Our mission is to investigate and expose crony capitalism, misuse of taxpayer monies, and other governmental corruption or malfeasance.
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

Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill on May 19, 2026 in Washington, D.C. The hearing was held to examine the Department of Justice's proposed FY2027 budget estimate.
Getty Images
GOP Waves White Flag in Contest of Ideas
May 26, 2026
There was a time the Republican Party believed in policies and principles. Conservatives genuinely believed in democracy and America, and not the cynical new version that requires its citizens to hate each other. And they believed in a contest of ideas.
The concept of competing for the soul of the nation with intellectually rigorous ideas and admittedly populist rhetoric became foundational to American politics and in particular movement conservatism later on in that century.
In a speech at CPAC in 1985, President Ronald Reagan boasted of the right’s recent dominance as a result of that competition. “Now, we’re not in power now because [the left] failed to gain electoral support over the past 50 years. They did win support. And the result was chaos, weakness, and drift,” he said. “Ultimately, though…we are where we are because we’re winning the contest of ideas. In fact, in the past decade, all of a sudden, quietly, mysteriously, the Republican Party has become the party of ideas…. All of a sudden, Republicans were not defenders of the status quo but creators of the future.”
And it was this way for some time, when conservatives believed that if given the opportunity, they could win over the country on the power of their ideas.
But in the era of Donald Trump, Republicans have decided competing is no longer useful or necessary, and they’re out of good ideas.
In some ways, they’re not wrong. Polling for any number of Trump’s “ideas,” from the Iran war to tariffs to burying the Epstein files are wildly unpopular and Republicans would lose that competition if judged solely on their merits.
But rather than even bother persuading, they’ve opted for other less democratic and more cynical pursuits to win elections.
The latest is Trump’s $1.8 billion slush fund, which will award allies and Trump supporters “compensation” for what the Trump DOJ is calling weaponized lawfare against them.
That means, presumably, that Jan. 6 insurrectionists, some of whom committed crimes at the Capitol, including assaulting police officers, could apply for and win taxpayer dollars as a form of political reparation.
One way to view these payoffs is that they’re a blatant bribe to buy MAGA support at a time when Trump is unpopular and making unpopular decisions that are impacting his own voters.
The GOP redistricting orgy is another example of Republicans simply giving up on winning voters over. Trump and his cronies in Congress love to boast about how America is now the “hottest” country, thanks to him, but if that were the case, wouldn’t they just go out and sell that to voters before the midterms? Instead, they’ve spent millions carving out new districts all over the South. That’s hardly a reflection of a party that’s confident in their ideas and their message — rather, it’s a party admitting, we can’t win it unless we rig it.
Trump’s media fights are about more than just his fragile ego, too. They’re another tell. In trying to coerce new Trump-friendly mergers, to get detractors fired from Fox and elsewhere, to sue media outlets for critical coverage, Trump isn’t just telegraphing his deep insecurities, he’s tacitly admitting he can’t win with a free and fair press.
Trump, the consummate salesman, isn’t even bothering to sell voters on his economy or his war anymore. He’s just lying about both, and hoping loyalty to him will be enough. But just in case it isn’t, Republicans are doing every craven thing they can to tip the scales and go around the voters.
It’s sad to watch how far the party of Reagan has fallen, but today’s Republican Party has unequivocally waved the white flag in the contest of ideas, and they’re just hoping we’re all too stupid to notice they’re no longer even asking for our vote.
GOP Waves White Flag in Contest of Ideas was originally published by The Tribune Content Agency and is republished with permission.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended

U.S. President Donald Trump (L) speaks to White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles as he oversees "Operation Epic Fury" at Mar-a-Lago on February 28, 2026, in Palm Beach, Florida.
Handout, Getty Images
Why Trump Has Gone Global
May 25, 2026
Why has Donald Trump transformed his foreign policy from isolationist to interventionist?
He doesn’t have some newfound curiosity in foreign affairs. Nor does he now deeply care about the global order. He’s shifted his focus for a different reason entirely: because his domestic agenda keeps getting stymied by checks and balances.
Unlike at home, Trump has few restraints on the global stage. He likes that environment much more.
He’s a bull who needs his China shop.
America’s domestic political system is resisting Trump more than many think. Sure, he’s gotten things done and caused lots of trouble. And to the victims of his abuses, the restraints on his power are far too weak.
But Trump’s domestic agenda has been muddled and underwhelming, especially for a president whose party controls Congress.
This is true even when the noise is screeching. Take DOGE, Trump’s partnership with Elon Musk. Remember how it was supposed to dramatically reduce federal spending?
For all its sound and fury, DOGE was largely negated by the very president who authorized it. About Trump's 2025 spending bill, Musk asked: “What’s the point of DOGE if the government’s just going to add $5 trillion more in debt?”
Moreover, while many Republicans slavishly acquiesce to Trump, not all of them do. Republican senators are rejecting his demand to end the filibuster. House Republicans are investigating the Epstein files.
The courts, for their part, rule against Trump regularly, including striking down his signature tariffs policy. His effort to undo birthright citizenship will likely soon meet the same fate.
State and local governments are likewise resisting Trump. Just look at California’s and Virginia’s broad gerrymanders in response to his (and his fellow Republicans’) election machinations.
The media–traditional and independent alike–have been fierce, notwithstanding Trump’s threats (and lawsuits). And the people in the streets, like in Minnesota, have made their voices heard.
Polling data suggests that Democrats will take the House in November. If they do, Trump will likely be impeached (again), and his legislative agenda will be in tatters.
Indeed, Trump has worthy opponents across American society thwarting his domestic ambitions.
Every single day.
But foreign policy, alas, is different. These checks don’t work internationally. A simple comparison illustrates the point: The same president who can’t get his political rival, Adam Schiff, indicted can unleash the might of America’s military on a whim.
Trump can largely do what he wants globally–including blowing up suspicious ships, taking out heads of state, invading sovereign nations, and threatening to end a civilization on social media.
It’s not supposed to work this way. The United States Constitution is ambiguous in numerous respects. But with declaring war, it’s clear: Article 1, Section 8 grants to Congress, not the president, “The power to declare war.”
“Only Congress can declare war,” Republican Senator Rand Paul said in March while protesting the Iran invasion. “That’s not my opinion. That's Article 1 of the Constitution … History will not be kind to a Congress that gave away its most solemn responsibility.”
As Trump's supporters emphasize, multiple presidents have initiated hostilities without congressional support. But numerous others have gone to Congress, as George W. Bush did in 2002 before the Iraq war.
One virtue of working with Congress before declaring war is that the public debate is more robust. Today, the American people are left to guess why Trump invaded Iran.
When he did so, without first seeking congressional authorization, he violated Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.
It’s that simple. Yet there was no practical way to stop him.
Congress moves far too slowly to block an aggressive commander-in-chief. And the courts can only do so much. Judges can force Trump to refund his tariffs, for example, but they can’t unwind the invasion of another country.
Ultimately, the person in the Oval Office is what matters most. As John Adams put it long ago, “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality … [which] would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net.”
Trump’s global ambitions flow from his domestic frustrations. The way to restrain him should be to follow the Constitution. That is, unfortunately, like trying to catch a whale with a fishing net.
Edward Larson is a Pulitzer Prize-winning legal historian, and William Cooper is an attorney and author. They cohost the podcast How Our Constitution Works And Why It Doesn't.
Keep ReadingShow less

white red and blue textile
Photo by Tim Mossholder on Unsplash
Has Deception Become America’s Currency of Power?
May 25, 2026
The most dangerous currency in American politics today isn’t money — it’s deception. It buys loyalty, distorts reality, and reshapes institutions long before citizens realize the damage. My father had a simple way of warning me to guard against that kind of influence: “Don’t take any wooden nickels.” He wanted me to recognize when someone was lying, conning, or dressing something up to look like value when it wasn’t. I never imagined that my childhood warning would become a civic alarm in my adult life, but it has. For years, politicians have handed Americans political wooden nickels — promises polished to look like truth — and the damage those deceptions have caused is now painfully clear.
In this administration, deception circulates like currency — traded, exchanged, and used to purchase influence, loyalty, and time. It is not merely a habit; it has become a governing strategy — a set of tactics used to acquire power, protect it, and bend institutions to its will. .
Corruption in government is no longer whispered about or hidden behind closed doors. It is practiced openly, defended aggressively, and normalized through constant repetition. The president brought his deception act from his business world straight into the White House — a world where branding often mattered more than results, where blurred financial lines, legal maneuvering, and spectacle-driven success substituted for accountability. Many supporters did not realize that the patterns they now see on a national stage were long established: contractors left unpaid, charitable funds treated as personal assets, and loyalty demanded as the price of staying in his orbit. Those same tactics — pressure, intimidation, and transactional loyalty — now shape the way power is exercised, turning deception into a political currency.
The president promised to “clean the swamp,” but millions now believe he developed it. Instead of restoring trust, he has treated public resources the way he treated his business ventures — using charitable foundation money for personal expenses in the past and spending taxpayer dollars freely now, even as families struggle to make ends meet. The contrast is hard to ignore: citizens tightening their budgets while their government spends as if the public purse has no bottom — another reminder of how deception buys cover for power.
His quest for a grand ballroom — a project he claimed would be funded by donors but was not — captures the disconnect. First the donors, then the taxpayers, then the donors again. It symbolizes leadership turned inward, where personal image becomes the currency and public needs become secondary.
Even some of his most vocal allies have begun to acknowledge the cost of this deception. Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene — once one of his fiercest defenders — publicly admitted that the promises of “MAGA” were "a lie" and that the president is now serving "big, big donors" rather than the people who believed in him. Even loyalty has its breaking point when deception becomes the cost of staying in power.
And the consequences are not theoretical — they are unfolding right now. In Louisiana, an incumbent senator was ousted after voting to impeach the president. Suspended elections, aggressive gerrymandering, and constitutional amendments rushed onto ballots are reshaping who gets to choose their leaders. Communities in Tennessee, Louisiana, and Alabama are protesting because they see what is happening: deception is being used to justify the erosion of their most fundamental right — the right to select candidates of their choice. When leaders manipulate maps, timelines, and rules to predetermine outcomes, deception becomes the currency for preserving power.
Little did Americans know that the same leader who promised stability during the 2024 campaign had already encouraged an attack on the peaceful transfer of power in 2020 — and would later support redistricting efforts in 2026 designed to silence minority voters. That pattern — a disregard for constitutional limits, an oath treated as optional in moments when the Constitution constrained him, and open praise for dictators like Xi and Putin— has been reinforced by repeated falsehoods about tariffs, drug prices, and even the origins of Russia’s war in Ukraine. These distortions function as transactions — buying time, shaping perception, and hiding unethical actions behind a veneer of legitimacy.
Conflicting explanations for the costly Iran war — despite promises of "no new wars" — show how deception buys political cover for decisions voters never expected. He once told rally crowds to "Knock the Crap Out Of" hecklers and promised to cover the legal fees. Now he is asking Congress to support individuals convicted for the violence of January 6 — violence that left Americans dead, officers injured, and millions outraged. This pattern has created a divide between the powerful and the powerless — a reminder that deception, once normalized, becomes the currency that determines whose voices matter. For many, it feels like rewarding those who attacked the Capitol while the people who honor it are left unheard. When truth becomes optional, institutions bend, and the public pays the price.
Recently, I spoke with a young acquaintance who supports the president. He was frustrated about rising costs, taxes, and congressional dysfunction — concerns shared by Americans across the political spectrum. But much of what he said was shaped by a news outlet he trusts, and several of the claims were simply untrue. He even repeated the false claim that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio‑Cortez was born outside the United States, though she was born in the Bronx to Puerto Rican parents. I didn’t argue with him. I listened, because his confusion is not a personal failing — it is the predictable result of a leader whose statements are so often contradicted by later facts.
The framers understood that concentrated power, especially when paired with deception, was the greatest threat to a Republic. They built a system in which ambition would check ambition, where Congress, the courts, and the executive branch would restrain one another. But today, those guardrails are weakened. Oversight that should be routine becomes selective. Norms that once protected the public interest are dismissed as inconveniences. With the 2026 election approaching, the cost of deception is no longer theoretical — it is shaping the choices voters will make and the future they will inherit. When deception becomes the currency of power, institutions grow vulnerable to manipulation, and the balance the framers designed begins to collapse.
If deception has become a currency of power, then the work ahead is to devalue it — and restore truth as the medium through which power must be earned. In the short term, we can strengthen our democracy through reforms that limit the influence of wealthy donors, require divestment from business interests that create conflicts of interest, and increase transparency in appointments and federal contracts. Fair representation calls for gerrymandering reform. Institutional integrity depends on restoring oversight bodies weakened by political pressure.
These reforms are essential, but they are not enough. Long‑term solutions demand something deeper: a cultural commitment to truth. That means promoting civic education, teaching critical thinking, encouraging cross‑aisle conversations, verifying information before sharing it, supporting reputable journalism, and electing leaders who treat public office as a public trust. Democracy cannot survive if citizens stop talking to one another or surrender their judgment to those who profit from division and confusion.
But the most important safeguard is the one the framers trusted most: the people. Democracy depends on citizens who refuse to accept deception as leadership and corruption as normal. It depends on voters who use the guardrails available to them — research, reputable journalism, public records, hearings, court rulings, and lived experience — to separate the man from the myth and reject the deception. A Republic survives when its citizens insist that public office be treated as a public trust.
My father’s warning echoes louder now than ever: don’t take any wooden nickels. When deception becomes the currency of power, truth becomes expendable, institutions become targets, and citizens become tools for someone else’s ends. Whether deception becomes America’s currency of power depends on Americans — because a Republic survives only when its people refuse to trade truth for deception.
Carolyn Goode is a retired educational leader and national advocate for ethical leadership and civic renewal. She writes about democracy, accountability, and the responsibilities of public leadership.
Keep ReadingShow less
The Rising Legacy of Latinas in America’s Armed Forces
May 25, 2026
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico —Visitors still pause at the white marble headstone of SPC Frances Marie Vega at the Puerto Rico National Cemetery. The 20‑year‑old soldier was the first female service member of Puerto Rican descent to die in combat during the Iraq War. Her legacy, once known mostly within military circles, has become a powerful symbol of the growing contributions and sacrifices of Latinas in the U.S. Armed Forces.
Vega was aboard a CH‑47 Chinook helicopter when it was hit by a surface‑to‑air missile near Fallujah on November 2, 2003, killing 16 soldiers. The shoot‑down became one of the deadliest single incidents for U.S. forces in the early stages of the Iraq War.

Born in San Francisco and raised in a military family stationed at Fort Buchanan, Vega enlisted after 9/11, joining the 151st Adjutant General Postal Detachment. The Army later awarded her the Bronze Star and Purple Heart posthumously. Fort Buchanan renamed its main entrance the SPC Frances M. Vega Gate, a tribute documented in Army public affairs releases.
Her story reflects a broader trend: Latinas are serving in the U.S. military at the highest rates in history. According to the Department of Defense’s 2023 Demographics Report, women now make up 17.5% of active‑duty personnel, and Latinas represent one of the fastest‑growing segments. The Pew Research Center has reported that Hispanic women enlist at higher rates than non‑Hispanic women relative to their share of the population. The VA’s Center for Women Veterans notes that Latinas are increasingly represented in combat support and leadership roles.
Despite this growth, Latina veterans often describe a dual invisibility — underrepresented in military history and overlooked in broader Latino narratives. Scholars such as Dr. Gina Pérez, who studies Puerto Rican military families, have written that Latina service members frequently shoulder “the weight of patriotic expectation and cultural silence.”
In Dr. Pérez’s field research exploring the complex motivations of families—especially regarding young Latinas seeking autonomy—she explains: “While limited economic opportunities certainly inform these decisions, Latina/o youth and their parents are also influenced by gendered understandings of autonomy, kinwork, honor, and respectability in turning to military programs while in high school.”

Vega’s death galvanized recognition of Puerto Rican and Latina service. Her name appears on El Monumento de la Recordación in San Juan, alongside more than 1,200 Puerto Rican service members who have died in U.S. conflicts since World War I. Her story is now taught in Puerto Rican schools during Memorial Day observances, and Army units deployed to the Middle East have held ceremonies in her honor. The Frances M. Vega Army Post Office at Camp Victory in Baghdad, named in 2004, served thousands of troops during the height of the Iraq War.
For many Latina soldiers, Vega represents both sacrifice and possibility. “Frances showed us that Puerto Rican women belong in every part of the military,” said one Army sergeant interviewed in a 2021 El Nuevo Día feature. “She’s part of ou story now.”
Her legacy stands alongside other trailblazing Latina service members, including Lori Piestewa, the Hopi Latina soldier who became the first Native American woman killed in combat; Olga E. Custodio, the first Latina U.S. military pilot; Linda Garcia Cubero, the first Latina graduate of a U.S. service academy; and Marisol Chalas, one of the first Latina Black Hawk helicopter pilots.
Each Memorial Day, Vega’s story resurfaces across Puerto Rico and Latino communities in the mainland U.S. Her youth, her service, and her sacrifice have made her a symbol of the thousands of Latinas who have worn the uniform. Her father, retired Sgt. 1st Class Daniel Vega, told The Washington Post in 2003 that his daughter “wanted to serve because she believed in this country.” That single sentence has since become one of the most quoted lines about her life.
Twenty years later, her legacy continues to grow — not only as a fallen soldier, but as a reminder of the courage and commitment of Latinas across the U.S. military.
Remembering SPC Frances M. Vega and the Rising Legacy of Latinas in America’s Armed Forces was first published on Latino News Network and was republished with permission.
Hugo Balta is the executive editor of The Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network, and twice president of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More
















Some MAGA loyalists have turned on Trump. Why the rest haven’t