedian John Cleese alleges that he has engaged in a sustained pattern of online activity which “demonises, dehumanises, and collectively attributes violence and criminality to Muslims and Islam.”… pic.twitter.com/4JOvgPTUpu
We’re allowed to dislike religions. We’re allowed to discuss our dislike of religions. We’re allowed to dislike some religions more than others. We’re allowed to dislike Islam.
Green Party guidance has claimed anti-LGBT laws in Middle Eastern countries are the fault of the British Empire.
The Muslim Greens, an affiliate group of the Left-wing party, made the claim in guidance that outlines how members can identify Islamophobia and anti-Muslim hate as part of its code of conduct.
The guidance, published on the Muslim Greens website, is intended for the Green Party in England and Wales. On the website, the group says “queerphobic legislation in many Muslim-majority countries is deeply tied to colonialism”.
Because Islam is so very progressive in every way, right?
It claims that suggesting Muslims are “uniquely queerphobic because of Islam denies acknowledging how modern-day queerphobia is strongly rooted in the British Empire”.
It states that the idea that Islam “is in some way based around hating and marginalising queer communities” is itself Islamophobic and a form of anti-Muslim hate.
We’re allowed to hate Islam. There are all too many real life opportunities to observe Islam being hateful. Just Google “stoning women” to see the abundance.
A Green Party spokesman said: “This is comprehensive, well thought-through and evidenced guidance produced by Muslim Greens for Green Party groups and local parties to help them understand all aspects of Islamophobia and its link to other forms of discrimination and racism.”
But Islam is not a race. Islam is a religion, with religion’s boundless entitlement to tell people what to do and what rights they can have and when they should stone women to death.
“It explains the rise and normalisation of Islamophobia in Britain, the role of successive governments and mainstream media in fuelling anti-Muslim hate, and the importance of education and understanding history.”
Ah see now you’re mixing them up. Islam is a religion; Muslims are people. Hating a religion is not synonymous with hating its followers/victims. It can lead to that, sure, but it’s still not the same thing. We have to be free to resist religions, and that means we have to be free to tell the truth about them. Islam is a bad one.
.@kaitlancollins: The entire time I've covered Trump, I've never gotten in a back and forth with him. He surrounds himself with people who praise him or laugh at his jokes, and when he is confronted with someone who is asking a challenging question, he doesn't like it and he… pic.twitter.com/LFoLo1s4qz
The bit I find particularly illuminating is that Collins points out that Trump spends nearly all his time surrounded by people who flatter flatter flatter him. That’s his life. So these few moments when there are people who don’t flatter him, and who ask him serious questions instead, is like a bucket of ice water poured over the head.
And then you add in the fact that mentally he’s about 3 years old, and it all becomes clear. Mommeeeeeeeee who is this horrible woman who is asking me these mean questions??? He was in a nice warm bath and suddenly he’s in a blizzard with sleet freezing his eyes shut. No wonder he barfs insults at her nonstop!
As Green convert and former Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle fortified himself for conference with a ‘kimchi croissant with Gaza Cola’, a small group of the party faithful stood outside.
These are the women from Green Women’s Declaration, who were excluded from the main hall after party officials told them its presence would make ‘trans members feel unsafe.’
But the group didn’t appear to be armed with much more than leaflets with incendiary points such as ‘Sex is real’, ‘Lesbians are same-sex attracted females’ and ‘protect women from abuse, discrimination and harassment.
Besides, what about women feeling unsafe? Why all this hand-wringing and sobbing over the unsafelike feelz of the tiny number of people who claim to be the sex they’re not, combined with the dead silence about the feelz of half the fucking population? Why do purported trans feelz matter infinitely while the feels of actual definite women don’t matter in the slightest?
GWD exists to combat what it calls the party’s “chilling atmosphere of censure”, support members who speak up for reality and restore sex-based protections to Green politics. Its declaration has been signed by more than 1,600 party members and supporters: a substantial constituency to treat as though they are a threat to public order.
Yet earlier this week, the Green Party Executive, which includes tit whisperer Zack Polanski, said the feminist activists had been barred because:
“GPEx took this decision because it believes that having GWD present at conference would make our trans members feel unsafe, based on the prior conduct of some GWD members.”
What prior conduct? You mean defending their rights?
No particulars of this alleged misconduct were offered. One of those pictured with seditious literature outside the venue was Emma Bateman. After being elected as chair of Green Party Women, and suspended three times, she is taking the party to tribunal. Writing on her Crowdfunder she explained:
“Since at least 2018, I and others have been warning the Greens that their anti-women policies would not wash with voters. The party chose to burn us as heretics, and they are still pouring on petrol eight years on.”
It seems the Green Party functions as a free-range nature reserve, where every species of weirdo is protected except the adult human female who knows her rights matter.
The fear of TERFs is the norm at the top. Earlier this year, Polanski called the EHRC guidelines on single-sex spaces “deeply regressive” and claimed they were “pushing trans people out of public life”. The Green Party also officially supports gender self-ID: a policy which would make women’s boundaries, safety and dignity depend on the goodwill of any man who fancies crossing them.
And they think this is progressive, and we pesky mouthy women are reactionaries.
Jude English, one of GWD’s directors, told The Telegraph earlier this week: “We are saddened that we must go to court to defend our character and values against a party we have served for years.”
She added that senior figures in the Green Party “do not yet understand that the Human Rights Act includes the rights of women as a sex class and the Equality Act confers on them as individuals a duty to uphold our human rights”.
And it’s not just that they don’t understand, it’s also that they passionately defend their misunderstanding and bash women who do understand.
