In this episode of the Politics in Question podcast, the team discusses what American politics will look like in 2022 from Congress to the upcoming midterm elections.
Podcast: What will American politics look like in 2022?
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Join a growing community committed to civic renewal.
Subscribe to The Fulcrum and be part of the conversation.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
The current continuing resolution, which keeps the government funded, ends this Friday, January 30.
Getty Images
Probably Another Shutdown
Jan 29, 2026
The current continuing resolution, which keeps the government funded, ends this Friday, January 30.
It passed in November and ended the last shutdown. In addition to passage of the continuing resolution, some regular appropriations were also passed at the same time. It included funding for the remainder of the fiscal year for the food assistance program SNAP, the Department of Agriculture, the FDA, military construction, Veterans Affairs, and Congress itself (that is, through Sept. 30, 2026).
As of Friday, January 23, the House had passed the remaining appropriations for fiscal year 2026. It appeared that the Senate would then pass those bills this week and government operations would go uninterrupted.
Then, this past weekend, Department of Homeland Security agents killed yet another legal observer of their activities in Minneapolis. Alex Pretti's death brings the number of DHS shootings since September to 12. Four of those shootings have been fatal.
Pretti's death seems to have been the last straw for Senate Democrats. Since Saturday, enough of them have said that they will not vote for more funding for the Department of Homeland Security as currently proposed that, unless Republicans find a way to compromise, the government will again be shut down, albeit only partially this time.
At the moment, Senate Republicans say they are unwilling to make any changes to the existing appropriations bills.
Even if Republicans do compromise in some way, perhaps by rearranging the existing legislation to separate DHS funding from all the other agencies, there would still be a short partial shut down at the very least because the House will not return to session before January 30.
So, assuming for now that a shutdown occurs, what would that mean? Well, first of all, this time, no food support would be endangered and the VA would keep running because those agencies were among the ones whose full year appropriations were passed last November.
It might mean interruption in agencies like the Department of State, Transportation, Health and Human Services, Housing and Labor. It might mean some interruptions in the Department of Defense, but like last time, the administration would be looking for ways to shuffle existing funds to continue paying military personnel.
It almost certainly will have little or no effect on the operations of DHS even though that's the agency at the center of the dispute. Why not? Because, like last the last time around, the White House will likely designate DHS as essential and look for workaround funding without regard to the legality of that funding.
The Senate is, officially, in session from the end of the day today through the week. However, due to the big winter storm this past weekend, no votes are scheduled until tomorrow at least. There are 20 committee meetings this week, including one on Wednesday where Secretary of State Marco Rubio is expected to testify about Venezuela.
It is unclear right now where things will go right now. Our colleagues at The First Branch Forecast explain the political considerations that Democrats are mulling right now. They also provide a fascinating summary of why the Government Publishing Office was established: in short, private enterprise isn't always better or cheaper than public agencies.
See you all on Friday.
Probably Another Shutdown was originally published on GovTrack.us and is republished with permission.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
A rosary adorns a framed photo Alex Pretti that was left at a makeshift memorial in the area where Pretti was shot dead a day earlier by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis, on Jan. 25, 2026.
(Tribune Content Agency)
Facts about Alex Pretti’s death are undeniable. The White House is denying them anyway
Jan 28, 2026
The killing of Alex Pretti was unjust and unjustified. While protesting — aka “observing” or “interfering with” — deportation operations, the VA hospital ICU nurse came to the aid of two protesters, one of whom had been slammed to the ground by a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent. With a phone in one hand, Pretti used the other hand, in vain, to protect his eyes while being pepper sprayed. Knocked to the ground, Pretti was repeatedly smashed in the face with the spray can, pummeled by multiple agents, disarmed of his holstered legal firearm and then shot nine or 10 times.
Note the sequence. He was disarmed and then he was shot.
That’s why the killing is undeniably unjust and unjustified. Unjust because Pretti didn’t deserve to die, even if he’d been fully “obstructing” federal agents, death is not a just price for that. But he wasn’t obstructing an agent from deporting an immigrant. He was obstructing an agent from further assaulting a woman in the street.
The killing was unjustified because a gang of agents didn’t need to shoot Pretti after they disarmed him. If you want to argue that merely bringing a gun to any protest justifies being shot by law enforcement, even after being disarmed, you’re going to sound as politically dumb, hypocritical or authoritarian as a whole bunch of administration officials and GOP defenders undeniably did over the weekend.
I keep using that word — “undeniable.” Sadly, it really doesn’t mean what it used to mean. “Undeniable” describes something that is so obviously and clearly true that no one can refute or dispute it. With this administration, truth ain’t got nothing to do with anything.
In the immediate aftermath of Pretti’s killing, members of the Trump administration took to TV and social media to describe Pretti as a “domestic terrorist” and an “assassin.” The head of CBP, Gregory Bovino, said, “This looks like a situation where an individual wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement.” Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem echoed the same talking points. Pretti’s motive, she claimed, was “to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement” because he was a “domestic terrorist.” White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller asserted that Pretti was an “assassin” who tried to “murder federal agents.”
The administration is making all of this up. But that doesn’t necessarily mean they are lying. They just don’t care what the truth is.
In his seminal book “On Bulls—” (the actual title isn’t censored), philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt argues that lying implies a certain respect for, and knowledge of, the truth. “It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bulls— requires no such conviction.” What this administration does is worse than lying because they don’t care whether something is true or false, only whether it will be believed.
The Trump White House is a bulls— distribution hub, that connects via tubes, canals and sluices across the media landscape. Like some vast Rube Goldberg contraption, the guy on the giant hamster wheel powering the whole thing is a president who spent his life saying whatever he needed to say at any given moment to make a deal, get out of trouble, whatever.
Raised on “the power of positive thinking” and the prosperity gospel, Donald J. Trump has always believed he could conjure the reality he wants through sheer will and a relentless repetition of what he wants people to believe. He makes claims about what “they” are “saying” and recounts tales about what people have told him, some of which are surely made up while others are probably true but insincerely told, given that everyone knows the president believes all flattery he hears.
Trump sprayed bovine excrement throughout his first term, too. But he also had staff with hazmat suits, containment and cleanup gear at the ready.
Now, in his second term, everyone grabs a hose — but that’s not water in those tanks. Terminally online and obsessed with cable news narratives, this White House is full of people who have learned at the (kissed) feet of the master. The truth and lies are just different kinds of tools for the job that matters: constructing a narrative the president wants to hear, mostly about himself or for his benefit.
That’s why the administration’s Sunday show spinners are so bad at the job. The mission isn’t primarily to reassure, never mind to inform, the public, but to reassure the president that the public is being properly told how great the president is. Because they know he’s watching.
Trump is reportedly “reviewing” the policies that left Pretti dead in the street. That’s good. But Trump’s motive isn’t to prevent more needless deaths, just the needless deaths that don’t make him look good.
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.
Keep ReadingShow less
A portrait of Renee Good is placed at a memorial near the site where she was killed a week ago, on January 14, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Good was fatally shot by an immigration enforcement agent during an incident in south Minneapolis on January 7.
(Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)
The Deadly Shooting in Minneapolis and How It Impacts the Rights of All Americans
Jan 28, 2026
Thomas Paine famously wrote, "These are the times that try men's souls," when writing about the American Revolution. One could say that every week of Donald Trump's second administration has been such a time for much of the country.
One of the most important questions of the moment is: Was the ICE agent who shot Renee Good guilty of excessive use of force or murder, or was he acting in self-defense because Good was attempting to run him over, as claimed by the Trump administration? Local police and other Minneapolis authorities dispute the government's version of the events.
There are several videos of the incident, none of which support the government's version of what happened. As is frequently the case, Trump news/speak is fake news. Here is what the videos show:
- The Honda driven by Renee Good was stopped crosswise in the street.
- One ICE agent arrives at the scene. While he is walking around the car, 2 other ICE agents approach the car and tell her to get out of the car, using an expletive, and one tries to open the door.
- The Honda backs up a few feet.
- The Honda starts moving forward and turns to the right.
- The first ICE agent, who is now at the front of the car, says, "Whoa."
- As the car passes the agent, he fires 3 shots at point blank range, 1 through the windshield and 2 through the open driver's side window, and calls her a "F***ing B*****." One video shows clearly that when he fired the first shot through the windshield, the car was passing him, not coming towards him.
- The Honda crashes into a parked car.
This all happened in 20 seconds.
The videos make clear that Renee Good was not attempting to run the ICE agent over, but was attempting to get out of the scene. (If that had been the case, had she not turned to the right, he would have been run over.)
Department of Justice policy states that police can use a gun only when they feel their life or the lives of others are in imminent danger. They cannot use a gun merely to stop someone from fleeing the site.
Even though she had no intent to run him over, things happened so quickly that the agent will try to argue that he felt his life was in danger. But the fact that even when he took the first shot, the car was already passing him belies that assertion. And the fact that he kept shooting as the car moved past him and clearly was no longer in danger would argue that the shooting had nothing to do with self-defense and was just an excessive, improper use of deadly force.
Also, why didn't he just shoot the tires of the car to stop her? Why did he choose to shoot her at point-blank range 3 times? This was not some tyro with a rifle but a person with combat experience and years of experience with guns.
That the government is still claiming self-defense and not allowing the local police to be involved in the investigation is emblematic of the administration's practice of controlling and distorting facts. They have no interest in the truth; they just want a justification for their actions.
Most recently, Trump has indicated that the fact that Renee Good spoke disrespectfully to the ICE agents was grounds enough for the shooting. This runs counter to all established policy on the use of deadly force by police.
Regardless of your view of illegal immigrants, Trump's deportation policies, and the man himself, all Americans should be outraged by the excessive use of force by quasi-military personnel against American citizens as well as illegal immigrants and Trump's defense of their ignoring our "right to life and liberty." This is not an isolated incident but a pattern of disrespect that we have seen frequently in the aggressive actions of ICE, even towards a Congressman.
Americans should show that outrage through massive peaceful demonstrations. Yes, several thousand showed up at a protest in New York City, but the number should have been much more—hundreds of thousands.
This is not a minor matter. It is reminiscent of several of the abuses of power cited by the Founders in writing the Declaration of Independence:
- "He has sent swarms of officers to harass our people."
- "He has, in times of peace, sent Standing Armies among us without the consent of our legislatures."
- "He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power."
These offenses are in addition to all the other things Trump has done that are destroying American democracy, the structure that the Founders designed to ensure that in the United States, no one person would ever be able to abuse his power as the British king had done. To prevent such abuse, including failing to respect the legislative process and making the judiciary dependent on his will, the Founders established America's distinctive balance of power with 3 independent branches: legislative, executive, and judicial—each responsible for reigning in any excesses of the others.
Every American who values the freedom and rights that our democracy has provided us should rise up and peacefully demonstrate. Not a voice should remain still. Jefferson believed strongly that we had to protect our rights: "The time to guard against corruption and tyranny, is before they shall have gotten hold of us."
Why are massive demonstrations important? First, they let you and others feel that your voice is being heard. This is of critical importance in a democracy. Second, it lets the silent majority of people who are either concerned or questioning about this issue see that there are massive numbers of fellow citizens who are concerned and are raising their voices.
Another thing people can do to increase engagement with this issue is to reach out to religious and other organizations in your community and encourage them to offer programs on this topic. Also, go to your local school board and encourage them to address this issue through school programs. Let your representatives in Congress know how you feel.
Finally, Trump was elected fairly by a majority of the American voters. But he has abused and expanded the power that the Constitution gives the President. In our system, the way to free ourselves from Donald Trump is through the ballot box and through our voices.
There are elections this November that will determine whether Republicans or Democrats control the House and the Senate. If Democrats regain control of Congress, that will restore the balance of power the Founders sought to ensure, as the current Republican-controlled Congress has almost entirely deferred to Trump's demands.
If we do not protect our rights, there is a distinct possibility, given the current political dynamic, that we will lose them.
Ronald L. Hirsch is a teacher, legal aid lawyer, survey researcher, nonprofit executive, consultant, composer, author, and volunteer. He is a graduate of Brown University and the University of Chicago Law School and the author of We Still Hold These Truths. Read more of his writing at www.PreservingAmericanValues.com
Keep ReadingShow less
An exploration of American patriotic songs and how their ideals of liberty, dignity, and belonging clash with today’s ICE immigration policies.
merrymoonmary/Getty Images
Patriotic Songs Reveal the America ICE Is Betraying
Jan 28, 2026
For over two hundred years, Americans have used songs to express who we are and who we want to be. Before political parties became so divided and before social media made arguments public, our national identity grew from songs sung in schools, ballparks, churches, and public spaces.
Our patriotic songs are more than just music. They describe a country built on dignity, equality, and belonging. Today, as ICE enforces harsh and fearful policies, these songs remind us how far we have moved from the nation we say we are.
"My Country 'Tis of Thee" – A Prayer for Liberty
Written in 1831, Samuel Francis Smith’s “My Country ’Tis of Thee” is one of the earliest expressions of America’s desire to be better. Its opening plea — “sweet land of liberty” was an aspirational vision that many shared. The song imagines a nation where freedom is not selective, conditional, or weaponized, but universal.
I cannot match that vision with what I see in our country now. It pains me to see families separated, asylum seekers treated as criminals, and whole communities living in fear. This is not the America I believe in, and it hurts to see us move so far from our ideals.
"The Star-Spangled Banner" – Resilience in the Face of Threat
Francis Scott Key wrote his poem in 1814, which later became our national anthem. It asks one main question: "Does that star-spangled banner yet wave...?"
This question is about endurance, not about power or force. It asks if America can last through its challenges.
Today, I worry that our greatest threat comes from losing our own values, not from enemies overseas. When ICE uses racial profiling, harsh detention, and broad raids, the flag may still fly, but the ideals behind it are being attacked from within.
"America the Beautiful" – A Vision of Moral Greatness
Katharine Lee Bates wrote "America the Beautiful" after seeing the beauty of the American landscape. But the real meaning of the song is not just the scenery, but the spirit and values I learned to believe in.
She urges the nation to be led by "brotherhood from sea to shining sea."
Brotherhood cannot exist alongside cruelty.
It does not fit with policies that dehumanize migrants, separate families, or see people as threats instead of neighbors.
"This Land Is Your Land" – A Rebuttal to Exclusion
Woody Guthrie wrote his 1940 classic to challenge inequality. Though many remember it as a simple folk song, its deeper verses say that America belongs to everyone—not just the privileged, the native-born, or those with the right documents.
When ICE targets people for their ethnicity, accent, or how foreign they seem, it goes against the heart of Guthrie's song: this land is our land, for all of us.
"God Bless America" – A Patriotic Prayer, Not a Boast
Irving Berlin wrote "God Bless America" as a humble prayer for a country trying to reach its highest ideals.
Why are we not guided today "through the night with a light from above"? Berlin, an immigrant who knew both America's promise and its weakness, wrote the song as a call for moral clarity. Now, as ICE policies bring fear and pain to vulnerable families, that prayer feels more urgent than ever.
"We Shall Overcome" – The Anthem of Moral Courage
"We Shall Overcome" started in the labor movement and became central to the civil rights struggle, always insisting that justice will win. The song is based on dignity, unity, and the strong belief that America can change for the better.
Today, many of us feel that hope is fading. But just like in the 1960s, our country can overcome its mistakes. When I see fear in immigrant communities, the song's message feels different. I see a nation that is scared and unsure, not trusting or hopeful.
But we must remember the lesson from that time: compassion should win over cruelty, and America must choose its better side again.
A Final Thought
All these patriotic songs remind us that America is at its best when it is generous, welcoming, and kind. They urge us to:
- welcome the stranger
- protect the vulnerable
- honor human dignity
- build community instead of fear
ICE's current actions, marked by hate, violence, and discrimination, are more than just policy mistakes. They go against who we are as a nation. They betray what makes America special and go against the songs we learned as children and now teach our own kids.
If you want to know what a country really believes, listen to its music. If you want to see how far it has drifted, compare its daily actions to its songs.
America has always sung about the country we want to become. Now it is time to live up to those words.
David Nevins is the publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More