Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Citizen McCarthy

Kevin McCarthy

Presumptive Speaker Kevin McCarthy


Wade Vandervort/AFP via Getty Images

Goldstone’s most recent book is "On Account of Race: The Supreme Court, White Supremacy, and the Ravaging of African American Voting Rights.

In the classic film “Citizen Kane,” there is a scene in which Charles Foster Kane refuses to abandon his run for governor after learning that details of his extramarital affair will be made public. Kane growls that no one was going to “rob him of the love of the people of this state.” His antagonist, political boss Jim Gettys, who had exposed the affair, is stunned since the scandal means certain defeat for Kane. (This was 1941 after all.) Gettys says to Kane, “With anyone else, I’d say it would be a lesson to you. But you’re gonna need more than one lesson ... and you’re gonna get more than one lesson.”

That brings to mind today’s Republican Party. Getting devastated in the midterms should have been a lesson, but whether the GOP will need more than one is open to question. Indications are they will. Already, the Freedom Caucus, named for its desire to deny freedom to anyone but themselves, is putting pressure on presumptive House Speaker Kevin McCarthy to engage in precisely the same behavior that cost the party a majority in the Senate, a commanding majority in House, and a stunning number of state and local offices across the nation. McCarthy, who wanted to be speaker badly enough to get the lead in Faust, will almost certainly give in.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter


Then there is Donald Trump. In his new run for the presidency, in which he, like Kane, assumes the love of the people, Trump seems motivated more by his desperation to avoid jail time than to again shoulder the responsibility of running the country. (Of course, for him that was only a part-time job the first time.) One thing certain is that he will use his candidacy to settle scores, both real and imagined. Princess Diana may have had her “revenge dress,” but Trump will do her one better with the revenge campaign.

It is not as if most Republican leaders and many party operatives not on the extreme right don’t know better — Mitch McConnell, Mike Pence and a host of others were willing to state publicly they were none too pleased that Trump has refused to move offstage even though the play has ended. Even Rupert Murdoch, the ultimate opportunist, seems to have instructed his minions at Fox News and the New York Post to cut Trump loose.

But that does not mean they are embracing what tens of millions of voters showed that they wanted — a functioning democracy in which the government is used to solve problems rather than rule by personal ambition or pandering to the extremes. The most surprising thing about Democrats’ avoiding the midterm graveyard is that they did so in the face of what seemed to be the extreme unpopularity of President Biden and the belief by almost three-quarters of Americans that the economy was in bad shape. What Biden and the Democrats did have in their favor was that they seemed to be making an effort to actually govern instead of wallowing in transparently false conspiracy theories or insisting that obvious lies were true. Democrats pounded on the message that democracy itself was on the ballot and voters believed them.

And so, Speaker McCarthy has entered “be careful what you wish for” territory. His choice seems to be whether to kowtow to the Freedom Caucus — and risk further alienating mainstream voters — or to try to persuade House Republicans to pretend they are an actual political party, with policies and ideas that will make people’s lives better.

The latter will be no easy task. As minority leader, he could hide behind an inability to control the House’s agenda and try to gain voters’ loyalty merely by opposing Democrats’ “radical socialist agenda.” But that will no longer be sufficient. Republicans in the House will now be setting the agenda and if they confine themselves to investigating the arch-criminal Hunter Biden or trying to impeach his father for the high crime of ... they’ll think of something ... McCarthy risks having a rather abbreviated term as speaker.

But McCarthy and his fellow Republicans have a policy problem as well. Beyond banning abortion and protecting military-style weapon ownership, they don’t seem to have any. This is a party that has spent so long merely attacking their opponents that, now that they are in power, they seem devoid of the means to remain there.

Then, of course, the question circles back to Trump. Since he initially announced for president in 2015, Republicans have been fractured. At first, it seemed of little consequence that many rural conservatives and others that Hillary Clinton termed “a basket of deplorables” flocked to Trump’s candidacy, because he seemed certain to be brushed away like a fly. But in an upset that astounded even Trump himself, he won the election. (A friend sent me a photo taken in the employees’ lounge at Fox News on election night 2016, wherein the faces of the staff appeared as stunned and horrified as if aliens had landed.)

For the ensuing six years, the party tried desperately to hold together an increasingly fragile coalition. But while at first it seemed that the party could not win without Trump and his loyalists, it now seems equally apparent that they cannot win with them.

The only solution is for McCarthy to defy the fringes of his party and adopt a reasonable conservative agenda. There are certainly issues on which he can do so, including government spending, excessive regulation and a bloated bureaucracy. The reason he likely will not is that he will view it as a risk to his speakership, the loss of which he dreads.

And so, McCarthy and his fellow Republican House members are likely to continue to press forward with an agenda that three elections have told them is fatally flawed. A liberal pundit said recently that Donald Trump is the best thing to happen to the Democratic Party since FDR. Kevin McCarthy, another man who needs more than one lesson, will soon be standing at his side.

Read More

Understanding the Debate on Presidential Immunity

The U.S. White House.

Getty Images, Caroline Purser

Understanding the Debate on Presidential Immunity

Presidential Immunity: History and Background

Presidential immunity is the long-standing idea that the president of the United States has exemption from liability or legal proceedings for acts related to the duties of presidential office. Contrary to popular belief, presidential immunity is not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution; only sitting members of Congress are explicitly granted judicial immunity through the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause. Rather, the concept of presidential immunity has arisen through the Department of Justice’s longstanding policy against prosecuting presidents in office and the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Article II, which has developed through a number of Supreme Court cases dating back to 1867.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump
President Donald Trump.
Brandon Bell/Getty Images

Trump 2.0: Navigating the New Political Landscape

With Trump’s return to the White House, we once again bear daily witness to a spectacle that could be described as entertaining, were it only a TV series. But Trump’s unprecedented assault on our democratic norms and institutions is not only very real but represents the gravest peril our democratic republic has confronted in the last 80 years.

Trump’s gradual consolidation of power and authoritarian proclivities, reminiscent of an earlier era, are very frightening on their own account. But it is his uncanny ability to control the narrative that empowers him to shred our nation’s fabric while proceeding with impunity. His actions not only threaten the very republic that he now leads but overturn the entire post-WWII world order, which is now in chaos. Trump has ostensibly cast aside the governing principle with the U.N. Charter of Sovereignty. By suggesting on multiple occasions that the U.S. will “get Greenland one way or another,” and that Canada might become our 51st state, our neighbor to the north is now developing plans to protect itself from what it views as the enemy across the border.

Keep ReadingShow less
Free Speech and Freedom of the Press Under Assault

A speakerphone locked in a cage.

Getty Images, J Studios

Free Speech and Freedom of the Press Under Assault

On June 4, 2024, an op-ed I penned (“Project 2025 is a threat to democracy”) was published in The Fulcrum. It received over 74,000 views and landed as one of the top 10 most-read op-eds—out of 1,460—published in 2024.

The op-ed identified how the right-wing extremist Heritage Foundation think tank had prepared a 900-page blueprint of actions that the authors felt Donald Trump should implement—if elected—in the first 180 days of being America’s 47th president. Dozens of opinion articles were spun off from the op-ed by a multitude of cross-partisan freelance writers and published in The Fulcrum, identifying—very specifically—what Trump and his appointees would do by following the Heritage Foundation’s dictum of changing America from a pluralistic democracy to a form of democracy that, according to its policy blueprint, proposes “deleting the terms diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), plus gender equality, out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation and piece of legislation that exists.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Devaluing Truth Makes America Weak

Blocks with letters on them, spelling out "Fake" or "Fact".

Getty Images, Constantine Johnny

Devaluing Truth Makes America Weak

Truth matters. You wouldn’t know that from watching the president address Congress earlier this month. The assault on truth since January has been breathtaking. The removal of data from government websites, the elevation of science deniers to positions in charge of scientific policy, and the advancement of health policy that flies in the face of scientific evidence are only the tip of the iceberg. We are watching a disaster in the making: Our leaders are all falling in line with a program that prioritizes politics and power over American success. But, we ignore the truth at our own peril—reality has a way of getting our attention even if we look the other way.

As a philosophy professor, my discipline’s attention to truth has never seemed more relevant than today. Although, there may be disagreement about the ultimate nature of truth, even the most minimal theory agrees that truth requires alignment with the way the world is. It is neither negotiable nor unimportant. Devaluing the importance of truth is a fool’s game, and it is incompatible with American success. It makes us weak and vulnerable; epidemics, deaths, and unrest will follow.

Keep ReadingShow less