Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Holding Trump Accountable: He’s NOT the Emperor

Opinion

Holding Trump Accountable: He’s NOT the Emperor
shallow focus photography white crown hanging decor
Photo by Megan Watson on Unsplash

Publishers' Notes: Our challenge as a publication, dedicated to keeping our readers informed so we can repair our democracy and make it live and work in our everyday lives, is not to be overly reactive or partisan. At the same time, we must not ignore the dangers of the administration's degrading, hostile, and accusatory language and actions when they occur. We invite you to read this column outlining our editorial position covering the Trump administration by clicking HERE.

Not every column represents the editorial focus of the Fulcrum. However, consistent with our mission, the column below represents a commitment to sharing many perspectives to widen our readers' viewpoints.


“But he hasn’t got anything on!” said a little child. “The emperor has no clothes!”

In Hans Christian Andersen’s 1837 fairy tale, “The Emperor’s New Clothes” it takes an innocent child to declare what all those surrounding the emperor will not. That is the “magical” garments,” which only the brilliant and astute purportedly can see, do not exist. They are mere fabrications. But for fear of crossing the mighty ruler and being thought inept or stupid, the courtiers proclaim the beauty of the emperor’s non-existent clothing.

If we take the emperor’s “clothes” to mean the dignity and true power of the office of the Presidency, then indeed, Donald Trump is wearing no clothes. And his chief tailor, Elon Musk, has never sewn a stitch of diplomacy or practiced relational tactics in his life.

In the United States, we do not have an emperor, and despite the publication from the White House declaring otherwise, we do not have a king. We have a president, the head of the Executive branch, whose job is to execute the law. We have two other equally powerful branches: the Legislative and the Judicial, whose jobs are, respectively, to make the laws and to judge the laws. Our forefathers intended for each branch to provide checks on the others, which is critical for the balance of power within the government.

Now, all three branches are peppered heavily with Republicans. In the true sense of Lincoln’s Republican Party, this would not be a problem. But this is no longer the Republican party. A perfect example is how the Republican members of Congress, the party that enthusiastically voted for military aid and support to Ukraine, have changed their tune almost unanimously now in support of Trump's clash with Ukraine president VolodymyrZelensky on the 28th of February.

However, it is the job of all members of Congress, regardless of which party, to speak up when legal or moral rules are violated.

Our country is a tangible collection of many ideas and ideologies, yet all are subject to its laws, and all citizens within the realm possess guaranteed rights. Even those who argue we need a thorough cleansing of the federal bureaucracy are not advocates of “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” Sure, we have very real problems: unchecked immigration, out-of-control national debt, etc. We do, of course, need to solve these problems.

However, the answers cannot be found in alienating half of our country’s citizens and many allies worldwide. President Trump’s meeting with President Zelensky at the White House was a national embarrassment, playing out on an international stage.

How can any of us remain nonplussed when viewing the chaos of the last several weeks? Or have Donald Trump’s litany of executive orders been so stunning that we are stunned and senseless?

Apparently so. Although some are rising in protest, and some judges and districts are bringing lawsuits, most Americans are acting as if all they need to do is change the channel on their smart TV, and this all-too-real reality show will go away.

But many don’t want to change the channel and believe our 47th President exhibits the “strong leadership” our nation needs. Of course, we do want strong leadership, but it must be tempered with respect and compassion, remembering that as president, our leader speaks for all his constituents, and he is the voice the world hears.

Our 26th President, Teddy Roosevelt, said it plainly, “Speak softly and carry a big stick, and you will go far.” Roosevelt’s approach emphasized the importance of maintaining a strong military as a deterrent while prioritizing diplomacy. One example of many was Roosevelt sending a fleet of U.S. Navy ships on a world tour to demonstrate American naval power, a peaceful yet powerful display of strength, aligning with his philosophy of speaking softly while carrying a big stick.

Perhaps many Americans who don’t support Trump's actions remain silent because they believe that, ultimately, the pendulum will swing, as it has in the past, and that we’ll restore sense and balance. But might it not be too late for us and the world if we do not take action now?

Presently, there are 96 legal challenges to the various Executive orders issued by the Trump Administration. Following the rule of law is one way to act with legal challenges and is likely to overturn many of Trump's executive orders. But there is more you can do. Protests against the DOGE cuts are happening across the country at an ever-increasing rate. A “50501 Movement’ standing for “50 states, 50 protests, one day” has emerged in which dozens of demonstrations across the U.S. were recently held.

The overriding message is “No Kings,” where protesters are criticizing some of President Donald Trump’s actions as illegal and beyond the scope of his presidential powers. Additionally, more and more protestors are taking aim at billionaire Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency-led efforts to cut spending and fire employees across the federal government without due process.

Donald Trump was re-elected as President of the United States to serve, not to reign, and he should return to these core principles.

Amy Lockard is an Iowa resident who regularly contributes to regional newspapers and periodicals. She is working on the second of a four-book fictional series based on Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice."


Read More

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's annual policy conference at the Washington Convention Center March 6, 2018 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

After AIPAC failed to defeat El-Sayed in the Michigan Democratic Senate primary—after spending $32 million—it said that it remains committed to defeating El-Sayed and his "radical, anti-Israel" agenda in the general election. Which means it is poised to sink tens of millions of dollars in supporting Republican Mike Rogers. It also said that Haley Stevens, his opponent, had presented "an authentic Democratic agenda." Meaning that El-Sayed did not? And they think that Mike Rogers, a MAGA Trump supporter, does compared with El-Sayed?

How can AIPAC say that El-Sayed does not present an authentic Democratic agenda when his socialist stance is much more in line with the principles stated in the Declaration of Independence than most centrist Democrats'? And making it sound like AIPAC cares about an authentic Democratic agenda is deceitful, when in the same breath they make clear that they will support Mike Rogers, a Trump lackey, in the general election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research
silhouette of person using microscope

Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research

Scientists and the federal government have been close partners since World War II. A landmark report by President Truman’s chief science advisor laid out a vision for government research that shaped eight decades of federally funded science. That vision is now at risk. In principle, the Trump administration has supported scientific research with its own vision for a new “golden age of science.” But in practice, the administration has upended the relationship between the government, researchers, and their institutions. The changes have alarmed working scientists and their allies, who have protested in record numbers.

In July, I moderated a webinar on “Rewriting the Rules: What’s happening to public science?” (read the transcript here). The webinar was co-sponsored by NAPA, CODE, and the Bridge Alliance, with Dr. Aaron Carroll of AcademyHealth, Dr. Chris Marcum of the Federation of American Scientists, Dr. Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Dr. Maryam Zaringhalam of the Center for Open Science. I also interviewed Cole Donovan of the Stand Up for Science Foundation by email.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democratic Party Suicide
a piece of paper cut out of the shape of a donkey
Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

Democratic Party Suicide

A recent New York Times article, "Moderate Democrats Prepare for 'War' Against an Ascendant Left," describes a disturbing perspective among mainstream, moderate, centrist Democrats. It is disturbing for many reasons.

First, there is the practical impact. If indeed mainstream Democrats attack socialist Democrats in a sustained, organized manner, there is only one possible result: the defeat of the Party in 2026 and the renewed vigor of Trump and his MAGA allies. Especially when combined with the all-out effort that AIPAC will mostly take to support Republican candidates running against Democratic candidates who are socialists. (See my article, "The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC.")

Keep ReadingShow less
An Iranian flag and the message "No King" graffitied on the ruins of the data center building of Sharif University of Technology after a U.S.-Israeli missile strike on April 7, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.

How has the meaning of military victory changed? Explore Iran, deterrence, nuclear weapons, and why modern wars are fought with limited objectives.

Kaveh Kazemi/Getty Images

The Last War We Understood

Every modern conflict seems to produce the same debate.

Supporters argue that military action achieved its objectives. Critics ask why the enemy still exists. Iran is only the latest example.

Keep ReadingShow less