Karim Khan goes down, complicating efforts to save the International Criminal Court from Trump's kill-justice siege.
The targeted assassination of the International Criminal Court got a boost with Khan's removal on charges of sexual assault. But we still need the ICC more than ever.
The Entitlement Law of The Patriarchy: If you are successful or have money, you are entitled to abuse any woman you want.
Subtitle: The Grab-’Em-by-the-Pussy Law of Male Entitlement
I say now that this is a law because the tawdry parade of J.D. Vance, Eric Trump, Donald Trump, Jr., and Barron Trump fawning on the Tate Bros. follows the shame walk of thousands upon thousands of successful, wealthy men outed in the Epstein files. They’re everywhere—all over the world. They are princes, like England’s disgraced Prince Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, and national leaders like Donald Trump, Israel’s disgraced Ehud Barak, Cabinet secretary Howard Lutnick, Harvard heavyweights Alan Dershowitz and Larry Summers, and rich creeps Elon Musk and Richard Branson.
And then there’s the money. J.P. Morgan Chase and Deutsche Bank profited heavily off their business transactions with Epstein, and they've agreed to pay nearly half a billion dollars in settlements of civil lawsuits linked to the sex trafficking and child abuse ring Epstein ran worldwide.
The sheer size and scope of the operation Epstein ran is staggering, bewildering. Thousands upon thousands of men willingly engaged in Epsteins sexual exploitations, or accepted business interests of Epstein’s, or turned a blind eye to what they knew was there. The banks above essentially laundered his money for him. Women like the predator Ghislaine Maxwell, who procured other women to be abused, and the never-innocent bystanders like Sarah Ferguson, who seems to have been in deep, disgust us. And the endless lists of innocents, male and female, who we find in the sprawling connect-the-dots web this evil man constructed—flies for a spider—attest to a matrix of female abuse that sold like umbrellas in the rain and intimated that this is something entrenched, fiber-dyed into the fabric of our definitions of male heterosexuality.
Showing through all this is the face of the most widespread criminal enterprise of our time, maybe of all time: the “law” that allows men of power and wealth to own, traffic, rule over, use, abuse, rape and even kill women. In fact, in some cultures, all men legally have this right. The Second Napoleonic Codes were adopted in Jordan and Brazil for the express purpose of allowing men to kill women as “a crime of passion” and suffer no consequences for it at all. Even in America, the “crime of passion” has offered abusive, battering and murdering men a way out. On a softer level, the entire Epstein crowd, including tangential enablers, men and women alike, gave this behavior a pass for the rich and famous and powerful. When they finish digging up the Epstein enclave in the Southwest, this may all look far, far worse even than it does now, with Virginia Giuffre dead and others outed by a corrupt Department of Justice covering for Trump and willing to expose the identities of abused women to a public that contains a small but virulent subset willing to do grievous harm to whistleblowers. It’s not James Comey’s “8647” that was a death threat: what the Department of Justice has done is a very likely the equivalent of a death threat where these women, and the people very, very desperate to silence them, are concerned.
The International Criminal Court
As the ICC defines itself:
Established in 2002 under the multilateral Rome Statute, the ICC is the first and only permanent international court with jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for the international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. The ICC is intended to complement, not replace, national judicial systems; it can exercise its jurisdiction only when national courts are unwilling or unable to prosecute criminals. It is distinct from the International Court of Justice, an organ of the United Nations that hears disputes between states.
The International Criminal Court has been marked by some remarkable indictments in the history of the Court, the Court designed to hold accountable the people—from high officials of governments to the grunts who try to claim they were “just following orders”—who commit atrocities in times or war or in the process of governance.
The creation of the Court was a miracle largely achieved by one man, and we covered its provenance here:
Nuremberg Prosecutor Ben Ferencz Dies at 103
He had wanted to be a World War II fighter pilot, but at 5’ 2” tall, Ben Ferencz—the infant immigrant who arrived in the United States at 10 months old from Transylvania, Romania—was so short his feet wouldn’t reach the pedals. He’d wind up doing something else. In 1943, the 23-year-old Harv…
American lawyer Ben Ferencz secured the most spectacular of all the convictions at the Nuremberg Trials. The first trials were of the Nazi bigwigs. But it was the second set of prosecutions, tried by Ben Ferencz, that took down some of the worst sadists of the Third Reich.
Ben Ferencz tried 22 Einsatzgruppen commanders—though he said he could have indicted thousands. The initial tally at trial time indicated that the Einsatzgruppen had murdered a million Jews. They killed some in the most horrible way: they loaded Jews onto boxcars standing room only—boxcars sown inches thick with quick lime that ate their bodies from the feet up. Death took four days to come.
Subsequent tallies raised that number to as many as two million Jews dead at the hands of the most vicious extermination brigade of the SS.
All of the defendants were convicted; four were executed. It was Ben Ferencz’s first courtroom trial. He was 23.
This is the man who helped create the International Criminal Court. Ferencz had seen first-hand what evil can exist in racist, xenophobic, self-elevating ethnic cultures, and he wanted there to be a mechanism by which they would be held accountable. That, he reasoned, would, by necessity, have to exist on an international level, outside the ability of the hateful regime to manipulate its courts and grant itself immunity. (Any of this sounding familiar yet?)
Trump’s siege of the International Criminal Court
The first thing you’ll notice here is that the United States and Russia were state signatories of the Statute of Rome—but then backed out. Israel (which dragged Gaza with it) never was a signatory, perhaps because the ICC recognizes the State of Palestine. Others (in orange) signed on but didn’t ratify it. Some ratified and then left. Some 125 signed on and stayed.
Some, like Israel, China, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Indonesia, Mauritania, India, Iraq, Somalia, Djibouti, Sudan, Borneo, Cuba, Turkey, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Malaysia, Vietnam, and others—including Vatican City—never joined.
However, if the ICC indicts someone, if that person lands in any country that is a signatory (in green), authorities in that country may arrest and deport the accused to the ICC in The Hague to stand trial.
Trump’s Call for the End of the ICC
First a little background. According to the ICC website …
The ICC has publicly indicted 73 people. Proceedings against 38 are ongoing: 32 are at large as fugitives, two cases are in the pre-trial stage, one person is on trial, and three cases are in the appeals stage. Proceedings against 36 have been completed: three are serving sentences, seven have finished sentences, four have been acquitted, eight have had the charges against them dismissed, five have had the charges against them withdrawn, and nine have died before the conclusion of the proceedings against them.
Among the indictments that are greatly influencing the behavior of the United States toward the ICC are those against:
Vladimir Putin, Russia
for stealing Ukrainian children and giving them to Russian families
Allegedly responsible for the war crime of unlawful deportation of population (children) and that of unlawful transfer of population (children) from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation (under articles 8(2)(a)(vii) and 8(2)(b)(viii) of the Rome Statute). The crimes were allegedly committed in Ukrainian occupied territory at least from 24 February 2022. There are reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Putin bears individual criminal responsibility for the aforementioned crimes, (i) for having committed the acts directly, jointly with others and/or through others (article 25(3)(a) of the Rome Statute), and (ii) for his failure to exercise control properly over civilian and military subordinates who committed the acts, or allowed for their commission, and who were under his effective authority and control, pursuant to superior responsibility (article 28(b) of the Rome Statute).
Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, Israel
for using forced starvation and withholding fuel and medicine as a method of warfare
The Chamber considered that there are reasonable grounds to believe that both individuals intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity, from at least 8 October 2023 to 20 May 2024. This finding is based on the role of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant in impeding humanitarian aid in violation of international humanitarian law and their failure to facilitate relief by all means at its disposal. The Chamber found that their conduct led to the disruption of the ability of humanitarian organisations to provide food and other essential goods to the population in need in Gaza. The aforementioned restrictions together with cutting off electricity and reducing fuel supply also had a severe impact on the availability of water in Gaza and the ability of hospitals to provide medical care.
We earlier wrote about the indictment against Netanyahu, and with it, the indictment of Yahyah Sinwar, architect of the October 7 music concert attack that started this war, and you’ll find it here:
Yahyah Sinwar, mortally wounded, crawled around Gaza for three weeks before the IDF took him out while he was hiding, like Saddam Hussein in hidey hole-style, in a tunnel. Benjamin Netanyahu is still prime minister of Israel. Last year he displayed his talent for humor by nominating Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Trump Calls for the Destruction of the ICC
The International Federation for Human Rights released this statement, perhaps the most succinct of all the responses the Trump administrations July 13th announcement that he would destroy the International Criminal Court:
The Hague, Paris, 20 July 2026. The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) strongly condemns the United States government’s 13 July announcement of a coordinated “whole-of-government“ campaign to dismantle the International Criminal Court (ICC). The measures reportedly under consideration—including pressure on States Parties to withdraw from the Rome Statute, expanded sanctions against the Court and organisations that cooperate with it, and additional sanctions against ICC officials—represent the most serious attack to date on the world’s only permanent international criminal court.
This campaign is an attack on victims seeking justice for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression. It is also an attack on an institution created by 125 sovereign States to ensure that, when national systems fail, the gravest crimes do not go unanswered.
Note here the usual vile Trump threats against individuals and governments to enforce his will. Expect nasty tariffs against “States Parties”—the 125 nations that belong on the ICC—and more sanctions against the chief prosecutor and judges, who have already been barred from entry into the United States (so they can’t attend events at the U.N.)—and integral barristers and lawyers—like AMAL CLOONEY—who have been threatened with arrest and incarceration if they enter the United States. This is, BTW, the reason George and Amal Clooney (who achieved a brilliant conviction through the ICC of Islamic terrorists for the rape of the Yezidi women) live in France and have French citizenship.
The Trump Administration’s Excuses
Excuse #1 (from The Guardian):
(Secretary of State Marco) Rubio invoked images of US border patrol agents and elected leaders being “dragged before an international court” and tried by judges from around the world in a lengthy op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal Monday. “If we stand idle, all of them will be at the mercy of foreign judges, thousands of miles away – facing the constant risk of prosecution and even imprisonment for the so-called ‘crime’ of defending their own country,” Rubio warned in a companion video posted to X.
Yeah, well, you know, Rubio et al. should be worried to death about this. The ICC is contemplating charges against some U.S. soldiers for war crimes from our engagement in Afghanistan. AND, even more serious is the fact that Rodrigo Duterte, president of The Philippines from 2016-2022, is in ICC custody, on trial for the murders of hundreds of people in his so-called “war on drugs.” Trump and Hegseth have killed more than 200 people from multiple countries in their own “war on drugs”—people who died on the high seas, convicted of drug smuggling without the hint of due process in an act of extra-judicial punishment (actually an oil war gambit) almost identical to the one that may see Duterte jailed for life, if not sent to the gallows. And after Abu Ghraib, U.S. soldiers should be aware that they are responsible for their own war crimes and that the military should not (and hopefully will not) help them avoid just consequences. Trump and Hegseth could both be indicted by the ICC for this action alone, even without considering what they’ve done in Iran.
Extremely well-educated observers strip this argument down to the bone, The Guardian reports:
“The ICC is not claiming jurisdiction over conduct in the United States,” said Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch. “Rubio is dressing up his quest for impunity for American war crimes under the label of national sovereignty, which ignores the sovereign right of other nations to invoke the ICC for crimes committed on their territory. … Trump wants to be able to commit war crimes on the territory of countries that have accepted the court’s jurisdiction – that’s what this is about.”
Excuse #2: Trump Says He’s Doing To Help Bibi
Well, Trump has been whining about the ICC Indictment of Bibi Netanyahu for quite some time. They have a complicated relationship. Along with the deep, passionate love of Trump in the very bosom of the Manosphere, Trump enjoys Jewish support in the form of MONEY and the passionate support of Israelis because Trump is willing to kill their enemies and turn a blind eye to the atrocities their leaders have committed in Gaza. Jews will vote for Trump here at home. AND Trump’s support of Israel is supported by the vast enclaves of Evangelicals who see the Jewish plunge toward Armageddon as a preliminary process move toward the Second Coming of Christ.
So, he’ll keep helping Bibi—by supporting grievous assaults on Palestinian civilians to try to get HAMAS leaders and by attacking Iran on Israel’s behalf. But on balance, I’d have to say, “Follow the money.”
What’s Really Going On
If the ICC can indict Netanyahu, if it can arrest and try Duterte—they can get indict Trump and Hegseth over the murders on the high seas and the atrocities in the illegal and illegitimate war with Iran.
And while claiming he’s doing it all “for Bibi”, Trump is also claiming there is no investigation of him by the ICC—and he’s apparently asked the ICC for immunity!
Hey, he got it from the U.S. Supreme Court, why not the ICC?????? There are no limits for the Teflon Don, are there?
Why is Trump doing this now? It may be a pre-emptive strike against the ICC before it indicts Trump on war crimes charges and crimes against humanity for his treatment of migrants by the United States. Now, if the ICC does indict, Trump can say it’s political retaliation for his complaints against the ICC and his threat to dismantle it.
The ICC’s one big ongoing problem may not be a fault at all.
The ICC has been accused at the U.N. of overwhelmingly targeting African countries. Earlier in this century, every single one of its convicted arrestees had been an African potentate, though some from other countries had died before being brought to trial and an number of indictees are at large.
But here’s the problem with that complaint. Most of the Africans indicted were turned by their own country in response to the assaults on their freedom. Nothing says this more clearly than the map of tyranny.
Or, as the U.N. put it:
The court can receive referrals from the UN Security Council (as seen in Libya and Sudan) but it mainly operates on the principle of consent. Indeed, the majority of African countries under current investigation (DRC, Uganda, Mali, CAR I, and CAR II) have arisen from self-referrals. In the case of Cote d’Ivoire, it accepted the Court’s ad hoc jurisdiction. Only in two of the African cases now open – Kenya and Burundi – has the ICC actually exercised its right to start investigations. The “African bias” of the ICC is therefore in many cases a symptom of African enthusiasm for the ICC. Indeed, African support was central to the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
So, the efforts of Trump et al. to use this justification are bogus, but they will play it for all they can get out of it.
They will also use the unfortunate situation of Karim Khan’s putative conviction and removal as chief prosecutor of the ICC on grounds of sexual misconduct. And this is a tragedy because it’s Karim Khan who indicted Benjamin Netanyahu, Vladimir Putin, and Rodrigo Duterte, along with Yahyah Sinwar of HAMAS.
Karim Khan Goes Down.
Karim Ahmad Khan was born in Edinburgh on 30 March 1970, the son of a British nurse and Pakistani physician. Khan earned an LLB and AKC from King’s College London. He later completed some studies toward a DPhil in law at Wolfson College, Oxford, but did not finish the degree.[21]
From 1993 to 1996, Khan was a Crown Prosecutor at the Crown Prosecution Service of England and Wales, having been appointed a Senior Crown Prosecutor in 1995. From 1997 to 1998, he worked as a Legal Officer at the Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). He later served as Legal Adviser at the Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) until 2000. From 2006 to 2007, he was lead defense counsel to former President of Liberia Charles Taylor before the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL).
In his distinguished career, he investigated Taliban human rights violations and indicted several Afghans: Afghanistan promptly withdrew from the ICC. He indicted Putin and Netanyahu for war crimes and Duterte for murder and investigated human rights abuses in Cambodia, Lebanon and elsewhere. In 2017, he represented more than 100,000 victim claimants from the Kipsigi and Talai communities in Kenya seeking redress for alleged human rights violations committed during British colonial rule. Khan said: “Certain historical injustices need to be recognised... It's something that I feel very passionately about and it's really worthwhile.”
But he would not let the fatal cup of poisoned wine pass:
According to The Wall Street Journal and The Guardian:
The ICC began investigating sexual misconduct allegations against Khan by a Muslim Malaysian lawyer, who said Khan began making sexual advances towards her in March 2023, shortly after she joined his team. She alleged he forced her to engage in nonconsensual sex acts on several occasions, including intercourse in June and December 2023. In August 2025, another woman accused Khan of sexual misconduct. She alleged that while she was employed by him during his time as a lawyer, beginning in 2009, he repeatedly invited her to his home, sat in proximity, attempted to kiss and touch her, and pressured her to engage in sexual relations.
On July 24, 2026, Khan was removed from his position as ICC chief prosecutor by a majority of member states by secret ballot. Khan vows to challenge his “conviction” though it is unclear there is a pathway for his doing this.
Israeli hawks cheered his downfall. However, the damage the two years of investigation did to the ICC is now over, though the stain will remain in some form forever.
Yet the triumph of some justice in sexual assaults by people at pinnacles of power is welcome, and the ICC is to be applauded for moving forward to a conclusion. The clear implication of the fall of a celebrated and very worthy human rights defender in establishing that even otherwise good men believe that women are spoils of competition in the achievement of high status in the male pecking order is not.
The Worldwide Epstein Gang
Epstein could make the connections, and Ghislaine could get the girls, and the market was the vastest on earth. Women, they would tell us, are nothing. They are not humans. They are breeding animals like the Manosphere Bros would tell us. Or they are a man’s right to take because he wants or needs them. They are made to marry young as Charlie Kirk would tell you and breed for white supremacy as Elon Musk would tell you. The Incel movement’s Elliot Rodger’s "manifesto" speaks of the need for concentration camps to exterminate women, with the exception of a select few that are kept for breeding.
A week before the last presidential election, J.D. Vance dog-whistled the Manosphere to vote Trump into office. Trump dog-whistled the Manosphere to show up on January 6th, lynch his vice-president, and overthrow the legitimate election of Joe Biden.
We have a problem. And misogyny and male privilege and entitlement to use and control women is a major part of it. Commentators are now predicting that the central lure of MAGA in 2028 will be the complete removal of women’s suffrage, right to work, and right to medical care—and the elevation of males to singular authority in the culture.
Be advised.