TRUMP HANDS PUTIN EASTERN EUROPE

 In a dramatic and contentious meeting at the White House on February 28, 2025, President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky engaged in a heated exchange with significant implications for the balance of power in Eastern Europe. The confrontation not only strained U.S.-Ukraine relations but also appeared to grant Russian President Vladimir Putin a strategic advantage he has long sought in the region.​

A Contentious Encounter

The meeting, intended to solidify a partnership over Ukraine's valuable mineral resources, quickly became a confrontation. President Trump accused Zelensky of being ungrateful for U.S. support and not genuinely pursuing peace. Vice President JD Vance echoed these sentiments, leading to a tense atmosphere that culminated in the cancellation of a planned press conference and the signing of the economic partnership agreement. ​

Aligning with Moscow

In the lead-up to this meeting, President Trump had engaged in discussions with President Putin, signaling a shift in U.S. foreign policy. Trump's rhetoric suggested a willingness to negotiate directly with Russia, even at the potential expense of Ukrainian sovereignty. This approach has been perceived by many as a concession to Russian interests, effectively granting Putin greater influence over Eastern Europe. 

Implications for Eastern Europe

The apparent U.S. pivot towards Russia has raised alarms across Eastern Europe. Countries that were once confident in American support now face uncertainty. Nations such as Poland and the Baltic states, which have historically been wary of Russian aggression, may feel compelled to reassess their security strategies. The potential reduction of U.S. involvement in the region could embolden Russia to exert more pressure on neighboring countries, destabilizing the region further.​

A Strategic Misstep

Critics argue President Trump's approach has inadvertently influenced Putin's strategic objectives. By sidelining Ukraine and its European allies in negotiations, the U.S. risks undermining the established international order and emboldening authoritarian regimes. This shift threatens the sovereignty of nations in Eastern Europe and challenges the unity and credibility of Western alliances. ​

Conclusion

The fallout from the Trump-Zelensky meeting marks a pivotal moment in Eastern European geopolitics. As the U.S. appears to realign its foreign policy, the region's stability hangs in the balance. The coming months will be critical in determining whether Eastern Europe can withstand the pressures of renewed Russian influence or if the strategic concessions will lead to a broader shift in the global power structure.​

William James Spriggs

TWO GREEDY LITTLE MEN

The Greedy Little Men

Two little men with hands so small,
Dreamed of a world where they owned it all.
Gold in their pockets, schemes in their eyes,
They built their empire on whispers and lies.

They spoke to the lost, the angry, the blind,
Filling their heads with the filth of their mind.
“We are your saviors, we’ll make you great,”
While stealing their futures and locking their fate.

One man, a jester, loud and obscene,
Drunk on his power, a madman's dream.
The other, a shadow, cunning and sly,
Pulling the strings as the people comply.

They fed on division, they thrived on the hate,
Turning the land into factions of fate.
They silenced the truth, they gutted the laws,
Crowning themselves as the kings of the cause.

The courts became puppets, the press turned to dust,
Justice was shackled, its sword left to rust.
They sold off the land, the air, and the sea,
Their greed had no borders, their reign had no plea.

And when the dust settled, the banners unfurled,
Two greedy little men had conquered the world.
But power is fleeting, a crown made of sand,
And soon they would learn no empire can stand.

For greed is a poison, a venomous art,
That devours the soul and rots from the heart.
And though they may rise, they all fall in the end,
For history buries the tyrants of men.

William James Spriggs

CONSTITUTIONAL COLLAPSE

The Road to Constitutional Collapse: The Case for a Counter-Coup

In the spring of 2024, we raised the alarm. We saw Project 2025 for what it was: a blueprint for destroying American democracy. We wrote articles, sent warnings to those in power, including the President and Vice President, and clearly stated that Trump’s eligibility should be challenged to avoid catastrophe.

No one listened.

Now, as we enter 2025, the catastrophe has arrived. What was once a warning is now a reality: Trump has returned to power, and the constitutional crisis we feared unfolds before our eyes. He will ignore the law, bend the courts to his will, and render Congress powerless. The system of checks and balances, America’s last defense against tyranny, will be dismantled, leaving Trump as the government's sole authority.

The signs are everywhere. Trump and his allies do not hide their ambitions. Project 2025 spells out their plan in plain language: replace career civil servants with loyalists, strip agencies of independence, weaponize the Department of Justice, and consolidate power under the Executive Branch. The legal system will be reshaped to serve one man’s interests. Dissenters will be purged. Democratic institutions will become tools of oppression.

And yet, where is the opposition? The Democratic Party, despite holding some power, is paralyzed, either too timid or too bureaucratic to mount meaningful resistance. Congress lacks the leadership and the will to fight. If not already compromised, the courts will face relentless attacks until they submit. And the people, many of whom still believe the system will correct itself, remain dangerously passive.

This is how democracy dies, not in an explosion, but in a slow suffocation.

What Comes Next?

The only way out of this is a counter-coup.

This is not a call made lightly. It recognizes the brutal reality we face: if Trump is allowed to consolidate power unopposed, there will be no elections in 2028, no peaceful transition of power, and the United States will be lost.

A counter-coup would require coordinated resistance from those still committed to the Constitution. Military and intelligence officials sworn to defend the country must recognize the threat and act accordingly. Judges, state governors, and legal scholars must refuse to comply with unconstitutional orders. Civil servants must resist attempts to co-opt their agencies. The people must be prepared to mobilize en masse, not with peaceful protests that will be ignored, but with strategic action that disrupts the machinery of autocracy.

This fight will require allies. The international community, notably the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and other democratic nations, must understand that what happens in America does not stay in America. A fascist U.S. government will embolden autocrats worldwide, undermining democracy everywhere. The world must be ready to apply pressure, provide support, and, if necessary, intervene to prevent the republic's final collapse.

We do not raise this alarm in haste, and we do not make this call without deep reflection. But the time for denial is over.

William James Spriggs

THE LITTLE MEN WHO WOULD BURN IT ALL DOWN

The Little Men Who Would Burn It All Down

Elon Musk and Donald Trump are not grand visionaries or masterminds of a new political order. They are not deep thinkers reshaping history. They are small, sociopathic men, driven by their own narcissistic pathologies, lashing out at a world they believe has wronged them. Their mission is not to build, improve, or innovate but to destroy.

These men do not operate from a coherent ideology or a structured political vision. They are not conservative, libertarian, or populist in any genuine sense. They do not serve the public interest or seek to uphold the American experiment. Their actions are purely reactionary, stemming from personal grievances and an insatiable thirst for power. Washington, D.C., the seat of government, law, and democratic order, stands in their way. And so, they seek to burn it down.

Trump’s disdain for democratic institutions is well-documented. His every move is centered on consolidating power, dismantling oversight, and placing himself above the law. His 2024 campaign is a revenge tour, promising dictatorship and the systematic dismantling of government agencies that dare to hold him accountable. He does not wish to reform Washington but to raze it to the ground.

Despite his public persona as a tech genius, Musk operates from a similarly destructive impulse. His erratic behavior, from enabling misinformation on his social media platform to undermining regulatory authorities, reveals a man whose primary goal is chaos. He harbors a deep resentment toward government and social structures that do not bend to his will. Like Trump, Musk views institutions not as mechanisms for collective good but as obstacles to his ego-driven ambitions.

These men share a fundamental characteristic: they do not care. They do not care about the Constitution, democracy, or the rule of law. They do not care about the economy, the well-being of ordinary citizens, or the country's future. They care only about their sense of power and their ability to wield destruction as a tool for personal validation.

And yet, their opposition remains timid. The institutions they seek to destroy still treat them as if they are normal political actors as if reasoned debate or legal processes will contain them. They will not. These men only understand force. They thrive on weakness, hesitation, and the naïve belief that democracy will somehow self-correct. It will not unless we make it.

It is time for real opposition, not polite disagreement, hand-wringing editorials, or procedural delays. It is time for the forces of democracy to organize in ways that truly matter. If necessary, we must seek support beyond our borders, as America once did when it faced existential threats. We must recognize that this is not a conventional political struggle but a fight for survival.

Trump and Musk are little men. For all their bluster, for all their posturing, they are weak. If confronted with enough resistance and enough organized power, they will cower. Bullies always do.

The only question is whether we will meet their aggression with the force necessary to stop them. The future of the republic depends on it.

William James Spriggs

MUSK'S DEBT REDUCTION FRAUD

Elon Musk’s Con Job: Slashing the Government to Feather the 1%’s Nest

Elon Musk is running one of the biggest cons in modern American history, and the public, blinded by his celebrity and faux “genius” status, is buying it. Under the guise of reducing the deficit, Musk is pushing for job cuts in government agencies and gutting government programs. But let’s be clear: these cuts won’t make a serious dent in the national debt. Instead, they serve one primary purpose: to pave the way for even more tax cuts for billionaires like himself.

The Debt Distraction

Like many of his billionaire allies, Musk points to the national debt as the great bogeyman of American politics. He claims that slashing government spending is necessary to restore the country's financial responsibility. But let’s be honest: cutting jobs and reducing public programs will do almost nothing to balance the budget. The debt problem is a convenient distraction, a sleight of hand designed to get the average American to support policies that harm them while benefiting the ultra-rich.

Consider this: if Musk were serious about reducing the deficit, he would advocate for the one thing that could actually make a difference: taxing himself and the 1%. Instead, he and his billionaire class fight tooth and nail against even the most modest attempts to ensure they pay their fair share.

The Real Way to Reduce the Deficit: Taxing the 1%

The first and most critical step in tackling the deficit isn’t slashing social programs, eliminating government jobs, or stripping federal agencies of resources. It’s tax reform. The ultra-wealthy have spent decades engineering a tax system that allows them to accumulate obscene wealth while the working and middle classes foot the bill.

If Musk and his allies were genuinely concerned about fiscal responsibility, they would advocate for:

• A progressive tax system that ensures billionaires don’t pay lower tax rates than teachers and nurses.
• Closing tax loopholes that allow corporations and the wealthy to dodge taxes by hiding money offshore.
• Ending tax breaks for billionaires who manipulate the system through stock buybacks, corporate deductions, and deferred capital gains.

The Immediate Impact of Fair Taxation

Rather than gutting government programs that help the middle class, the best way to reduce the deficit is through a targeted tax reform focusing on the ultra-rich. Consider the impact of these potential changes:

• Increasing the top marginal income tax to 50% on earnings above $10 million could generate $320 billion annually.
• Implementing a 2% wealth tax on fortunes above $50 million would raise $300 billion annually.
• Raising the corporate tax rate to 28% (a modest increase from the current rate) would add another $220 billion annually.
• Closing tax loopholes like the carried interest provision and offshore tax shelters would recover $150 billion annually.

These reforms alone would generate nearly $1 trillion per year, far exceeding the impact of Musk’s proposed spending cuts. Instead of cutting jobs and reducing services for working-class Americans, the country could fund education, infrastructure, and healthcare while making meaningful reductions to the deficit.

A Con Job on the American Public

Musk is not a financial savior; he’s a profiteer. He understands that if the public can be made to focus on spending cuts rather than tax fairness, he and his billionaire friends can continue to hoard wealth unchecked. It’s a classic con: create a crisis, propose a solution that benefits yourself, and convince people that you’re their champion while you rob them blind.

Sadly, much of the American public is falling for it. The right-wing propaganda machine has convinced millions that cutting government jobs and programs is the responsible thing to do, even as billionaires extract record-breaking wealth from the economy.

What Needs to Happen

The only responsible path forward is to demand a tax system that works for most Americans. That means:

• Higher taxes on billionaires who have gotten away with financial murder for too long.
• Reinvestment in public infrastructure and services that benefit the many, not just the privileged few.
• An end to corporate welfare that hands out billions in subsidies while gutting programs that help ordinary people.

Musk’s “deficit reduction” strategy is a fraud, and it’s time for Americans to wake up. Real fiscal responsibility starts with making the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share—not punishing the 99% to further enrich the 1%.

William James Spriggs

COMPENDIUM OF ARTICLES ON MORALITY

 

https://wspriggs2.blogspot.com/search?q=morality

 

IN PRAISE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

The Federal Government: Essential, Beneficial, and Irreplaceable

For decades, anti-government forces have worked to dismantle the very institution that makes America function. Now, with Trump and his allies gearing up for another round of devastating budget cuts, it is imperative that we recognize just how much the federal government does for us and why we cannot afford to lose its services.

Their justification? The illusion of fraud, waste, and abuse. The reality? These claims are primarily fabricated to justify slashing programs that benefit ordinary Americans, all in the name of funneling more wealth to billionaires through tax cuts. When we weigh the tangible benefits of government against this deceptive rhetoric, the truth becomes clear: the federal government is not the problem; it is the backbone of a stable, functional, and prosperous society.

What the Federal Government Does for Us

The federal government provides various essential services that affect every aspect of American life. Here are just a few of the critical functions it performs:

1. National Security and Defense

• The U.S. military ensures our safety from foreign threats.
• Federal law enforcement agencies, such as the FBI, CIA, and Homeland Security, protect against terrorism, cybercrime, and espionage.
• The National Guard responds to natural disasters and civil emergencies.

2. Social Security and Medicare

• Millions of seniors rely on Social Security for their retirement income.
• Medicare provides critical healthcare for the elderly and disabled.
• Medicaid ensures low-income families have access to medical care.

3. Infrastructure and Transportation

• The federal government funds highways, bridges, and public transportation.
• The FAA regulates air traffic safety, preventing catastrophic airline disasters.
• Amtrak and other federal transportation programs connect cities and boost economic activity.

4. Public Health and Safety

• The CDC fights pandemics, researches diseases, and prevents outbreaks.
• The FDA ensures that our food and medicine are safe.
• The EPA enforces regulations that protect air and water quality, preventing environmental disasters.

5. Education and Scientific Advancement

• The Department of Education provides funding for schools and student loans.
• NASA leads space exploration and technological innovation.
• The National Institutes of Health (NIH) funds lifesaving medical research.

6. Disaster Relief and Emergency Response

• FEMA aids communities struck by hurricanes, wildfires, and other disasters.
• Federal funds help rebuild infrastructure after catastrophic events.

7. Consumer and Worker Protections

• The SEC regulates Wall Street to prevent financial fraud and market crashes.
• The Department of Labor enforces fair wages, workplace safety, and labor rights.
• The Consumer Product Safety Commission ensures products on the market are safe.

8. Veterans Services

• The VA provides healthcare, education, and housing assistance to veterans.
• Federal programs help veterans transition to civilian life.

9. Economic Stability and Innovation

• The Federal Reserve stabilizes inflation and prevents economic collapse.
• Small Business Administration (SBA) loans help entrepreneurs create jobs.
• Federal agencies fund research that fuels technological advancement.

10. National Parks and Public Lands

• The National Park Service preserves America’s natural beauty for future generations.
• Federal protections prevent the exploitation of public lands by corporate interests.

The Myth of Fraud, Waste, and Abuse

The primary justification for these draconian budget cuts is the claim that the federal government is riddled with fraud, waste, and abuse. This lie is designed to justify slashing programs that help everyday Americans while preserving tax breaks for the wealthy.

Here’s the reality:

• Government programs have strict oversight and accountability measures.
• Studies consistently show that fraud in federal programs is minimal.
• The real "waste" comes from tax loopholes that allow billionaires and corporations to avoid paying their fair share.

When these so-called “budget hawks” talk about saving money, they are not talking about cutting defense spending or closing corporate tax loopholes. They are targeting programs that keep Americans alive and thriving.

Who Really Benefits from These Cuts?

The answer is simple: the ultra-wealthy and their political enablers.

• The proposed cuts would gut social services while giving billionaires more tax breaks.
• Healthcare, education, and infrastructure would suffer while corporate profits soar.
• The average American would lose critical services while the richest 1% hoard even more wealth.

This is not about fiscal responsibility—it is about power and control.

The Bottom Line: Government Works for Us, Not Just the Rich

The federal government is not the enemy. It is a collective institution that serves the people's interests, providing security, stability, and opportunity. The real danger is allowing those who seek to destroy it for personal gain to succeed.

It is time to defend the government that works for us, reject the false narratives of fraud and waste, and recognize that when we invest in America, we all benefit. If we allow these essential services to be gutted, it will not be the wealthy who suffer; it will be the working class, the elderly, the sick, and the vulnerable. Once these services are gone, they will be nearly impossible to restore.

The question is simple: will we fight for the government that serves the people, or will we allow billionaires to dismantle it for their benefit? The future of America depends on the answer.

William James Spriggs

ROLLING OVER NOT AN OPTION

Rolling Over is Not an Option: A Blueprint for Resistance

There is a troubling notion circulating that opposition to Donald Trump should simply roll over and play dead, as if resignation and apathy are viable strategies against authoritarianism. This fatalistic approach suggests that by offering no resistance, Trump’s movement might self-destruct under the weight of its own corruption and incompetence. However, history demonstrates that successful resistance movements have never been won by submission; rather, they have been waged through relentless defiance, strategic opposition, and unwavering unity.

Lessons from History: The Power of Resistance

Throughout history, the most successful movements have been those that refused to stand down. Consider the following examples:

1. The Civil Rights Movement (1950s-1960s): If Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, and thousands of activists had merely accepted the status quo, segregation and racial oppression would have persisted unchecked. Instead, they organized marches, staged boycotts, and pursued legal challenges, ultimately forcing a nation to confront its sins.
2. The American Revolution (1775-1783): The colonists did not "roll over and play dead" when faced with British tyranny. They engaged in protest, formed militias, and, when necessary, waged war for their independence.
3. The Anti-Apartheid Movement (1948-1994): Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress (ANC) did not capitulate to the oppressive South African regime. They fought through protest, international advocacy, and economic sanctions and ultimately dismantled apartheid.
4. The Women’s Suffrage Movement (19th-20th century): Suffragists endured arrest, force-feedings, and police brutality in their fight for the right to vote. Their refusal to be silent ultimately changed the course of history.
5. The Resistance Against Fascism in World War II: The French Resistance, British forces, and American troops did not sit idly by while Hitler expanded his empire. They fought relentlessly to defeat one of the most dangerous autocratic threats in history.

The Blueprint for Resistance Today

Just as past movements demanded an active and organized fight, we must deploy every possible means of resistance to counter Trumpism and its assault on democracy. Here are the most effective ways to fight back:

1. Legal Warfare

Lawsuits and legal challenges must be pursued at every turn. As Trump’s administration attempts to dismantle government institutions, rewrite laws, and suppress opposition, every unconstitutional act must be met with immediate litigation. Organizations such as the ACLU, NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and others should be supported to challenge authoritarian overreach.

2. Mass Mobilization and Protests

From the Women’s March to Black Lives Matter, public demonstrations remain a powerful tool. Large-scale, coordinated protests keep issues at the forefront, demonstrate public dissent, and disrupt authoritarian attempts to establish unchecked control.

3. Economic Pressure

Businesses and corporations that support Trump’s agenda must be boycotted. Public pressure campaigns have worked in the past, as seen in South Africa during apartheid and with corporate retreats from anti-democratic policies in the U.S.

4. Media and Information Warfare

Trump and his allies thrive on misinformation. Countering propaganda with relentless fact-checking, investigative journalism, and grassroots information campaigns is essential. Supporting independent journalism and ensuring the truth reaches the public must be a priority.

5. Political Action and Election Defense

Voter suppression is a core strategy of the MAGA movement. Protecting voting rights through advocacy, monitoring elections for fraud and suppression tactics, and encouraging voter turnout are crucial. Every state and local race matters.

6. Grassroots Community Building

Resistance is strongest when it is rooted in local communities. Organizing at the local level, through town halls, activist groups, and neighborhood coalitions, builds the foundation for national movements.

7. Government Resistance from Within

Government workers, civil servants, and military officers must uphold their constitutional oaths and resist illegal or unethical orders. Whistleblowers must be protected and encouraged to expose corruption and abuses of power.

The Stakes Have Never Been Higher

Rolling over and playing dead is not an option when facing the possibility of an authoritarian takeover. The stakes are clear: democracy, civil liberties, and the very foundation of the nation. The battle against Trumpism must be fought on every front, politically, legally, socially, and economically.

History says otherwise to those who believe resistance is futile. The only way to defeat authoritarianism is through relentless, unyielding opposition. The time to fight is now, and the time to unite is immediate. If we do not, we risk forever losing the democracy we once knew.

William James Spriggs

FIGHT!

No Compromise: Fighting Back Against Trump’s Assault on America

There is no middle ground, no compromise, no "working with" the forces of destruction. Those who oppose Donald Trump and his minions must take a stand on every issue, at every turn, with unwavering resolve. Appeasement is complicity. Silence is cowardice. Hesitation is betrayal.

This is not just another political fight. This is a battle for the very survival of American democracy, the rule of law, and the fundamental values that make this country worth saving. Trump and his enablers have made it clear: they intend to dismantle the federal government, replace it with a machine of loyalists, and weaponize the system against anyone who dares to oppose them. They want a country where corruption thrives, where justice is perverted, where facts are irrelevant, and where power belongs only to those willing to destroy democracy itself.

We must resist on every front. Every single issue must be opposed because every single issue under Trump is an attack on the principles of a free and just society. No “good” policy is hidden in his administration's wreckage. There is no redeeming quality to his governance. From international relations to domestic affairs, from the economy to the functioning of government itself, everything has been corrupted, twisted, and broken for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many.

We must say NO, unequivocally, unapologetically, and without exception.

• NO to every Trump nominee, from cabinet secretaries to federal judges to agency heads. Anyone who stands with Trump must be opposed because they are complicit in his destruction.
• NO to any policy proposal that bears his name, no matter how deceptively framed. If he supports it, it benefits him and his cronies, not the American people.
• NO to normalization. The media, businesses, and individuals must not treat him as just another politician. He is a criminal, a traitor, and an existential threat to America’s future.
• NO to personal complacency. Those in our lives who enable Trump, whether out of ignorance, greed, or blind loyalty, must be made to understand that their choices have consequences. If they choose to support a man who seeks to destroy democracy, then they are no different from him.

This is not about policy disagreements. This concerns whether America remains a democracy or falls into the hands of a power-hungry autocrat. History will judge what we do in this moment. Will we be the generation that lets fascism take hold in America? Or will we be the force that stops it, fights back, and reclaims our country from the abyss?

The fight is now, on every front. And in this fight, there can be no laggard, hesitation, or retreat. If we do not resist with everything we have, in total unity, there will be no America left to save.

William James Spriggs

TOUGH TIMES: TOUGH SOLUTIONS

The Erosion of American Democracy and the Case for a New Constitutional Convention

For decades, the erosion of democracy in the United States has been slow but steady. Perhaps it can be traced back to the Reagan era when deregulation and the privileging of corporate interests over the common good began shifting power away from the people and toward an elite class. However, there is no question that today, democracy is on the run, thanks to the coordinated efforts of Donald Trump and his allies, who have systematically sought to undermine democratic institutions and establish an oligarchy.

Billionaires like Elon Musk, with immense wealth but limited insight into governance, have only exacerbated this trend. The "dumbing down" of America has resulted in a system where wealth dictates power, effectively replacing democracy with an oligarchic rule. And if this trend is not reversed, it appears that this new power structure is here to stay.

The Need for a New Constitutional Convention

So, what can be done? What should be done?

One of the most radical but necessary solutions is to convene a new Constitutional Convention to rewrite the U.S. Constitution. Though revolutionary, the founding document is now outdated and riddled with amendments that often are misinterpreted, forming an inconsistent and confusing legal structure.

The fundamental values of democracy, freedom, equality, and justice remain essential. Still, they need to be rearticulated to ensure a clear and enforceable framework of rights for all members of society. Such a revised constitution must include:

• A clearly defined right to bodily autonomy, ensuring that individuals have full control over decisions regarding their physical selves.
• The unequivocal right to vote, protected against any form of suppression, with measures ensuring that every vote is counted fairly and accurately.
• The right to public safety, including the ability to curb the proliferation of weapons designed to kill indiscriminately.
• The elimination of institutions enabling privilege-based governance, such as the Senate and the Electoral College, both undermine democratic representation.

How Can This Change Be Achieved?

The path to a new Constitutional Convention is neither simple nor peaceful. The current regime, structured to protect those in power, must first be dismantled. The fundamental question, then, is how? Historically, no ruling class has willingly surrendered its power. Change of this magnitude has typically come through revolution, whether peaceful or violent.

One controversial but often-discussed mechanism for radical change is a military intervention. History offers examples of military coups that have claimed to return power to the people, though the outcomes vary widely.

Historical Instances of Military Coups Restoring Democracy

• Portugal’s Carnation Revolution (1974): The Portuguese military overthrew the Estado Novo dictatorship, restoring democracy and leading to a new constitution that enshrined civil liberties.
• Turkey (1960, 1980, 1997): Turkey has seen multiple coups, some of which led to a temporary restoration of democratic governance, though they were often followed by further instability.
• Egypt’s Arab Spring (2011): The military ousted Hosni Mubarak, leading to democratic elections, but ultimately, the military retained control and democracy was short-lived.
• Chile (1973): Though the coup led by Augusto Pinochet was initially framed as restoring order, it resulted in decades of brutal dictatorship rather than democracy.

The lesson from these examples is that while military coups can sometimes lead to democratic reforms, they often do not. More often than not, they replace one form of authoritarian rule with another.

Another Path Forward

Rather than relying on a military coup, the American people must seek a more sustainable path to systemic reform. This requires:

1. Mass Mobilization: Large-scale civic engagement, including protests, strikes, and legal action, to pressure those in power to acknowledge the need for reform.
2. Political Overhaul: The election of leaders who prioritize democratic principles and are willing to rewrite the Constitution in favor of true equality and representation.
3. Constitutional Amendments or Convention: If reforming the existing Constitution is too cumbersome, a new Constitutional Convention must be convened to rewrite it from the ground up.
4. Public Awareness and Education: A populace that understands its rights and the dangers of oligarchy is essential for maintaining a healthy democracy.

Good luck with that.

The American experiment is at a crossroads. The forces of oligarchy have entrenched themselves deeply, and democracy is in retreat. Change must come, whether through peaceful reform or more radical action. The Constitution, revered but outdated, must be rewritten to reflect modern realities and the needs of all citizens.

Democracy must be fought for if it is to survive. The question now is whether the American people are willing to engage in that fight before it is too late.

William James Spriggs

QUIT WATCHING CNN

The Elusive Truth: CNN Fails to Push Back on the Corporate Takeover

In a time when the truth is more elusive than ever, it is becoming increasingly clear that mainstream media, once seen as a bastion of reliable reporting, is failing in its duty. This is more apparent than at CNN, which has chosen to toe the line on the so-called "reform" efforts championed by figures like Donald Trump and Elon Musk.

CNN has accepted, without critical examination, the premise that massive layoffs across government and private industry are justified by the existence of “fraud, waste, and abuse.” They argue only about the speed and precision of these cuts rather than challenging the foundational assumption behind them. But that assumption itself is a deception. The idea that fraud, waste, and abuse are so rampant that entire agencies need to be gutted is a narrative designed to consolidate power, cripple government oversight, and enrich the oligarchs who stand to benefit from a weaker regulatory state.

The Truth About Fraud, Waste, and Abuse

Let’s be clear: fraud, waste, and abuse do exist. But they are not the pervasive crises that demand a wholesale dismantling of institutions. That’s why we have systems, inspectors general, auditors, and whistleblower protections to uncover and address these issues. If those systems are insufficient, the answer is not to burn the house down but to strengthen our existing safeguards. More oversight, not less. More investigators, not mass firings.

Yet, CNN and other mainstream outlets do not start from this fundamental reality. Instead, they accept, without evidence, the notion that bureaucracies are inherently bloated and must be trimmed to the bone. They parrot the talking points of those who gain the most from gutting public institutions, presenting the conversation as one of efficiency rather than a systematic assault on democratic governance.

The Real Goal: Corporate Takeover and Wealth Extraction

This is not about eliminating inefficiency. It is about power and profit. The same billionaire class that decries "big government" has no problem demanding taxpayer bailouts when their own fortunes are at risk. They want deregulation not because it benefits society but because it enables them to operate unchecked. They want fewer civil servants because civil servants act as guardrails against corruption.

Trump and Musk are not interested in reforming systems for the public good; they are interested in removing obstacles to their own dominance. By failing to challenge this false premise, CNN becomes complicit in its agenda.

Where to Find the Truth

If CNN is not a reliable source for challenging these dangerous narratives, where can people turn? Journalists and independent publications, places like ProPublica, The Guardian, and The Atlantic, among others, are doing real investigative work. Some Substack writers and nonprofit investigative groups are doing better work than cable news networks.

The key is to seek sources that start with a commitment to facts, not with assumptions designed to justify corporate and authoritarian overreach. We cannot be manipulated into believing that mass layoffs and the destruction of public institutions are necessary evils. Instead, we must insist on real oversight, accountability, and commitment to the public good.

CNN has lost its way. The question is, will the American people wake up before it’s too late?

William James Spriggs

EQUITABLE TAX SYSTEM

Why America Must Restore a Truly Progressive Tax System

The American tax system has become a national disgrace—an albatross around the necks of working- and middle-class citizens while the ultra-wealthy accumulate obscene levels of wealth, paying a fraction of their fair share. We once had a progressive tax system to ensure that those who benefit the most from society’s resources contribute proportionately. That system has been gutted, perverted, and ultimately reversed into a de facto regressive system, where the poor and middle class pay the lion’s share while billionaires escape virtually unscathed.

Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, European nations have demonstrated how progressive taxation fuels a thriving, equitable society. It’s time the United States stopped acting like a third-world oligarchy and started taking lessons from the rest of the developed world.

The Roots of Progressive Taxation and Its Betrayal

The United States didn’t always have an income tax, let alone a progressive one. In its early days, revenue was generated through tariffs and excise taxes, highly regressive mechanisms that disproportionately burdened those with lower incomes. That changed with the Civil War-era Revenue Act of 1862, which introduced a modestly progressive income tax to finance the war effort. Later, the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913 solidified the federal government’s ability to levy income taxes, paving the way for a truly progressive system.

At its peak, during the mid-20th century, the U.S. had a tax system that ensured the wealthy paid their fair share. In the 1950s, under Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, the top marginal tax rate was a staggering 91%—and guess what? The economy thrived. The United States built the interstate highway system, expanded access to education, and lifted millions into the middle class. This was not a period of economic decline but a golden era of prosperity.

Then came the betrayal. Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts in the 1980s marked the beginning of the end for severe progressive taxation. The top tax rate plummeted from 70% to 28%, shifting the burden downward. The neoliberal gospel of “trickle-down economics” was sold to the American people like snake oil, promising that tax cuts for the rich would magically benefit everyone. Instead, wages stagnated, wealth inequality skyrocketed, and the American dream began its slow death spiral.

The American System Is Now Regressive—By Design

Today, America’s tax system is regressive in all but name. While the federal income tax remains mildly progressive, it is riddled with loopholes, deductions, and credits that overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy. However, the real injustice happens at the state and local levels, where reliance on sales, property, and payroll taxes disproportionately hits lower-income earners.

Consider this: in states like Texas and Florida—both of which pride themselves on having no state income tax—the tax burden falls disproportionately on the poor and middle class. Why? These states rely heavily on sales and excise taxes, which take a much larger share of income from low earners than from the wealthy.

An Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) study found that the poorest 20% of households in the most regressive states pay tax rates up to seven times higher than the richest 1%. The billionaire class, meanwhile, pays next to nothing, thanks to tax shelters, capital gains loopholes, and offshore accounts.

Europe’s Tax Model: A Blueprint for Fairness

Across Europe, many nations have refused to buy into the American-style neoliberal tax scam. Instead, they maintain strong progressive tax systems that fund universal healthcare, tuition-free education, robust infrastructure, and generous social programs while maintaining economic growth and innovation.

Take Denmark, where the top income tax rate is around 55%—and yet Denmark consistently ranks among the happiest nations in the world. Why? Because tax revenue is invested back into society, ensuring free healthcare, paid parental leave, and world-class public transportation.

Look at Germany, where corporate tax rates are higher than in the U.S., yet German businesses remain globally competitive. Unlike in America, where large corporations pay little to nothing in taxes while receiving massive subsidies, German corporations contribute to the well-being of the nation as a whole.

Even France, often derided by American conservatives, has a tax system that ensures the wealthiest contribute fairly. A wealth tax on high-net-worth individuals complements their progressive tax brackets, something the U.S. refuses even to consider.

The Path Forward: A Tax System That Works for the People

It’s time to reject the propaganda of the billionaire class and demand a tax system that works for the majority of Americans. Here’s what needs to happen:

1. Restore Higher Marginal Tax Rates – The ultra-rich must pay their fair share again. A top rate of at least 70% on incomes over $10 million is not extreme; it’s what worked before, and it can work again.
2. Close Loopholes and Tax Wealth – The real money isn’t in income taxes; it’s in wealth. We need a wealth tax on billionaires and higher capital gains taxes to ensure that investment income is taxed at least as much as wages.
3. Federalize and Equalize State Taxation – States that rely on sales and excise taxes must be reined in. The federal government should incentivize progressive state tax structures, ensuring fairness across all states.
4. Crack Down on Corporate Tax Evasion—There should be no more offshore loopholes or subsidies for billion-dollar companies. A minimum corporate tax rate of 25% should be enforced.

America Must Choose: Progress or Oligarchy

A progressive tax system is not just about fairness but survival. If we continue down this path of regressive taxation, where the rich get richer while the working class struggles to afford basic necessities, we are setting the stage for a social and economic collapse.

We can either restore a tax system that prioritizes the well-being of all Americans, or we can continue subsidizing billionaires and corporate greed while the nation crumbles. The choice is ours.

William James Spriggs

THE OPPOSITION LEADER

The Opposition Needs a Leader: Why Mike Pence is the Only Real Choice

The United States is in the midst of a political crisis, and with the threat of authoritarianism looming, the question must be asked. Who will lead the opposition? The Democratic Party, despite its best intentions, has failed to present a credible counterforce to the radicalized Republican Party that now bears little resemblance to the party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, or even Reagan. The opposition needs a leader who can reach beyond the usual partisan lines and appeal to the real Republican Party, the one that once valued constitutional principles over blind loyalty to a single man. That leader, unlikely as it may seem, could be Mike Pence.

A Bridge to the Old Republican Party

For all his faults, Mike Pence carries something that no Democrat or progressive leader can, a deep-rooted credibility within the conservative movement. He was once a favorite among traditional Republicans, a steady hand who could quote Ronald Reagan and talk about fiscal responsibility without being laughed out of the room. The Republican Party, before Trump and his sycophants hijacked it, prided itself on law, order, and reverence for the Constitution. If there is to be a movement to reclaim the party and return it to its foundational values, it must be led by someone with credibility among conservatives.

Pence demonstrated his allegiance to the Constitution over personal loyalty in his most defining moment. On January 6, 2021, he refused to bend to the mob and reject the electoral votes, an act that could have plunged the country into a constitutional crisis. He upheld the rule of law when it mattered most. That moment alone gives him the moral authority to challenge the rising tide of authoritarianism within his own party.

An Evangelical Who Can Speak to Evangelicals

One of the most critical barriers to forming an effective opposition to Trumpism is the unwavering loyalty of evangelical Christians to the MAGA movement. Trump has courted the religious right with empty promises, appointing conservative justices and championing their causes despite his own blatant moral failures. The only figure who could credibly challenge Trump’s grip on evangelical voters is someone who speaks their language, and that person is Mike Pence.

Pence has built his entire political career on his faith. Unlike Trump, who cynically wields religion for political gain, Pence genuinely believes in the principles he preaches. If he were to step forward as the leader of the opposition, he could make the case that the evangelical movement must return to moral leadership, not blind allegiance to a man who represents the antithesis of their faith.

The Truman Comparison: A Reluctant Leader Who Rose to the Moment

Mike Pence may not seem the natural choice to lead a political resistance, but history has shown that the most effective leaders often emerge from unexpected places. Harry Truman was once dismissed as an unremarkable politician, a placeholder vice president who suddenly led the nation at one of its most crucial moments. He was underestimated, yet he rose to the occasion and became one of the most consequential presidents in American history.

Like Truman, Pence may not exude the charisma or boldness of a traditional opposition leader. But he has a foundation of credibility, experience, and a deep understanding of the constituencies that must be won over to defeat Trumpism. If he wishes, he could define himself as a continuation of the role he once played, to protect and defend the Constitution, not as Trump’s vice president but as the leader of a principled opposition.

The Question of Willingness

The real question is whether Mike Pence wants to assume this role. So far, he has largely faded into the background, unwilling to fully challenge the forces that now control his party. However, he must step forward if he recognizes the danger of a second Trump presidency and truly believes in the values he has long claimed to uphold.

The opposition needs a leader, and Mike Pence is the only one who can credibly reclaim the soul of the Republican Party and counter the dangerous rise of authoritarianism. The time for hesitation is over. He must lead if he is serious about his oath to the Constitution.

William James Spriggs

DRAFT SUIT AGAINST ELON MUSK

The suit against Musk would argue that his direct influence over governmental policies, tax structures, and regulatory decisions has led to tangible harm by reducing essential services.

Potential legal theories:

1. Public Nuisance – Musk’s advocacy and financial backing of defunding efforts have created unsafe conditions for the public.
2. Negligence/Reckless Endangerment—Musk has knowingly increased public risk by pushing for regulatory rollbacks and defunding.
3. Tortious Interference with Government Functions – Musk’s influence has obstructed essential government services, leading to direct harm.
4. Wrongful Death/Personal Injury – If deaths or injuries can be linked to his policies, those affected could sue under wrongful death laws.

Potential Plaintiffs:

• Families of individuals who died due to emergency response delays.
• People harmed by increased crime due to police layoffs.
• Fire victims whose homes were lost due to reduced fire services.
• Patients harmed by overwhelmed or underfunded healthcare systems.

Pro Forma Complaint Against Elon Musk

COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

[Jurisdiction TBD: Federal or State Court]

Plaintiffs:
[List of affected individuals, estates, or organizations]

Defendant:
Elon Musk, individually and as CEO of various enterprises

COMPLAINT FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE, NEGLIGENCE, AND WRONGFUL DEATH/PERSONAL INJURY

INTRODUCTION

1. This is an action for damages and injunctive relief against Elon Musk for his reckless and intentional actions that have resulted in substantial harm to public safety.
2. Through his direct influence over government policies, corporate lobbying efforts, and public statements, Musk has advocated for and actively contributed to the weakening of federal law enforcement agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and other essential federal agencies responsible for public safety, national security, and cybersecurity.

JURISDICTION & VENUE

3. This Court has jurisdiction under [appropriate statutes, e.g., diversity jurisdiction if multiple states involved].
4. Venue is proper in [location where harm occurred or where Musk has significant influence, e.g., California, Texas, or another affected state].

PARTIES

5. Plaintiffs are individuals and families who have suffered physical, emotional, and financial harm due to the Defendant’s actions.
6. Defendant Elon Musk is a private citizen, billionaire, and CEO of multiple enterprises, including Tesla, SpaceX, and X (formerly Twitter), who has used his influence to advocate for the weakening of essential government agencies, thereby compromising public safety and national security.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

7. Defendant Musk has publicly criticized, undermined, and contributed to efforts aimed at dismantling federal law enforcement agencies, particularly the FBI.
8. Defendant has actively supported political initiatives and individuals who have worked to defund, discredit, and reduce the effectiveness of federal agencies responsible for investigating corporate fraud, cybercrime, and threats to national security.
9. As a result of Musk’s actions, the FBI, federal regulatory bodies, and key public safety agencies have suffered staff reductions, budget constraints, and decreased effectiveness, leaving the public vulnerable to crime, fraud, and national security threats.
10. Plaintiffs have suffered harm as a direct result of these actions, including (a) increased cyber threats due to weakened federal oversight, (b) loss of critical protections from financial and corporate fraud, (c) increased risk of domestic and foreign terrorism due to a weakened FBI, and (d) compromised national security due to the dismantling of regulatory agencies.

CAUSES OF ACTION

COUNT I – PUBLIC NUISANCE

11. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference all prior paragraphs as if fully stated herein.
12. Defendant’s actions in advocating for the weakening of federal law enforcement and public safety agencies have created an ongoing public nuisance by increasing risks to public security, cybersecurity, and financial stability.
13. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiffs have suffered injuries including economic loss, emotional distress, and increased exposure to criminal activity.

Relief Sought:

• Declaratory judgment that Musk’s actions have contributed to public harm.
• Injunctive relief requiring Musk to cease funding anti-government initiatives that undermine federal law enforcement.

COUNT II – NEGLIGENCE & RECKLESS ENDANGERMENT

14. Defendant owed a duty to exercise reasonable care in his influence over public policy and governmental functions that protect public safety.
15. Defendant breached that duty by knowingly advocating for policies that have made communities, national security, and the economy more vulnerable, resulting in foreseeable harm.
16. As a result of Defendant’s reckless actions, Plaintiffs have suffered economic loss, exposure to cybercrime, increased financial fraud risks, and threats to physical safety.

Relief Sought:

• Compensatory damages for economic harm and increased security risks.
• Punitive damages to deter Defendant from continued reckless behavior.

COUNT III – WRONGFUL DEATH (IF APPLICABLE)

17. Certain Plaintiffs bring this claim under wrongful death statutes as representatives of deceased individuals who lost their lives due to reduced federal law enforcement capabilities.
18. Defendant’s actions directly contributed to the conditions that caused the death of the decedents.

Relief Sought:

• Wrongful death compensation for families of deceased victims.
• Injunction to prevent further efforts to weaken federal law enforcement.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court:
A. Award compensatory damages for economic loss, increased security risks, and personal harm.
B. Award punitive damages due to Defendant's actions' egregious and reckless nature.
C. Issue an injunction preventing Musk from funding anti-government initiatives that harm federal law enforcement and national security.
D. Award any other relief this Court deems just and equitable.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

Dated: [Insert Date]
Respectfully submitted,
[Plaintiff’s Attorney Name]
[Law Firm Name]
[Contact Information]

William James Spriggs

 

SUE ELON MUSK

This article explores how we could sue Elon Musk for his tortious behavior.

1. What Torts Could Be Alleged?

• Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED): This would require proving Musk’s conduct was extreme and outrageous, intended to cause distress, and did cause severe emotional harm. Public statements, social media actions, and business decisions might be used, but courts often set a high bar for IIED.
• Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress (NIED): If Musk’s conduct can be shown as reckless or careless, and it foreseeably caused harm, there might be a claim. However, NIED often requires a physical impact or close proximity to a traumatic event.
• Tortious Interference with Business or Contract: If individuals or businesses lost contracts or suffered economic damage due to Musk’s deliberate actions (e.g., his influence on Twitter policies harming employees, former staff, or advertisers), this might be a strong avenue.
• Defamation: If specific people or businesses were falsely harmed by Musk’s public statements (e.g., accusing someone of fraud, criminal activity, or incompetence), a defamation suit could have merit.
• Breach of Fiduciary Duty / Shareholder Lawsuits: If Tesla or SpaceX shareholders lost significant value due to Musk’s erratic behavior, they might have standing for derivative suits.
• Violation of SEC Rules & Stock Manipulation: Musk’s tweets and business statements have already drawn SEC scrutiny. A securities fraud case might be viable if investors lose money due to misleading or false statements.

2. Legal Hurdles

• First Amendment Defense: Musk’s public statements, especially on social media, may be shielded under free speech protections unless they involve defamation or direct incitement of harm.
• Causation Issues: Proving direct harm from Musk’s actions would require showing a clear link between his conduct and financial/emotional damage, which can be challenging.
• Class Action Certification: If pursuing a group lawsuit, plaintiffs need common harm and legal grounds. This might be difficult given the varied ways people are affected by Musk’s behavior.
• Jurisdiction & Venue: Where to file would be crucial, federal court versus state court, and whether the claims fall under contract law, tort law, or regulatory statutes.

3. Possible Paths Forward

• Securities & Shareholder Lawsuits: This has precedent. Musk has been sued for stock manipulation and misleading investors before.
• Employment & Contractual Claims: Laid-off workers, advertisers, and others impacted by his actions (e.g., X/Twitter firings, cancellations) might have viable claims.
• Strategic State-Based Claims: Some jurisdictions have stronger consumer protection or defamation laws that could be leveraged.

4. Would It Work?

• It could work, but it would require strategic plaintiff selection, clear-cut harm, and strong evidence tying Musk’s conduct directly to damages.
• If the goal is accountability rather than financial recovery, public lawsuits (even if unsuccessful) could pressure Musk and bring regulatory attention.

 Another argument would be that Musk’s actions have resulted in widespread harm by weakening essential public services, creating foreseeable risks to public safety, health, and welfare. This would be a novel approach in tort law, but it’s worth exploring. Here are some potential theories of liability and challenges:

1. Possible Legal Theories

A. Public Nuisance

• Claim: Musk’s actions (such as pushing for eliminating regulatory agencies, spreading misinformation, or defunding government functions) have caused substantial harm to the public.
• Example Precedents: Public nuisance cases have been used against opioid manufacturers (Purdue Pharma), polluters (Flint Water Crisis), and gun manufacturers. Could Musk be held responsible for similarly dismantling social safety nets?
• Challenges: Courts often require direct causation and reject nuisance claims against political or ideological advocacy.

B. Negligent or Reckless Endangerment

• Claim: Musk’s financial and political influence has made society more vulnerable to disaster by undercutting government services that protect public health and safety.
• Example: If Musk’s lobbying against government intervention directly reduced resources for pandemic response, disaster relief, or emergency services, one could argue reckless endangerment.
• Challenges: Courts generally do not hold individuals liable for systemic policy changes unless direct causation is clear.

C. Tortious Interference with Public Services

• Claim: By advocating against government regulations and funding, Musk has interfered with essential government functions that protect citizens.
• Example: If a municipality had to cut emergency services because of a Musk-driven initiative, and people were harmed as a result, this could form the basis of a lawsuit.
• Challenges: Government policy is usually seen as the responsibility of lawmakers, not private individuals.

D. Wrongful Death / Survival Actions

• Claim: If there is a direct connection between Musk’s influence (e.g., his misinformation about COVID, refusal to follow safety regulations or actions that weakened government response) and actual deaths, wrongful death claims might be possible.
• Example: If Tesla employees were forced to work in unsafe conditions due to Musk’s decisions and someone died as a result, that could form a case.
• Challenges: Proving direct causation is difficult in mass-scale harm cases.

E. Civil RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)

• Claim: If Musk’s actions involved fraud, coercion, or manipulation for financial gain while dismantling government safeguards, it could be argued that he engaged in a pattern of unlawful conduct.
• Example: If Musk knowingly manipulated stock values or defrauded investors while promoting policies that harmed public safety, there could be an argument for RICO violations.
• Challenges: RICO cases require proving an ongoing criminal enterprise, which may be difficult in this context

2. Challenges

• First Amendment Protections: Musk’s speech, lobbying, and business decisions are primarily protected unless they involve direct fraud, defamation, or incitement to violence.
• Proving Causation: Courts would demand clear evidence that Musk’s actions directly caused harm rather than broader systemic issues.
• Sovereign Immunity of Government: If Musk’s influence led to lousy government decisions, courts might view the responsibility as belonging to policymakers, not him.

3. Potential Legal Strategy

• Focus on Specific Harms: Rather than suing over broad societal impact, plaintiffs would need clear cases (e.g., individuals who died due to lack of emergency services that Musk’s influence helped defund).
• Leverage Existing Lawsuits: Musk is already being sued for employment violations, securities fraud, and whistleblower retaliation; adding a public endangerment angle could be an extension.
• Class Action: A class action suit might be possible if a group of people can be identified as suffering due to Musk’s influence (e.g., emergency workers laid off due to budget cuts caused by Musk-backed policies).

Would It Work?

• It’s a long shot, but it’s not impossible.
• The most substantial claims might be public nuisance or wrongful death tied to specific incidents rather than broad social change.
• A successful lawsuit would likely need to use Musk’s own statements and actions to show he intentionally or recklessly endangered public welfare.

William James Spriggs

 

 

Top of Form

 

Bottom of Form

 

THE MILITARY OATH TO DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION

Defending the Constitution Is a Lifelong Duty

To every member of the United States military, active duty, recently separated, retired, and veteran, I write to remind you of our solemn commitment when we swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. This oath is not a temporary obligation. It does not expire upon separation from service. It is a lifetime commitment, a sacred duty that binds us to the very foundation of our nation.

When I was commissioned as an officer in the U.S. Marine Corps in 1964, I swore the following oath:

"I, William J. Spriggs, having been appointed an officer in the Marine Corps of the United States, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."

The Oath Has No Expiration Date

Every man and woman who has taken this oath, whether enlisted or commissioned, must recognize its weight. It is not tied to a contract, an enlistment period, or a duty station. It does not dissolve upon retirement. It is a lifelong duty to uphold and protect the Constitution, ensuring our democracy remains intact for future generations.

At this moment in our history, that duty calls upon us again. Today's threats to our Constitution are not coming from a foreign battlefield but from within. Those who seek to dismantle democratic institutions, undermine the rule of law, and erode the foundational principles of our Republic are the very "domestic enemies" our oath requires us to defend against.

The Military’s Role as the Guardian of the Constitution

To those currently serving in uniform: your duty is clear. You are not just soldiers, sailors, airmen, guardians, and Marines. You are the last line of defense for the Constitution of the United States. You are not beholden to any individual, political party, or movement. Your loyalty belongs to the Republic and the democratic system of government enshrined in our founding documents.

If anyone, whether a civilian leader, an elected official, or a military superior, commands you to act in a way that violates the Constitution, your duty is to refuse. History has shown us the consequences of blind obedience to unlawful orders. As military professionals, we swore to uphold a higher standard, obey lawful orders, and reject unconstitutional ones.

To Veterans: Our Fight Continues

Our duty has not ended for those of us no longer in uniform. While we may no longer serve officially, we remain bound to our oath. We must speak out, educate, and engage in the democratic process. We must ensure that those currently serving understand their role as guardians of the Constitution.

This is not a time for silence or complacency. Democracy is under attack. Efforts to undermine voting rights, delegitimize elections, and concentrate power into the hands of the few are threats that demand our attention and action. We must remember that our oath was not to a person; it was to an idea, to a set of principles that have guided our nation since its inception.

Honor the Oath

Once a Marine, always a Marine. Once a soldier, always a soldier. Once a defender of the Constitution, always a defender of the Constitution. In these days of national crisis, we must honor our oath in the truest sense, by fighting to preserve democracy.

Let history remember us for our uniform service and our unwavering commitment to the ideals that make America a nation worth defending.

Semper Fidelis,

William James Spriggs

Top of Form

 

Bottom of Form

 

SELLING AMERICA TO THE BILLIONAIRES

The Wrongheaded Push to Privatize Public Services: How Trump and Republicans Are Selling Out America

The push to privatize public services is one of the most disastrous trends in modern American governance. This country is moving in the wrong direction, dismantling public institutions and handing them over to private, for-profit interests. Donald Trump, following in the footsteps of Ronald Reagan and decades of Republican ideology, seeks to turn nearly every essential public service into a revenue stream for his billionaire allies. This is not just misguided, it is a direct assault on democracy and the American people.

Public services exist for the common good, not for private profit. They are meant to be controlled by the people, funded by tax dollars, and operated as not-for-profit institutions. The core of a functioning democracy is that its citizens have oversight and control over essential services through voting and public accountability. Once privatized, these services become beholden to investors, profit margins, and corporate greed rather than the population's well-being.

What Must Remain Public?

Every essential service that affects life, safety, and the functioning of society must remain in public hands, including:

• Police and Fire Departments – Public safety should never be a profit-driven enterprise. When law enforcement and emergency services are privatized, justice is sold to the highest bidder.
• Transportation – Public transportation, including air, rail, and ground transit, should serve all people, not just those who can afford high fares dictated by private corporations.
• Food and Water Safety – The privatization of food inspection, water management, and utilities threatens the health of every American. A profit-driven model incentivizes cutting corners, leading to dangerous lapses in safety.
• Healthcare – The idea that private insurance companies and hospitals should dictate who gets care and at what cost has resulted in skyrocketing prices, medical bankruptcies, and millions without access to necessary treatment. Like in other developed nations, publicly funded healthcare is the only ethical solution.
• Education – Schools should be learning centers, not profit-driven businesses. Charter schools, for-profit universities, and voucher programs are designed to siphon taxpayer money into private hands while leaving millions of children behind.
• Electricity and Power – Privatizing electricity, gas, and other utilities has led to skyrocketing costs and preventable disasters, such as power grid failures that have left millions in the dark.
• Roads and Infrastructure – Turning highways and bridges into private toll roads creates a system where only the wealthy can afford efficient transportation. Infrastructure should be built and maintained for the benefit of all.
• Postal Services – The U.S. Postal Service provides affordable, universal mail delivery. Privatizing it would mean higher costs and reduced service, particularly for rural communities.

The Real Agenda: Oligarchy in the Making

The goal of privatization isn’t efficiency; it’s power and control. When Trump and his allies push for privatizing government services, they are not looking to improve them. They want to create an oligarchy in which billionaires control society's essential functions.

Privatization does not lower costs or improve services. It eliminates public oversight, allows price gouging, and creates monopolies that benefit only a wealthy few. Other developed nations recognize the value of public services. European nations, Canada, and some developing countries ensure that healthcare, education, transportation, and utilities remain public goods. The United States, however, is moving in the opposite direction, auctioning off the public sector to private investors with little to no accountability.

We Must Reverse Course

If America continues down this road, we will become a nation where only the wealthy have access to safety, education, and healthcare. The dismantling of public services is a direct attack on democracy, replacing it with a corporate-controlled state that serves only the elite.

To stop this, Americans must demand the protection and expansion of public services. We must reject politicians who prioritize corporate profits over the well-being of the people. We must vote for leaders who understand that government exists to serve all, not just those who can pay the highest price.

The privatization agenda betrays the American people. It’s time to fight back before there’s nothing left to save.

William James Spriggs