This week, Lisa is back and she and David talk about starting the holiday season; what’s next for Marjorie Taylor Greene; Georgia prosecutor drops election interference case against Trump, others; federal judge throws out cases against James Comey and Letitia James due to Lindsey Halligan’s “invalid” appointment as US attorney; Lisa is furious about her Congressman’s ridiculous reply; Lisa asks whether it’s ‘illegal’ to urge the military to refuse unlawful orders?; mother of Karoline Leavitt’s nephew arrested by ICE; Nord Stream pipeline sabotage suspect extradited to Germany; U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff shown to have advised Moscow on “peace plan”; Lisa wants to know where all the tariff money is going; J6 pardon recipients; committing new crimes; former New Jersey Republican congressional staffer staged her own political attack; gerrymandering wars; blue collar pay; RFK, Jr. orders CDC website changed to include false claims linking autism and vaccines; Trump strangely avoids attacking South Park; questionnaire for a healthy marriage; and more.

Added Context for the Military and “Legal Orders”

According to Time, “legal experts say that nothing in the video was “seditious” or “illegal,” and that there is no basis for the Pentagon to investigate Kelly for participating in the video.”

Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and long‑standing military law, service members have a dual duty:

* They must obey lawful orders.

* They must disobey manifestly or patently illegal orders, such as orders to commit war crimes or other obvious violations of the Constitution or international law.​

Because of this framework, statements that accurately remind troops of their duty to refuse illegal orders are, in substance, restating existing law rather than advocating lawlessness.

Military law does contain an offense (often referenced in sedition or “impairing loyalty” debates) that prohibits advising or inciting members of the armed forces to mutiny, become disloyal, or refuse duty, but experts emphasize this targets efforts to undermine obedience to lawful orders, not generalized reminders to follow only legal ones.

This is a high‑stakes, fact‑specific area; criminal liability turns on the precise language used, who is being addressed, the nature of the orders at issue, and whether the speech is seen as encouraging disobedience to lawful authority or fidelity to higher legal duties.

Added Context for United States as a “Rogue State”

In policy and scholarly usage, “rogue state” refers to governments that severely restrict human rights, sponsor terrorism, and often seek weapons of mass destruction while flouting basic international norms. Common examples given usually include North Korea and Iran, not the United States, even though some analysts note that U.S. conduct abroad sometimes resembles its own criteria for “rogue” behavior.

The United States accepts the International Court of Justice (ICJ) jurisdiction only in specific ways. The ICJ has found the United States in violation and noted that it failed to fully comply with provisional measures and judgments, revealing a pattern of partial or delayed compliance.

The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC) and has taken legal and diplomatic steps to shield its personnel from ICC jurisdiction, including the American Service‑Members’ Protection Act, which even authorizes using force to free Americans from ICC custody.

When the ICC pursued investigations touching on U.S. actions, Washington imposed sanctions on ICC officials in 2020 and again in 2025, moves that U.S. allies such as France publicly condemned as attacks on the court’s independence.

In calling the U.S. a rogue state we’re making a normative or political argument: that its willingness to ignore or undermine international courts while demanding others follow rules fits the spirit of “rogue” behavior, even if the label is not formally accepted.

Links:

Outrage Overload Podcast

Yergz Radio (yergzradio.com)

Dare Talk Radio (daretalkradio.com)

This Week in Outrage Substack (outrageoverload.net/twio)

Outrage Science Bites - 30 episodes in 30 days challenge

Marjorie Taylor Greene wants to leave toxicity behind. I’m skeptical (Seattle Times)

What happens next for Marjorie Taylor Greene after exit from Congress? (BBC)

What comes next in the James Comey and Letitia James cases? (BBC)

Is It ‘Seditious’ or ‘Illegal’ to Urge the Military to Refuse Unlawful Orders? (Time)

What the Law of Military Obedience Can (and Can’t) Do—What Happens if a President’s Orders are Unlawful? (American Constitution Society - 2018)

Ukrainian man suspected of Nord Stream pipeline blasts placed in custody in Germany (ABC News)

Russia rules out big concessions on Ukraine as leak shows Witkoff advised Moscow (Reuters)

Trump struggles to crack tariff piggy bank (Politico - Oct 2025)