Shambola: Health savings accounts are no substitute for Obamacare

 GOP has long supported health savings plans as an alternative to the ACA.  This is shambolic, at best, They claim this would give consumers more choice and control, and shortcut the middle man.  Consumers are not pining for more choice; they are wanting a plan that is indeed insurance they can afford. ,It they fail to extend the ACA subsidies, it will  be ripe fodder for Democrats to win in November 2026 after consumers get the actual sticker shock.  The final vote in Congress will take place December 17.  Voters will not be fooled when they get their bills for 2026 Obamacare....and many will still be forced to go without insurance because of the premium unaffordability.  

The ACA was inspired mostly by a Republican governor, Mitt Gov. Romney of Massachusetts, as an alternative to Medicare to All, popular among some on the left. While it did not help rein in the insurers, it provided a way for the self-employed and those who did not get insurance from an employer to get affordable access to preventive care, coverage of those with pre-existing conditions, and catastrophic illness to receive the care they needed. Subsidies and premiums in the ACA are geared to consumer's income...the lower the income, the more the subsidy, the cheaper the premium. Nothing proposed by health care saving plans comes close to providing the same advantage nor does it do anything to rein in the insurance industry's greed. Health savings plans only give consumers the ability to buy cheap, partial coverage insurance, either catastrophic or inadequate, high-deductible coverage, but not both, at retail, fine-print policies. This assumes consumers can find any insurance on the open market that also cover their pre-existing conditions. That is only music to the insurance companies' ears as they can scrap coverage of those who are sick in favor of those who are already healthy.

 In the guise of lowering premium costs, one provision being discussed recently  by advocates off replacing the ACA with health savings accounts deceptive and irrelevant. .Instead, this sham GOP bill  favors business who can lower costs of covering insurance to their employees by forming cross state alliances.Irony: Obmacare  purpose was and isto provide affordable insurance for those who do not get employer's insurance....so this is meaningless and useless to those depending on Obamacare; it's just a plum for business and there is no guarantee business will lower its premiums for employees, either..

  Voters will not be fooled when they get their bills for 2026 Obamacare....and many will still be forced to go without insurance because of the premium unaffordability.  

Two states, one red, one blue, just defied Trump's atttack on states ability to control their elections.

 December 11, 2025, was a civics lesson in states' rights to control their elections:Two states, one red, one blue, just defied Trump's attack on their states' rights, defying his attempts to federalize and control the election process and state laws. The GOP majority in the Indiana state senate refused to go along with Trump's pressure and threats of being primaried and losing federal funds if they refused to redistrict boundaries gerrymandered to increase GOP Congressional votes in time for the 2026 midterms. As one GOP state senator who voted to defy Trump on this issue commented on MSNOW, Indiana Republicans favor small government, and they resented Trump's pressure to federalize partisan advantages. The Indiana senators also defied death and bomb threats to do it.

In another case in Colorado, Trump declared once again that he would pardon Tina Peters, who is currently in a Colorado prison, having been found guilty of violating state election laws when she sought to take favorable action on behalf of Trump. Colorado officials, the governor, attorney general, and secretary of state said no, and also defied the president and his threats. They asserted that Trump can only pardon those found guilty of violating federal laws, per the Constitution, not state laws. Peters was convicted under state election laws.

Affordability vs economy is not about semantics; both are true at the same time

 Affordability vs economy is not about semantics; both are true at the same time. Why the disconnect? Trump may be touting his great economy, but those concerned about having enough money to pay for the basics have been left out of his "economy". The Trump administration's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA) resulted in a shift of wealth toward the wealthiest Americans and corporations, the "greatest upward transfer of wealth in American history," some say, and Trump made affordability worse by his tariffs and cutting everything from SNAP to Obamacare. However, those who live paycheck to paycheck or barely make ends meet, at least 40% of Americans, are those for whom the term "affordability" means something, and the term "economy being great" looks like a lie by an out-of-touch president. Polls and recent off-year election wins by those who made affordability their top issue show that the political chickens have come home to roost.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Failed To Deliver Promised Benefits - Center for American Progress

Trump and Putin: dividing up the world. Did you vote for this?

Update: 12/12/2025.In February 1945, at the Yalta conference, the US, UK, USSR, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin met and came to an agreement that virtually divided the world into two and led to the Cold War for the next 45 years...The USSR claimed Eastern Europe as its sphere of influence, and the Iron Curtain descended within a few months. Roosevelt had died soon after Yalta. Trump is now telling Western Europe and Eastern Europe both, even they are in the sphere of Russian influence. There will be no help from the US. This takes us back to the early 1900s, even worse than the Yalta catastrophe. What happened in 1914 and 1939 was the result. Here we are again in 2025, repeating history. and the stupidity of the isolationists of the past century. Trump has succeeded in de facto destroying the NATO Atlantic alliance, a further echo and potential repeat of the tragedy of the last century. Scroll down for the original post and earlier updates..

Through various reports, Guardian among them, Trump is considering abandoning Ukraine. That is only one issue.. In a so-called American First ideology, Trump is cutting most ties with Western Europe as well. He has already been subverting NATO and its mutual defense purpose and now there is no burden sharing of armaments with Europe. NATO now only exists in issues of nuclear defense..Welcome to the 1938 version of America First.  How did that turn out?

The sad thing about this post is, like in 1938, American citizens did not give a darn of what happened in Europe, and America First isolationism held heavy political inflence is...until Pearl Harbor. The rest of historyis about is US's blood and treasure in World War II. I fear we are about to make the tremendous miscalculation that US defense is not also connected to Europe, with our economic ties and culture, even more entwined than in 1938. If war breaks out in Europe beyond the boundaries of Ukraine, just maybe the uneducated and naive American Firsters may wake up...when it is too late.

Trump is threatening Western Europe with repercussions if it funds Ukraine's defense with Russian funds in Western banks. In December, 2025, the EU defied American pressure and ensured that Hungary and Slovakia cannot veto their use of the funds to help Ukraine. EU triggers emergency clause to indefinitely immobilise Russian assets | Euronews

What Trump is in effect doing he is leaving the sphere of influence across the Atlantic to Russia by his own edict and orders. He recently shifted our Mediterranean fleet from Europe to near Venezuela..., indicating the US sphere of influence is solely the Western Hemisphere. Trump appears to demand Ukraine surrender to Russia's "peace plan" or "'else", terms that will eventually lead to Russia taking over all of that country. This is a striking spoken alliance of Trump and Putin, cutting out Western Europe. In 2026, Trump is laying the groundwork, many fear, to hand Ukraine on a silver platter to Russia, whose stated goal is to reassemble the USSR influence over the countries they lost when the Berlin Wall fell. This is not what America signed up for in 2024, but it is what Trump is actually doing by his actions, deeds, and words.

Back to days even I remember, WWII. It is also repeating history. It is the isolationism that led to WWII, as Japan and Germany thought and miscalculated on the US's resolve to remain isolated. Germany had counted on pro Nazi and American Firsters, who were US politicians, to influence its support for Germany or remain neutral. It is now like 1938 when the UK prime minister handed over part of Czechoslovakia to Hitler and proclaimed it was peace in our time.

Trump thinks he is a dictator and he can get away with this as Congress sleeps an/ord bows down to him, and any violation of laws and the Constitution is no longer punishable thanks to the gift of immunity by "his" 6-3 Supreme Court. What fools we are to tolerate this.

Europe also sees Trump and Putin's contempt of them, reinforcing Trump's disdain of Europe. From the German weekly magazine, Der Spiegel 12.20.2025 in a commentary titled" Trump and Putin, partners in malice."

"The tone Trump strikes toward Europe oscillates between pity, contempt and open hostility. .... "The Trump administration sometimes couches its criticism in the language of concern.......  In practice, though, this means the U.S. government is now officially supporting right-wing populist forces from Stockholm to Madrid. “Cultivating resistance” is the phrase used in the document – which, to the ears of European politicians, sounds suspiciously like regime change.." The article continues that NATO is no longer "burden sharing" with the US when it comes to provisions of armaments. NATO in effect is only sharing nuclear defense with US support, and now  Europe is on its own for assistance for non nuclear defense.  Earlier, Trump had threatened to destroy Article 5 of the NATO treaty  if Europe did not contribute at least 2% of their GDP to their own self defense (these are not "dues" as Trump had deceptively claimed, but a commitment). Europe rose to that and complied ...and exceeded the 2% so now Trump says...it is all 100% yours, on your own, no burden sharing. He has defacto succeeded in destroying the Atlantic alliance, in a repeat of the stupidity of the isolationists of the past century. I

The accountability for Venezuelan boat attack: symptom of a larger problem

 Who can be held accountable for the two-tap Venezuelan drug boat hit? This is a symptom of a larger problem: the pattern of the Trump administration's strategy to avoid accountability for any unpopular or controversial act. The buck no longer stops at the Oval Office desk. "The Buck Stops Here" Desk sign | Harry S. Truman

Trump is saved from legal action by the Supreme Court granting him immunity: Those below him are accountable and do not have immunity, but it is not as simple as we are learning to pin anything on them, as well. Probably the only entity with the power to expose responsibility is Congress, which is now engaged in doing so.: Trump's usual pattern of response when he is challenged for his actions is to deflect attention by claiming the protesters are against something they are not. He also reacts by throwing his own appointees "under the bus", letting them to take the fall and blame.

What particularly frustrates holding Trump legally responsible for an act is that the Supreme Court puts Trump above the law and he would never be held accountable within the justice system or outside of it for various reasons. there is an excellent discussion of this in a CNN analysis: Trump is immune from accountability for boat strikes. What about everyone under him? | CNN Politics

Here is how this Venezuelan boat controversy, side-stepping accountability, could play out based on Trumpian response to being blamed for other unpopular actions that get blowback.. I see this one as typical of Trumpian strategy: pick an issue that most support...stop narco and human trafficking...and get rid of migrants who committed crimes in our country. and claim the libs are supporting all of those sins. Narco and human trafficking, and migrants with serious criminal records are bad guys, and these are are motherhood and apple pie kinds of a consensus held by both the left and the right. Then, when there is an objection to the methods or legality, Trump will claim the libs are supporting human trafficking and drug runners and narco trafficking and want to cripple the military.

There will be many in MAGA who will nod their heads and say "amen" without serious consideration of the implications, political fallout, or the methods. They will just pass it off as "you hate Trump" or ignore the methods used to carry out goals, which is the essence of the criticism. Where Trump et al go off the rails is the methods they use that far exceed what they promised to do. Most migrants deported by ICE and grabbed without a warrant, for example, have no criminal record, and appear to be treated cruelly and brutally, violating human and civil rights and threatening family separation to force compliance. Per the CATO ,Institute, 73% of those detained by ICE have no criminal record, and only 5% have a record of violent crimes. Politically, polls are showing the majority of voters are showing disdain for the methods, if not the goal. Trump may have underestimated the blowback to his methods, if not the goals. Most Immigrants Support Border Enforcement, but Not Mass Deportations, Poll Finds - The New York Times

MAGA itself has been spooked to support mass deportations by such claims that yearly 4000 are killed by undocumented migrants. However, as Reuters reported, there are few statistics available but there are statistics on the commission of crime in general that show that undocumented immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than the general population.  Texas does keep such statistics and they also agree that migrants commit crimes less than do the citizen population. Fact Check: No evidence 4,000 people are killed yearly by undocumented immigrants | Reuters

5% of People Detained By ICE Have Violent Convictions, 73% No Convict.ons | Cato at Liberty Blog

List of particulars: How Trump has consolidated his dictatorial powers in eleven months

List or particulars: How Trump has consolidated his dictatorial, king-like powers in eleven months. In the Declaration of Independence, the colonists listed their objection to the king acting like a tyrant. Here is my list. This has been a firehose of many different steps he has taken to destroy the fundamental foundations of our Constitutional democracy...so much so, those of us supporting democracy are so involved in the outrage du jour, we lose track of the total picture and get caught up in the news story of the day. 

Trump is in the process of building his own paramilitary force. He is invoking wartime powers to deport people without due process, even suggesting that American citizens may be sent to foreign prisons. He has deployed National Guard troops to cities over the objections of local officials. That one is still being contested in the Courts, though lower courts have generally ruled against the Trump position. Trump has signaled that he is open to invoking the Insurrection Act, an 1807 law that allows the president to deploy the military in the United States. And he has claimed, without legal justification, that he has the right to order the military to summarily kill people suspected of smuggling drugs on boats off the coast of South America.  This one is the hot one on the burner now.

The  firing of the JAGs is just one element of a broader purge of the military, which started at the beginning of Trump’s second term in February, five former defense secretaries, including James Mattis,

In fact, we were warned that this and other purges would happen in the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025. 2025 was a blueprint for two purposes: rule by white Christian nationalists and enable it by making the president a virtual dictator by replacing executive branch civil servants with political appointees pledged to the cause.  So far, 2025 is on track. The telltale phrase was the destruction of DEI throughout, and the proponents were devotees of a unitary form of government with all power in the executive branch. The chief author of 2025 was Russell Vought, whom Trump appointed as Director of Management and Budget ( and personnel) with the power to carry out the purges. The 2025 plan was to do away with supervisory civil service positions and make the positions political. That was not done, and instead, positions and whole agencies were eliminated in addition to purges. All during 2025, the Heritage Foundation was vetting for ideological purity the potential appointees to replace civil servants. All has not gone as planned since the incompetence of replacements has resulted in amateurish mistakes that have backfired on the administration itself. https://thehill.com/opinion/5059017-trump-cabinet-nominees-unqualified

Trump views himself as the final arbiter of the legality of anything he does. An executive order he signed in February says, “The President and the Attorney General’s opinions on questions of law are controlling on all employees in the conduct of their official duties. No employee of the executive branch acting in their official capacity may advance an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes the President or the Attorney General’s opinion on a matter of law.” For greater detail, go to MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: How Trump is destroying the rule of law, replacing it with the rule of Trump

Trump is suggesting that the Federal Communications Commission should revoke the licenses of television broadcasters that give him too much “bad publicity” and is suing major newspapers and networks.  The 6-3Trump Supreme Court is expected to rule that all independent agencies will no longer be independent and will be comprised of the partisans of the president.  That will affect the FCC, as well as the FDA and FTC.

Trump has pressured the Department of Justice to target, indict, and destroy those he considers to be his political enemiesTrump has pressured the Department of Justice to target, indict, and destroy those he considers to be his political enemies. Ask Letitia James and Jim Comey how those attempts have bit the dust.  Nonetheless, even the act of charging it regardless of the outcome in courts is a painful hammer. To say this is an abuse of power is an understatement.

Trump has usurped the Congressional powers to levy across-the-board non-security-related tariffs. The Supreme Court has heard the arguments, but there is no hurry to decide. Cosco has filed a heavyweight lawsuit on this matter, but in the meantime, the tariffs continue.  This is an abuse of power that has repercussions on consumer affordability and even the ability of some to stay in business.  This one may not set well with the conservative members of the Supreme Court who are, in their ideological hearts, free traders.

Trump has violated the civil rights of migrants with warrantless detentions and racial profiling. Colorado has gotten a lower Federal court decision to stop the ICE practice...but no doubt the 6-3 Supreme Court may weigh in. Federal judge restricts how ICE can arrest people in Colorado, calling past conduct ‘unlawful’ - The Journal

How Trump is destroying the rule of law, replacing it with the rule of Trump

MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: The Supreme Court likely to further presidential power, destroying independent agencies. Trump's pattern of abuse of law and order, criminal and civil justice, is his method to replace the rule of law with the rule of Trump.  If any of the rules, laws, and regulations stand in his way of getting what he wants done, he succeeds most of the time. One of Trump's weapons is to subvert the rule of any law: attack first, get away with it until he gets sued, and he will keep on appealing until he gets the judgment he wants. When it comes to acting unlawfully, Trump shoots first, then waits until someone tells him" no" in the Supreme Court or even a lower court, and maybe not even then if he can find a workaround. (ask Abrego Gracia how that works)..

He has already usurped the legislative powers of Congress, treating executive orders like the law he expects to you to obey.  This is not like a frog in boiling water analogy, gradually, without the subversion going unnoticed. It is more like sticking the Constitution in a microwave to burn to a crisp, and any opposition has yet to find the cancel button. The destruction of the rule of law has all been accomplished in 11 months.  

 If there is one fundamental characteristic that separates a dictator/autocrat/king from a democracy, it is the degree to which law is respected and complied with in advance, this is.  Otherwise, the subjects/citizens of Trump's rule are at the mercy of his fear and favor.  Pay homage, contribute treasure, and expect in return, the head of government will favor you. This is a reward for loyalty: you get out of jail reward even if you pleaded guilty or were found guilty by a jury of peers.   This is the definition of corruption. This is the rule of law replaced by a wannabe tyrant of a dictator, issuing pardons daily to those he favors and making an example of how others are to act in the future, if they know what is good for them.  This makes a mockery of the legal system, including the findings of juries. Justice is no longer blind; the blindfold has been ripped off. Do not worry about committing a crime on Trump's behalf; you too, will be pardoned, is the unstated message.   Even the worst of the worst get pardons if they were acting to benefit Trump such as violent January 6ers or the central American king pin of cocain smuggling, How Former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández Landed a Trump Pardon - WSJ Hernández had been convicted in March 2024 by a federal jury for conspiring to import cocaine into the United States, with prosecutors stating he used his presidential power to facilitate the transport of more than 400 tons of cocaine through Honduras. 

What has enabled Trump to operate in this manner is the grace of a 6-3 Supreme Court, which anointed him King, ruling that he was above the law and could not be prosecuted for crimes committed while executing his executive functions.  Trump took this bit in his mouth like a runaway outlaw horse gone berserk, out of control,  and full of aggressive kicks, strikes, and bared teeth.  

Before the Supreme Court became the ultimate player, there was an enabler. The GOP dominated Senate was the prime mover of measures that resulted in the 6-3 Supreme Court. For over the past ten years, their leaders kept Democrat nominees from even getting a vote, and then, when in the majority, got their Federalist Society vetted "conservative' choices on the Bench.

 Like a rider of a tiger, the GOP Congress now fears to dismount, since Trump, the tiger, will turn and attack and destroy anyone in his political party who would try to contradict his wishes or pronouncements, and he has the teeth to rip his victims apart with no one standing in his way. Ask Marjorie Taylor Greene how that works.  Only now are a few voice being raised, brave enough to withstand the threats of violence by MAGA thugs,  revenge in denying money approriateed by Congress, or insults and rages by Trump, acting like the mad Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland shouting "off with his/her head" at whoever dare challenges his power.

   The rule of law has been replaced by the law of the ruler.

The Supreme Court likely to further presidential power, destroying independent agencies

Trump bid to expand power comes before Supreme Court   Independent regulatory agencies like the FDA and FTC would become more political tools for a power-hungry Trump. It would replace them with political appointees subject to the whims of whoever is in the White House and destabilize the stability of the capitalistic system that had been the envy of the world. Dependable policies are needed for any long-term planning in making decisions.   Furthermore, any protections of consumer rights will be gone with the wind if the rich and powerful self-interested are in power in the short term.  

This would destroy any vestige of a government that rules on the facts and the purposes for which Congress set them up. It gives more power to dictator Trump to get revenge on enemies and favor his supporters. The president would now gain absolute control of any agency that dares to favor consumers, the environment. The only antidote is regime change in 2028 so the partisans from the left can get their way if they gain the White House. What goes around will come around. We will be dealing with a pro-Trump Supreme Court for a very long time unless Congress expands it, which I favor as the only way out of a Supreme Court sanctioned dictatorship.

The ultimate Catch 22 in the question if the military should obey illegal orders: a corrupted chain of command

 The ultimate Catch 22: What do you do when the whole chain of command is corrupted? The reason the clause was inserted in the Code of Military Justice was in reaction to the Nazi Generals' defense in the Nuremberg trials, which was "they were just following orders", and they were still hanged for their criminal acts. An excellent explainer: Explainer: Can military members refuse orders? - ABC News The one issue not addressed in this is what if the JAGs ( the military law corps) are also controlled by the president, to make the judgment call of what is or is not an illegal order? This is not a hypothetical. The president has already fired the top three JAGs in the Pentagon. How the Pentagon sidelined lawyers while testing the legal limits of military action | CNN Politics

Per Peter Wehner, writing in The Atlantic in October, "firing of the JAGs is just one element of a broader purge of the military, which started at the beginning of Trump’s second term. In February, five former defense secretaries, including JamesMattis, who served under Trump in his first term." Trump’s Plan Is Now Out in the Open - The Atlantic.

Now the FBI has been ordered to interview the 6 who dared remind the military of their rights not to obey illegal orders.FBI interviewing Democrats over ‘illegal orders’ video   It seems like the president plans to issue clearly illegal orders (he did contemplate having the military shoot unarmed protesters iin his first term), The flip side of his demanding the 6 be executed for sedition is that Trump wants the military to obey illegal orders and then resistance would be before the hand picked loyal JAGs? The Constitution is still supreme over the military code of justice....so back to the Supreme Court that Trump considers "his"?

Welcome to the brave new world of Trump's  pretense of  dictatorship.

Ukraine: same song second verse: will it get better or will it get worse

 Trump and Putin are both singing the same songs they have all along, but it truly went off-key this past week when Trump claimed his peace plan turned out to be a suspected translation from Russian and did nothing but repeat what Putin has wanted since Trump and he met in Alaska. Putin's position has never wavered from a nearly complete surrender of Ukraine to him.  Without thinking, rolling off his tongue,  Trump demanded Zelensky accept this surrender or else "Trump says Zelensky can agree to peace plan or ‘fight his little heart out’ and once again implied or left open the question if the US will or will not send them more aid.   

So ticked at Trump even considering the Russian 28 point surrender non-starter, they have revisited the question of tapping into billions of Russian assets held by Belgium and pressuring Belgium to go along. Can Europe save frozen Russian assets from Donald Trump?

Update: 11/27/25 Why even try to negotiate with Putin. It takes him to be willing to give up Ukraine. Instead, Europe and the US should be discussing how to save what is left of Ukraine and guarantee support militarily. Someday Putin will get that message, but at least speak his language...military force. Russia ready to 'fight to the last Ukrainian,' Putin says amid US peace drive

Continuing original post:

Not only should Trump be condemned for singing Putin's tune, but he is opening himself to another bipartisan legislative pushback post Eptsein doc flap as it is believed by observers that Ukraine has a significant number of supporters on both sides of the aisle. 

  I wrote this October 30 after Trump's address to the Israeli parliament, and nothing changed since then, either..  Only in the case of Trump's "acceptance of the Russian wish list", both Europe and the bipartisan Ukraine support in Congress pushed back with a roar and Europe and Zelensky met in Switzerland for an emergency meeting on November 23 and Secretary of State Rubio tried to mute and confuse things.. From my blog post October 30, Trump:  Once again, Trump discussed Ukraine in a very public forum, prefacing his remarks with the usual attempt to excuse his not being able to end the conflict on day one. It is always: he is always claiming that if he, Trump, were president at the time, there would never have been a war. The rest of that sentence should be: it was because Ukraine was absorbed into Russia with his blessing.. The message to Putin would have been from Trump: it is ok, Vladimir, to keep on going to reassemble the boundaries of the old USSR influence, Putin's publicly stated goal, and we would not help stop you.

Update 11/24/2025

How to end the conflict in Ukraine? Tom Friedman's opinion piece in the NY Times over the weekend made a lot of sense.

Freeze forces in place without ceding territory.

Station European/U.S. security forces along ceasefire lines.

Require Russia to pay reparations and remain under sanctions.

Guarantee Ukraine’s path to EU membership.

(My note: Ukraine's revolt against Russian domination began in 2014 with popular street demonstrations fueled by disgust of corruption by Putin's puppet presdient of Ukraine and by a desire to turn west to join the EU)

What is missing is how to get Russia to agree: Russia thinks time is on its side< but the only way to get them to agree is for the WEST, including the US, to give Ukraine the ability to keep the battle line frozen as it is now by providing long-term commitment of military aid.

The main obstacle to this is Trump himself, who puts Russia first, instead of the US, in some very mistaken thought that feeding the Russian beast will somehow stop Russia in its stated goal of conquering all of Ukraine and re-establishing Eastern Europe as its satellites. they dominated in the Cold War.

Note: Friedman leaves out Ukraine's NATO membership but agrees on EU membership. I would think that mutual defense treaties could exist outside of NATO, either with the EU or individually with willing individual partners. The security element is the vital requirement of any peace plan.

https://www.nytimes.com/.../ukraine-russia-negotiations...

European allies disagree with the U.S. proposal to end negotiations over the Ukraine war. Big stumbling blocks: assurances on Ukraine's protection and security against further Russian aggression, and capping Ukraine's military size. Actually, these are more than just stumbling blocks: these are booby trapped, tank-teeth roadblocks. Ukraine had no input or presence in the Russian-US proposal or in the European meeting with the US in Switzerland. European allies disagree with the U.S. proposal to end Ukraine war negotiations. Big stumbling blocks: assurances on Ukraine's protection and security against further Russian aggression, and capping Ukraine's military size. Actually, these are more than just stumbling blocks: these are booby trapped, tank-teeth roadblocks. Ukraine had no input or presence in the Russian-US proposal or in the European meeting with the US in Switzerland. European allies disagree with U.S. proposal to end Ukraine war negotiations, per Fox News.

https://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/.../ukraine-same...

Why call the Trumpist control of government a regime, and not an administration

 The demonstratios in DC this weekend were calling for regime change.(Impeach and remove) Why call the Trumpist control of government a regime, and not an administration? The use of the term " regime " is justified.    It is not worthy of the term "administration" because in the past nearly 10 months, what the Trumpists have done to the executive branch is contrary to their role laid out in the Constitution: to faithfully execute the laws passed by Congress. Instead, it has behaved like a wannabe dictatorship, signing executive orders like they are decrees and to be treated like the laws of the land, refusing to spend money Congress appropriated unless it contributes to a power grab or the Trump ideology. In many instances, even then, the act was unconstitutional... done until some lower court ruled otherwise months after the act was committed. Now, some of these court rulings are awaiting the Trump-friendly, empowering Supreme Court to rule in ways that overturn prior decisions. For example, the Trump regime is sending active duty and naitonal guard troops into citites, gerrymandering to politically advantage while trampleing civil rights provisions of the Constitution, passing sweeping tariffs with a stroke of a autopen that is in the purvue of Congress, ordering thhe Department of Justice to launch investigations into political enemies witthout probable cause, and threatening to invade: Greenland, Venezuela, Nigeria, and anyone else that Trump thinks he can try to look like a bully whileattempting to withdraw from NATO, UN, and any other entity that stands in the Trumpist way in fits of rage or to ivert attention from other negative news., while forcing those in the MAGA orbit who challenge Trumpist policies to resign after threats of violence unleashed by words and withholding campaing money. That kind of behavior is more like dictatorships of Orban or even Putin (gulags are only for brown migrants in the US, though).

excerpts from a post of 11.20 2025 re the issue of whether military must obey illegal orders

From MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Pinch me. Am I hearing the Queen of Hearts in Wonderland or a president in the White House? 

The GOP and Trump went ballistic, claiming that the 6 members of Congress (all with combat or intelligence experience) were encouraging the military to disobey orders, while deceptively leaving out the important words the Congresspeople clearly used "illegal orders'.  .  The flip side of that is does the GOP want the military to carry out illegal orders? Should Trump have required US military to shoot the Black Lives Matter demonstrators in the legs in his first term?In fact, per the military code of justice, those who commit illegal acts can be subject to prosecution. What the military oath of enlistment says about legal and illegal orders - ABC News

The following italics sections was replicated in a stand alonge posting 11/21/2025

The ultimate Catch 22: What do you do when the whole chain of command is corrupted? The reason the clause was inserted in the Code of Military Justice was in reaction to the Nazi Generals' defense in the Nuremberg trials, which was "they were just following orders", and they were still hanged for their criminal acts.An excellent explainer: Explainer: Can military members refuse orders?  The one issue not addressed in this is what if the JAGs ( the military law core) are also controlled by the presidnt. to make the judgment call of what is or is not an illegal order? This is not a hypothetical. The president has already fired the top three JAGs in the Pentagon. How the Pentagon sidelined lawyers while testing the legal limits of military action | CNN Politics

Now the FBI has been ordered to interview the 6 who dared remind the military of their rights not to obey illegal orders. .FBI interviewing Democrats over ‘illegal orders’ video   It seems like the president plans to issue clearly illegal orders (he did contemplate having  the military shoot unarmed protesters iin his first term), The flip side of his demanding the 6 be executed for sedition is that Trump wants the military to obey illegal orders and then resistance would be before the hand picked loyal JAGs? The Constitution is still supreme over the military code of justice....so back to the Supreme Court that Trump considers "his"?

From my FB posting 11/20/2025: The issue is if military enlisted personnel believe the orders given to them are unconstitutional or against the military code of justice, can they refuse? I found this site, which may be helpful. Basically, obey your commanding officer first and fight it out in court-martial. Usually, the burden is on the officer who gave the order in court-martial proceedings. I recall that Hitler's minions at Nuremberg were hanged, and their defense was "just following orders". Officers have the real burden, and if they disagree with the president's orders, they could resign their commissions. This first came to head when Trump discussed with Gen. Milley ordering the military to shoot the legs out of the black lives matter demonstrators. Milley refused.

Note in the article: when military law, the Universal Code of Military Justice, conflicts with the Constitution, the Constitution is the superior law.

https://nlgmltf.org/.../faq-on-refusing-illegal-orders/....

MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: Why General Milley is emerging as a hero who saved democracy, updated 8/9/22 . 9/28/23

theatlantic.com

Trump Floats the Idea of Executing Joint Chiefs Chairman Milley

The former president is inciting violence against the nation’s top general. America’s respo