Business leaders from across the political spectrum sign on to the American Promise Business Network for a variety of important reasons — for Maureen Kline, Vice President, Public Affairs and Sustainability for Pirelli Tire North America, the decision was a natural fit as it reflects her company’s policy of not making political campaign contributions. That commitment is part of Pirelli’s stakeholder capitalism mindset, which values contributing to healthier and more equitable systems as well as making a profit.
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

President Donald Trump speaks during an arrival ceremony on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, D.C., on April 28, 2026.
(Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images/TCA)
Trump’s petty pursuit of his ‘enemies’
May 09, 2026
When the history books write about Donald Trump, they’ll have a lot to say — little of it positive, I’d be willing to wager.
His presidencies have been marked by rank incompetence, unprecedented greed and self-dealing, naked corruption, ethical, legal and moral breaches and, as we repeatedly see, a rise in political division and anger. From impeachments to an insurrection to who-knows-what is still to come, the era of Trump has hardly been worthy of admiration.
But don’t tell that to his loyal supporters, for whom no one stands in higher esteem, despite Trump’s obvious shortcomings. Where we see an embarrassment, they see the fulfilment of a promise. Where we find horror, they find jubilation. We are truly living in two different Americas.
It’s remarkable that Trump can so clearly be two opposing things depending on whom you ask, and that stark contrast is often revealed in moments where he’s waging war on perceived enemies.
This week, Trump’s Justice Department, under the leadership of Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, announced it had indicted former FBI Director James Comey over an Instagram post in which Comey had photographed seashells on a beach to spell out “86 47.”
To be clear, “86” is common restaurant jargon to “nix” a menu item, and “47” refers to Trump. Blanche’s DOJ is claiming that this amounted to a threat of violence.
If that sounds silly, it’s because it is. But Trump’s got it out for Comey, and he tried this once before. This indictment, like the last one, isn’t likely to result in a prosecution.
But the indictment was met with predictable praise from MAGA loyalists, for whom Trump’s revenge campaigns are a titillating projection of his strength and a righteous use of presidential power.
For the rest of us, they are just another humiliation for Trump and the country — a weaponized and compromised DOJ that’s already seen one AG fired for failing to throw enough Trump opponents in prison, and a president who is pathologically consumed with old and irrelevant grudges.
Trump fans love it when he’s playing the bully and swinging at the people he’s told them to hate, from Jimmy Kimmel to Sen. Mark Kelly to New York Attorney General Letitia James.
For all of his efforts at projecting strength, Trump never looks weaker than in these moments, when he’s pursuing these personal vendettas — and losing.
Just in the past year, Trump’s DOJ has lost numerous high-profile cases it sought to use to appease the president’s bloodlust.
It failed to get an indictment against six Democratic lawmakers, including Kelly, over a video they released regarding illegal orders.
Grand juries rejected cases against protesters in Washington and elsewhere, including trying to charge a man with felony assault for throwing a sandwich at an officer.
Attempts to prosecute James, former CIA Director John Brennan, and Fed Chair Jerome Powell have thus far failed.
Trump has also failed to successfully sue a number of opponents, from Hillary Clinton to the DNC, the New York Times to CNN.
Judges have overruled his attempts at silencing news outlets, blocking a Pentagon policy limiting reporter access, ordering the White House to lift restrictions on the AP after Trump had banned the news agency for refusing to use the term “Gulf of America,” and blocking an executive order to cut funding for NPR and PBS.
Trump has lost so many of these petty fights, it’s hard to imagine why he keeps going back to the trough, only to suffer more humiliating losses.
And yet somehow, his fans don’t read these abject failures the same way the rest of us do. Where we see impotence and incompetence, they still see power and strength.
I can’t make it make sense, but I’m fairly confident that the history books, at least, will get it right.
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
The Walls Between Us: Jerusalem in the Shadow of War
May 08, 2026
Amid the political and military standoff among the United States, Israel, and Iran, it is civilians — the people with no say in these decisions — who bear the fear, disruption, and uncertainty of every strike and escalation. This week, The Fulcrum’s executive editor, Hugo Balta, reports from Israel with a single aim: to humanize the war by focusing not on the spectacle of Operation Epic Fury, but on the ordinary lives being reshaped by it.
Jerusalem’s Old City — long treated as a symbolic red line by regional actors — is now squarely within the trajectory of the War of Redemption, exposing the limits of deterrence and the growing entanglement of local communities in a broader geopolitical confrontation.
During my recent visit to the Old City, the impact of the conflict was immediately visible. The usual flow of pilgrims and tourists around the Western Wall, the Dome of the Rock, and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher had been replaced by near‑silence. Local guides described the atmosphere as a city holding its breath, a sentiment that proved prescient.
On March 20, an intercepted Iranian ballistic missile broke apart over the Old City, scattering debris across all four quarters. The strike — the first time Iranian missile fragments had fallen inside the walls — marked a significant escalation. Analysts say the incident demonstrated Iran’s willingness to test Israel’s air‑defense saturation point and to challenge the symbolic core of Israeli sovereignty. Israeli officials, meanwhile, framed the attack as evidence of Iran’s expanding regional reach and the need for sustained military pressure.
Local Impact Reflects Broader Strategic Shifts
In the Muslim Quarter, the collapse of tourism — from 4.4 million visitors in 2019 to 330,000 in 2024 — has accelerated an economic crisis that predates the current war. The 37‑day closure of the Al‑Aqsa Mosque compound, imposed under security regulations, and severe Ramadan access restrictions fueled perceptions that the conflict was reinforcing long‑standing political marginalization. Regional analysts note that these measures have become a rallying point for Iran‑aligned actors, who frame the closures as evidence of Israeli overreach.
In the Jewish Quarter, residents described air‑raid sirens as routine. Even as many support the state’s defense efforts, a fierce internal debate has erupted over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for not standing up to American pressure, particularly regarding a Lebanon cease-fire. Yet the dominant narrative is one of national resilience in the face of what many view as a uniquely dangerous adversary.
The Christian Quarter has experienced both physical and social fallout. The closure of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher during Holy Week — unprecedented in modern memory — followed damage from falling missile debris and heightened security concerns. Church leaders from the Latin, Greek Orthodox, and Armenian communities issued coordinated statements warning of “expanding wreckage” and a deteriorating environment for Christian institutions.
These concerns intensified after Israeli prosecutors indicted a Jewish man accused of assaulting a Christian nun near the Via Dolorosa. Authorities described the incident as religiously motivated. Christian leaders welcomed the indictment but warned that such attacks are becoming more frequent, contributing to a sense of shrinking space for Christian life in the city.
The Vatican also entered the debate. In early April, Pope Leo issued a forceful call for an immediate cease-fire, criticizing both Iran’s missile campaign and Israel’s military response for inflicting disproportionate harm on civilians. The Pontiff's remarks drew sharp rebukes from President Donald Trump and Israeli officials, as well as dismissive commentary from Iranian state media. Diplomats say the Pope’s intervention underscores growing international concern about the conflict’s humanitarian and symbolic implications.
In the Armenian Quarter, residents face a dual threat: Iranian missile fire from above and intensifying pressure from radical settler groups on the ground. Ongoing disputes over land deals have heightened fears of displacement, with some community members describing the situation as ethnic cleansing under the cover of war. In response, Armenians have begun organizing community‑based security patrols — a sign of diminishing confidence in state protection.
Walking through the Old City, I saw four distinct communities living side by side in a fragile but unmistakable harmony, a reality that stood in stark contrast to the widespread conflict often portrayed in mainstream media. "The problem is the establishment. They create the problem," said Monica Rabotnicoff Stolarz, Jerusalem resident. "People want to live in peace. People want the stores to be open, filled with tourists. They want to prosper," said the veteran tour guide.
- YouTube youtu.be
Economic and Cultural Risks Mount
Across all four quarters, small businesses — the backbone of the Old City’s economy — are expected to close in record numbers this year. Traders say state compensation covers only a fraction of their losses. Policy analysts warn that prolonged instability, combined with the temporary closure of major religious sites, risks accelerating cultural erosion and undermining the city’s multi‑faith character.
Jerusalem’s Old City is now a frontline not only of military confrontation but of competing geopolitical narratives. Iran portrays the missile strikes as part of a broader campaign to challenge Israeli and Western influence. Israel frames its response as a necessary defense against an expanding Iranian network stretching from Lebanon to Yemen. International actors — from the Vatican to Gulf states — are increasingly vocal, each interpreting the conflict through their own strategic lens.
"From the outside (of Jerusalem), things look different," said Rabotnicoff Stolarz. "The media generally publishes whatever sells. What sells is conflict—it is blood. But living here, inside the Old City, there is a great deal of harmony."
What is clear on the ground is that the Old City’s residents are bearing the brunt of decisions made far beyond its walls. As the conflict continues, the question is no longer whether Jerusalem will be affected, but how deeply the geopolitical struggle will reshape the city’s religious, economic, and cultural landscape.
Hugo Balta is the executive editor of The Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network.
Coverage of this report was made possible in part with support from Fuente Latina.
Keep ReadingShow less

The National Museum of African American History and Culture, a Smithsonian museum with unique exhibits on African American history, culture & community, Washington, D.C., USA
Getty Images, PurpleImages
Florida’s Anti-DEI Politics Will Destroy the Culture Museums are Created to Support
May 08, 2026
Recently, I sat in my museum’s annual public programming meeting, expecting the usual work of dreaming up the next year: what our community needs and what children deserve. But when Florida’s anti-DEI measure, SB 1134, came up, the room shifted from possibility to fear.
That meeting is usually the best part of our jobs. This time, however, the conversation turned to risk: what would become too dangerous to defend and what would be dropped before anyone even had to tell us to drop it. One of our managers finally said, “Culture is dead.” What I heard was more precise: culture is not dead. It is being killed.
When our history is wiped from the very institutions that are supposed to teach us who we are, we are cutting children off from the stories that should anchor them. Florida has a long history of this—from the Ocoee massacre in 1920 to Rosewood in 1923. This country has long known how to attack what gives marginalized people strength, from the federal boarding school system for Native children to today’s censorship.
And museums need to decide, right now, who we are in this moment.
The threat is no longer theoretical; it is a documented federal and cultural campaign. In March 2025, the Trump administration issued an executive order targeting the Smithsonian Institution, accusing the National Museum of African American History and Culture (NMAAHC) of promoting a “race-centered ideology.” As reported by AP News, this order empowers officials to prohibit programs deemed to “divide Americans based on race,” essentially moving to sanitize the uncomfortable truths of slavery and Jim Crow.
The "so what?" of this issue is found in the physical removal of history. Recent reports from NBC4 Washington confirm that artifacts like an 1880 book by Rev. George Washington Williams and a Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Bible were returned to their owners following federal pressure on the NMAAHC. While some cite routine loan rotations, the timing fuels a broader climate of fear. When oversight turns into censorship, it undermines the public’s right to know the full history of racial injustice.
This impact ripples outward. Museums like the National Civil Rights Museum at the Lorraine Motel, though not under federal control, are now battling donor withdrawals and school district hesitancy to host visits. Corporate sponsors are increasingly avoiding “controversial” history to escape political blowback. As a result, we are seeing reduced attendance and program eliminations that strip communities of their "truth-tellers."
As someone in museum education, I worry most about the human cost. I have seen what happens when a child recognizes themselves in history. So when I ask what museums should do now, the answer is simple: tell the truth, protect the educators, and stay accountable to the communities we serve. A history museum that cannot tell history honestly is no longer doing its job; it is just storage. If, in the name of being “nonpartisan,” museums retreat from their responsibility, they become just another venue where fear wins.
Protecting our nonpartisan role does not require silence. It requires honesty. Reflecting the full reality of our communities is not a political act; it is public service. Museums cannot just issue careful statements. They have to fight for inclusive education in public and with legislators. If museums want to call themselves civic institutions, this is the moment to prove it.
Once an institution shows what it will surrender under pressure, the public believes it. We have already seen the consequences of following political winds. After Target scaled back parts of its DEI agenda in January 2025, it faced a massive boycott. Reuters later reported that the backlash hurt sales while the company's market value plummeted. This should be a warning to every museum: when you abandon the people who trusted you, the cost is not only moral—it is public, reputational, and financial.
We cannot celebrate culture when it is marketable and abandon it when it becomes politically inconvenient. History will remember who stood as a community anchor and who became an accomplice to erasure. Our museums are resilient, but they cannot stand alone. They belong to us, and it is our responsibility to ensure they remain the truth-tellers our nation desperately needs.
Keep ReadingShow less

The future of AI should be measured by its impact on ordinary Americans—not just tech executives and investors. Exploring AI inequality, labor concerns, and responsible innovation.
Getty Images, J Studios
The Kayla Test: Exploring How AI Impacts Everyday Americans
May 08, 2026
We’re failing the Kayla Test and running out of time to pass it. Whether AI goes “well” for the country is not a question anyone in SF or DC can answer. To assess whether AI is truly advancing the interests of Americans, AI stakeholders must engage with more than power users, tokenmaxxers, and Fortune 500 CEOs. A better evaluation is to talk to folks like Kayla, my Lyft driver in Morgantown, WV, and find out what they think about AI. It's a test I stumbled upon while traveling from an AI event at the West Virginia University College of Law to one at Stanford Law.
Kayla asked me what I do for a living. I told her that I’m a law professor focused on AI policy. Those were the last words I said for the remainder of the ride to the airport.
She methodically walked through a long list of reasons why AI was causing her and her loved ones far more trouble than it seemed worth. She talked about data centers and another era of extractive capitalism. She railed against the algorithms that seemed to force her to work longer and harder for a little extra pay. She shared her concerns that her kids lacked teachers with a strong understanding of the latest tech. On the whole, she was anything but positive about AI. Having delivered AI talks in Montana, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Nebraska, Virginia, Alaska, Ohio, Nevada, Tennessee, Massachusetts, Texas, and several other states, I know others would likely respond with a similarly lengthy set of AI grievances.
Her lack of enthusiasm is unsurprising. Rather than causing all tides to rise, it feels to many Americans a lot more like AI is poking holes in lifeboats. That sinking feeling will continue until policymakers and AI companies start asking and answering the questions that are top of mind for Americans trying to stay afloat.
AI policy conversations often revolve around questions disconnected from how everyday Americans experience this technological wave. On X, you'll find debates about how to define AGI, how to assess if it's been achieved, and how to address the national security risks that may follow. On the Hill, you'll find a few conversations and hearings on the economic and societal instability many Americans already associate with AI. Yet, those efforts rarely result in action—let alone action on the scale and scope that aligns with the urgency demanded by Americans watching their savings sink and the horizon blur.
Our country has a tired habit of asking middle and working-class Americans to bear the burden of technological progress that is always a few years away. In the interim, their economic security is threatened, their local resources are exploited, and their ability to live a good life and build an even better one for their children feels harder and harder. You can disagree with the empirical validity of those feelings, but ultimately, it's how many Americans understandably think about yet another tech boom era. They don’t have the time to read up on how AI carries tremendous promise for healthcare, science, education, and entrepreneurialism. Their on-the-ground experience is that AI is very highly correlated with a more precarious status quo.
So here's the test: ask someone in a low- to middle-income community outside of the Bay Area and the Beltway what they think about AI. Note that this must be an actual, in-person conversation—not some poll or text exchange. If they have anything positive to say about how AI is directly improving their lives or the well-being of their loved ones and neighbors, then we're headed in the right direction. If, as is the case today, they feel like they're on the wrong end of another lopsided deal, then all those involved in trying to make sure AI goes "well" have a lot of work to do.
I’m one of those people who feels a personal obligation to ensure AI is something other than a boon to VCs and folks who happened to invest in Nvidia on a hunch a few years back. My start in tech policy was working to close the Digital Divide—a divide that’s still prevalent in communities across the nation. We’re at a severe risk of once again seeing technology become a tool of division, a cause of inequality, and a source of political strife. That’s why I’m dedicated to taking the Kayla Test seriously—talking more with the folks who aren’t reading this post, who don’t read Arxiv in their spare time, and who feel like they’ve serially been asked to support the American Dreams of others.
Passing the Kayla Test isn't complicated. Get out of the hearing rooms. Leave the Signal chats. Drive through towns where the nearest data center is the biggest employer and the nearest AI researcher is a thousand miles away. Listen. Then build policy around their answers, not around the ones that play well in a Senate hearing or a venture pitch. The Kaylas of this country are not asking for much. They want honest work, good schools for their kids, and some say in what gets built around them. If AI can't deliver that, it doesn't matter how impressive the benchmarks get. We will have failed an essential test.
Kevin Frazier is a Senior Fellow at the Abundance Institute, directs the AI Innovation and Law Program at the University of Texas School of Law.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More




















