One year ago today, we launched this Substack. The idea was simple and straightforward: provide a platform for courageous Americans who are willing to speak out against this administration’s abuses. We knew there were still people out there unafraid to take a stand for democracy. We just weren’t hearing from enough of them.

This time last year, large multinational corporations and some of our society’s most prestigious institutions—legacy media companies, Big Law, universities, tech giants—were consciously choosing to self-censor. Worse, many were opting to align themselves with the administration in the hopes that Donald Trump wouldn’t single them out for abuse.

This is how the Trump administration has attempted to consolidate its power—with the active participation of those people and institutions who put fear or expediency over principle. We sought out those people who are doing the exact opposite, and committed ourselves to amplifying their stories. Today, more than 50,000 of you have subscribed to hear from them directly.

These are stories of courage, selflessness, and a stubborn refusal to bend the knee. We want to bring you just a few of them. And if these kinds of pieces inspire you or bring you hope, here’s our only ask: Support our work to help ensure we can continue telling them to the world.

1.) The US citizen and veteran who ICE abducted.

George Retes signed up to defend his country as part of the Global War on Terror. Years later, as Trump put boots on the ground across his native California, George was violently arrested by federal agents. They held him for three days with no charges, no information, and no ability to contact his family.

Then one day, he was simply released without an explanation or an apology. He missed his daughter’s third birthday, and was traumatized by the experience. As a soldier and a patriot, George refused to take all of this lying down. Today, he is suing the federal government over what happened to him—a persistent, living reminder of the need for accountability in the face of state violence.

2.) The brilliant mathematician who was de-funded for no reason.

It’s hard to overstate the brilliance of Terence Tao, a professor in the Department of Mathematics at UCLA who has been called the “Mozart of Math.” He is considered by many to be the greatest mathematician alive. Which is why it was so bewildering when, amid DOGE’s rampage across the federal government, his research funding was abruptly cut off.

This left Prof. Tao scrambling for other funding sources, and working overtime to protect his research team from the harmful effects of these needless cuts. This all left him discouraged, but refusing to give up—because, as he writes, in the current environment, “the luxury of disengagement is no longer a viable option.”

3.) The tennis star who has lived under totalitarianism.

The legendary Martina Navratilova has seen this movie before: Growing up in communist Czechoslovakia, she saw firsthand what it feels like when an authoritarian regime seizes power and refuses to let go. She came to America in part because it was the one place where she could pursue her craft with total freedom—the place a person could go to become the very best in the world.

Now, she says she’s seeing many of the same worrying signs that alarmed her all those years ago: the strongman rhetoric, the cowardice of elites, the self-silencing, the sense of constantly needing to look over one’s shoulder. That’s why she’s speaking out, in order to ensure that history doesn’t repeat itself here in America.

4.) The general who is speaking out against domestic deployment of troops.

Retired Maj. Gen. Randy Manner served for more than 35 years in the US Army and National Guard, part of a long line of service running through generations of his family. He rose to become the number-two leader in the National Guard Bureau in the Pentagon, which commands the 450,000 citizen-soldiers who help keep our homeland safe.

So when Trump insulted that proud institution by deploying National Guard troops in unfriendly blue cities across the country, Gen. Manner recognized what a uniquely dangerous move it was. Not only did this corrupt the apolitical nature of our armed forces, but it put the young men and women in uniform in direct opposition to their fellow Americans.

5.) The Nobel Prize-winning immigrant who no longer recognizes America.

Born in London and raised in Canada, Jack Szostak is quintessentially American. He chose this country as the home base for his pathbreaking research in biology and chemistry. Eventually, along with his coauthors, he won the Nobel Prize in 2009 and has been recognized with dozens of other distinguished awards for services in his field.

In recent years, he has watched in shock and horror as his adoptive country—or at least its current leadership—has turned its back on everything that drew him here in the first place. The nativism, the anti-scientific dogma, the de-funding of potentially lifesaving research; all of it has left him reeling, and resolved more than ever to raise his voice in opposition.

6.) The cop who is still holding the line.

My friend Michael Fanone defended democracy on January 6. He spent hours being attacked viciously by rioters summoned to the Capitol by Trump, and he was nearly killed when they dragged him into the crowd, with one man shouting, “Kill him with his own gun!”

In the years since, Michael has refused to allow the memory of that day to be whitewashed by MAGA liars—up to and including the president himself. In this scorching piece, he tells his story, and lays out why exactly he doesn’t plan on shutting up or going away anytime soon.

Support Home of the Brave

This is just a small sample. In these pages, we’ve published hundreds of voices from across the spectrum of American life:

The Maine reverend sheltering immigrants. The veteran family cut off from VA support. The architect appalled by Trump’s DC vanity projects. The Minnesotan lamenting ICE’s occupation. The infectious disease expert skewering this administration’s ebola response. The rural American watching her neighbors fall prey to Trumpism. The European whose fellow countrymen are afraid to visit America. The son of immigrants whose friends are fleeing to Canada. The veteran activist laying out the Iran war’s costs on service members.

The DC cops who bravely held the line alongside Fanone. The career prosecutor sickened by the politicization of justice. The disabled veteran speaking out on behalf of his comrades. The Ohio farmer suffering Trump’s tariffs. The parent of a child with special needs who is suffering from research cuts. I’ve even told my own story of working inside the first Trump administration, and resigning in protest on January 6, in hopes that it can offer lessons for others to follow their consciences, and not be lulled by the false promises of those currently in power.

Each and every one of these stories holds a lesson, a fragment of wisdom about the precarious moment we’re living through. We share them not to depress or overwhelm you—just the opposite. We’re telling these stories to show that bravery is still, always, an option. That the silence of cowardice is a choice, and one that Americans need not make in this moment of slow-rolling crisis. There is another way. All of these people prove that.

Be like them. Speak out. Refuse to be silenced. This is a moment of darkness that our democratic way of life can—and will—survive. But it requires that each of us do our part.

Share

Sarah Matthews is an advisory board member for Home of the Brave, which exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

Like, rate, review and subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Going forward, we’ll be dropping episodes every Saturday at 11 am ET.

In his dystopian 1935 political novel It Can’t Happen Here, Sinclair Lewis imagined what could transpire when Americans elected a dictator. Less than a century later, Bill and Tom are here to break down the threats to American democracy, and lay out a playbook for how citizens can respond.

Our first episode covers why Trump’s attorney general nominee, Todd Blanche, should be made to answer for Ghislaine Maxwell, the Epstein files, and the corruption of the Justice Department. You won’t want to miss it.

Bill is an advisory board member of Home of the Brave and leading voice in defense of American democracy. Tom served as a senior professional staff member on the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the US Capitol, where he was principal author of the Committee’s final report.

Subscribe now

Share

Support Home of the Brave

Home of the Brave exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

Bob has written that, in fighting and then losing the Iran war, the damage to US credibility “can neither be repaired nor ignored. There will be no return to the status quo ante, no ultimate American triumph that will undo or overcome the harm done.”

Bob and Sarah discussed the recently signed memorandum of understanding, what it does and doesn’t do, the possibility of further re-escalation, and how all of this leaves America in a weaker position globally.

A very special livestream with Home of the Brave’s Sarah Matthews and Robert Kagan, contributing writer for The Atlantic, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, and the author, most recently, of “Rebellion.”

Bob has written that, in fighting and then losing the Iran war, the damage to US credibility “can neither be repaired nor ignored. There will be no return to the status quo ante, no ultimate American triumph that will undo or overcome the harm done.”

Bob and Sarah discussed the recently signed memorandum of understanding, what it does and doesn’t do, the possibility of further re-escalation, and how all of this leaves America in a weaker position globally.

Subscribe now

Share

Support Home of the Brave

Home of the Brave exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

But, decades ago, farmers and scientists triumphed. In 1966, all the U.S. states dealing with screwworm declared an eradication program a success. Screwworm came back a few times since, but the government-established programs to monitor and prevent screwworm outbreaks were effective.

Then the Trump administration’s DOGE made sweeping cuts to USAID—including a program that monitored and helped contain the screwworm in Central America. Unsurprisingly, just over a year later, the screwworm has returned to the U.S. Now the administration is scrambling to prevent the situation it caused from getting worse.

Watch our video on the screwworm’s return to learn what happened and why it matters. And if you want to help us keep bringing these kinds of messages to the American people, consider supporting us today.

Support Home of the Brave

Home of the Brave exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

Share

This article is part seven of a series called The Epstein Administration, in which we break through the noise of the Epstein files, report the truth, and demand transparency and accountability.

The week of June 8 was chock-full of news about the Epstein files. With so many stories competing for media attention, no single story received its due attention. Home of the Brave collected the week’s most significant updates on the Epstein files to ensure that the news cycle does not drown out the extent to which the Trump administration continues to resist transparency and investigation. We’ll continue to consolidate Epstein news into one easily viewable place for our readers who remain interested and concerned about the Administration’s handling of the Epstein files.

Trump Formally Nominates Todd Blanche For Attorney General. On Monday, June 8, Trump formally nominated his former defense attorney Todd Blanche to serve as Attorney General. Blanche has served as Acting AG since Trump fired Bondi in April, and Blanche served as Deputy AG under Bondi.

Blanche must now submit paperwork to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which must wait 28 days after Blanche turns in all of his paperwork to schedule his confirmation hearing. Punchbowl News estimates that the fastest timeline would culminate in a committee vote on Blanche’s nomination at the end of July.

Epstein’s Former Executive Assistant Appears Before House Oversight. On Tuesday, June 9, Epstein’s executive assistant Lesley Groff testified before the House Oversight Committee. Groff oversaw a large portion of Epstein’s scheduling, travel, and day-to-day life for nearly twenty years, spanning from 2001 to 2019.

Epstein’s controversial 2008 plea deal and federal non-prosecution agreement included a release of federal criminal charges against Groff as Epstein’s co-conspirator.

A 2019 civil lawsuit named Groff as an enabler. But Groff has always maintained that she was not aware of Epstein’s crimes when they happened. Groff repeated this same claim on Tuesday to the House Oversight Committee. She told the committee members that Epstein was a “master manipulator” and that she sought to “dispel the false notions” that she “knowingly enabled or conspired with him to commit his evil acts” because “nothing could be further from the truth.”

When Oversight releases the transcript of her interview, we’ll fact-check her testimony here.

Comer Wants to Meet with Todd Blanche and Alan Dershowitz. On Tuesday, June 9, Comer announced that the House Oversight Committee will try to speak with Todd Blanche and Alan Dershowitz.

Dershowitz was a lawyer on Epstein’s defense team after Epstein’s initial 2006 arrest for solicitation of prostitution, and helped negotiate Epstein’s 2008 plea deal. Dershowitz told The Guardian: “Everything I did in relation to the Epstein case, I’m proud of.” Comer said that he will “give him an opportunity to come in” and answer the Committee’s questions.

Bill Gates Appears Before Oversight. On Wednesday, June 10, the House Oversight Committee interviewed Bill Gates about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Gates said in his opening statement, which he released to the public, that he “never witnessed nor had any indication that Epstein was engaged in ongoing criminal conduct” and “never victimized anyone.” The public has long questioned Gates’ relationship with Epstein, scrutiny that only increased after DOJ’s release of its files in January, which include several communications between the men.

Gates noted in his opening statement that he “never should have met with Epstein in the first place” and now understands that “even if he had delivered the new donors [to Gates’s global health efforts] he promised, it would not have justified associating with him.”

New Poll on Approval of Handling of Epstein Files. On Wednesday, June 10, Reuters/Ipsos released a poll finding that nearly 75% of the country believes that the federal government probably is hiding material related to Epstein’s alleged clients, and only 10% of the poll’s respondents say that the Trump administration “helped efforts to hold people connected to Epstein accountable.”

New York Times Article on Epstein Fallout in Trump Administration. On Wednesday, June 10, The New York Times released an excerpt from Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan’s forthcoming book that details the Trump White House’s “freakout” about the Epstein files in the summer of 2025.

The article details top officials in the Trump administration’s attempts to handle the political fallout from the Epstein files debacle, featuring several meetings in the Situation Room. The article portrays then-Attorney General Pam Bondi, Todd Blanche, FBI Director Kash Patel, and then-Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino as heavily involved in political strategizing, alongside JD Vance and Trump’s White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles.

The Times article weighs the Trump administration’s PR motives against its aims of transparency, ultimately depicting an administration more concerned with image control than justice. Epstein survivors released a statement in response to the article with an emphasis on Blanche’s purported role, writing that “we deserve an attorney general who will use the full power of that office to pursue justice, protect others, and ensure that what happened to us never happens again.”

Support Home of the Brave

Robert Garcia Announces Requests to Comer for More Appearances. On Thursday, June 11, Ranking Democrat on House Oversight Robert Garcia announced that he asked Chairman Comer to bring before the Committee JD Vance, Susie Wiles, Kash Patel, Dan Bongino, then-White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications and Personnel Taylor Budowich, then-White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Legislative, Political, and Public Affairs James Blair, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Steven Cheung, and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, Jr.

“Explosive new reporting from the New York Times,” Garcia wrote, necessitates immediate interviews with Vance, Blanche, Patel, and Wiles in particular.

Comer has yet to respond publicly to Garcia. Comer ultimately holds subpoena power, but any of the officials named in the New York Times article could voluntarily sit for an interview by the Committee, as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick did.

Trump Announces Plans to Nominate Jay Clayton for DNI. On Thursday, June 11, Trump announced that he plans to nominate Jay Clayton for Director of National Intelligence to replace Tulsi Gabbard whose last day as DNI is June 19.

Clayton currently serves as the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York and in that role, and last November, Trump and Bondi charged him with investigating Epstein’s alleged ties to high-profile Democrats. Days after the passage of the Epstein Transparency Act, Clayton signed a court submission asking the judge to unseal grand jury materials related to the Epstein investigation, a gesture that the New York Times article referenced above depicts as strictly performative. Prior to serving as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Clayton served on the Board of Apollo Global Management, an appointment he received in connection with the resignation of Leon Black, the company’s co-founder and CEO, who stepped down amid controversy over his financial ties to Epstein. Clayton served as Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission during Trump’s first term.

Share

Home of the Brave exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy. We’ll continue to keep an eye on the Oversight Committee, the upcoming confirmations, and other Epstein-related events as they unfold. Let us know if you’d like weekly roundups on other topics and what those topics might be.

By Prof. Lawrence O. Gostin

Right now the United States is choosing to stand on the sidelines, rather than take on a leadership role in confronting the ebola crisis. Instead of taking active measures informed by sound public health data, our government is banning travelers, including health and humanitarian workers returning from affected countries, while stranding vulnerable US citizens on foreign shores. This comes after the administration has systematically de-funded the very organizations created to respond to such a crisis, and waged a broader war against scientific expertise in general and the public health community in particular.

The result is an ineffective response to an outbreak that threatens to spin out of control. I know because we’ve been here before. After the 2014 ebola outbreak in West Africa—the largest in history—I served as senior advisor to the United Nations Secretary General’s post-ebola commission. At the time, we proposed “a bold new agenda for global health preparedness” in order “to effectively prevent, detect, and respond to future global health emergencies.”

The idea was that, by studying what had worked and what hadn’t, we would come away better prepared for the next time a crisis struck—as we knew it would. But more than a decade later, it’s now clear that this administration has chosen to wantonly disregard all of the lessons learned during that period. Maybe that shouldn’t surprise us; this is an administration that derides public health expertise and entrusts Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. with life-and-death decision-making power, despite his long-held anti-vaccination views. Even still, by any measure, Trump’s ebola response could be catastrophic.

The administration has imposed a total travel ban to keep potentially exposed people abroad. This might sound good on the surface, but it actually makes Americans less safe. It means that health and humanitarian workers, and badly needed medical supplies, cannot flow to the region. It also drives the epidemic underground so that people will not disclose their travel history. The government has no power to prevent citizens from entering the United States. But the administration plans to keep ebola-exposed citizens in Kenya, including health workers like Dr. Peter Stafford. To refuse to bring them home for treatment sends exactly the wrong message, and is a cruel and inhumane way to repay their honorable service to our nation.

Beyond the betrayal, this also unnecessarily endangers affected people. The United States has world-class, state-of-the-art medical facilities that are built to handle such cases. Developing countries do not, and instead rely on more makeshift options, increasing the risks to all parties. And we’ve proven that this can be done: During the 2014 outbreak, infected American health care workers like Nina Pham were transferred to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) facility in Bethesda, MD for treatment. We’ve done this before, and we can and should do it again.

Quarantining people abroad also incentivizes them to avoid tracing efforts. This is because, if a person knows that a positive diagnosis would severely curtail their access to treatment, they are less likely to voluntarily disclose it. Containing an outbreak of this scale requires robust, ongoing testing and tracing. Anything that gets in a way of that acts like an accelerant for the outbreak. It’s the kind of policy that sounds good if you’ve never taken the time to think it through, but is actually a disaster once you consider the second-order, real-world consequences.

The Kenyan government has also weighed in on the Trump administration’s policy of quarantining patients there. Last month a Kenyan court blocked the US’s quarantine facilities at Laikipia Air Base, citing the fact that it endangers the local population and may violate the country’s constitution. Kenyan medical experts have called this “an apartheid healthcare model on Kenyan soil.” My coauthors Alexandra Phelan, Jennifer Nuzzo, and I agreed, calling it “coercive, ineffective, and unlawful.”

We have to view the current response in context. This is a president who, during the COVID pandemic, advised Americans to ingest bleach and various bogus cures, and mused about curing COVID using “ultraviolet or just a very powerful light.” Trump believed that the disease would “disappear like magic,” and advised against testing and contact tracing, because “if we stop testing right now, we’d have very few cases.” His secretary of health and human services is an anti-vax advocate with no medical training, and he’s purged his federal agencies of large numbers of qualified medical professionals, while also de-funding the nation’s public health infrastructure.

All of these costs add up. They’ve left us unprepared for an outbreak of this scale. The results speak for themselves: more cases, more deaths, and a greater likelihood that the disease spreads farther, faster. Into the vacuum of US leadership have stepped some unlikely players. Our erstwhile European partners are working to fill the funding holes created by US withdrawal from the global public health stage. Even China has donated $500 million to the World Health Organization (WHO), when in the past they’ve typically opted to stay on the sidelines.

But, admirable though these actions are, none of these countries have the resources or the wherewithal to match the US’s historic contribution in the field of global public health. We are—or were—as in so many other fields, truly the “indispensable nation.” And now we are missing in action, content to pull back our resources and hope against hope that, somehow, the disease will simply spare us. This is the “America First” vision for public health. It’s never worked before; there’s no reason to believe it will work this time.

Support Home of the Brave

There is a better way. The United States’ response to the 2014 outbreak was the gold standard for exactly this sort of crisis. Back then, the US sent in the military and public health service, and surged resources to West Africa, the epicenter of the crisis. These actions alone almost certainly prevented hundreds of thousands of ebola infections, and untold numbers of fatalities. The Obama administration spearheaded a multi-national coalition to assist in this process, invested seriously in testing and tracing, and made the US’s best-in-class facilities available to those who needed it. The president also spoke to the public, calmly and clearly, about the nature of the threat—a jarring juxtaposition to Trump’s all-caps jingoistic fear-mongering.

We could do these things again, if we as a nation chose to. Today, we need another wave of trained health workers on the ground in central Africa, helping with surveillance, contact tracing, and care for those in need. We need a surge of diagnostics, lab capacity, effective vaccines, treatments, and therapies on a scale that only the US is equipped to provide. We need to re-fund and re-engage with the public health institutions that this administration has abandoned—especially USAID, the CDC, and WHO—that exist to respond to crises like these, which respect no borders and threaten the people of all nations.

We chose to be the country that did these things before; we could do it again.

Lawrence O. Gostin is Distinguished University Professor, Georgetown University’s highest academic rank conferred by the University President. Prof. Gostin is Faculty Director of the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law and is the Founding O’Neill Chair in Global Health Law. For decades, he has been at the center of public policy and law through multiple epidemics, from AIDS, SARS, and Influenza H1N1 to Ebola, MERS, Zika, and mpox.

Share

Sarah is the former deputy White House press secretary, and resigned in protest on January 6, 2021. Michael is a former Metropolitan Police Officer who defended the Capitol on that day. They are both advisory board members for Home of the Brave, which exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

A live taping of The Home of the Brave Podcast, featuring Sarah Matthews and Michael Fanone.

They broke down how this administration’s policies are sending summer prices skyrocketing, and our new campaign bringing this message straight to the American people. Plus: new ICE funding with no strings attached, and Todd Blanche’s nomination to be attorney general.

Sarah is the former deputy White House press secretary, and resigned in protest on January 6, 2021. Michael is a former Metropolitan Police Officer who defended the Capitol on that day. They are both advisory board members for Home of the Brave.

Subscribe now

Share

Donate

Home of the Brave exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

By Thomas W. Schaller

Parallels between governmental power and cultural aesthetics are nothing new. The cornerstone of the ancient Greeks’ way of life was the belief that beauty and social order were inextricable. They equated moral superiority with beauty in all forms, including the physical, and as expressed by painting, architecture, mathematics, literature, music, philosophy, and spirituality. The quest for social order was a quest for excellence as expressed by symmetry, balance, and moderation.

Centuries later, the conquering Romans, while heavily influenced by the Greeks, focused their aesthetics more upon a celebration of ancestry, and imperial, iron-fisted power. The expression of this focus was seen everywhere, but perhaps nowhere more clearly than in the opulence and grandeur of their public architecture. These structures were meant to overwhelm and to impress, exacerbating—among other things—the gulf between the ruling elite and the mere mortals under their control.

Understanding the birth of a purely American aesthetic is an elusive thing. We are a relatively young country, having only a few hundred years of history upon which to draw. The Founders were a diverse group of men, but it is fair to say that to one degree or another, they were all influenced by Greek and Roman writings, European precedent, and importantly, by the Enlightenment-era emphasis on reason, science, and individual liberty as essential components of a thriving society.

It is this emphasis upon personal freedom and egalitarianism that is the North Star of the American spirit. And while we have not always lived up to that promise, it is a literal and aspirational cornerstone of our Constitution. This anti-monarchical point of origin has formed the backbone of our ever-evolving American aesthetic.

In terms of architectural expression, early American design was a reflection of historic antecedents and stressed the importance of symmetry, balance, simplicity, and nobility. The Federal style that characterized most civic buildings in America from the late 1700s and early 1800s is dignified, refined, and seems intended to lift up, inspire, and to include. Its Neo-Classical vocabulary was influenced by the Greeks and early Romans and popularized throughout Europe, Britain, and America in part by Scottish architect Robert Adam. So many of our public buildings of that era are marked by their elegance, proportion, and lack of opulent ornamentation.

Public architecture has a unique ability to telegraph to the public the intentions of those in positions of authority. These early American designs often seem to offer hope, solidity, and comfort and to feel inclusive rather than forbidding. In many ways, this aesthetic proved perfect for a nascent country.

The more modern era has been no stranger to public buildings that reflect the nationalist aspirations of their respective governments, rather than the welfare of their populations. German, Russian, and Italian Fascist design of the 1930s had more in common with the emperors and monarchs of Imperial Rome and dynastic Europe, than the more egalitarian or utopian ideals of emerging modernist ideas at the time.

Today, there is the perennial clash between those who look back to classical precedent for the design of civic buildings and those who wish to look to the future. In many ways, modernism seems ideal for a young, forward-looking country, but it has not always been understood or well-received. Likely, this is because the forms of classical design are more easily grasped, while modernist forms can be experimental and unprecedented. But timeless examples of civic buildings by modernist architects abound.

The National Gallery of Art by I.M. Pei, The Salk Institute by Louis Kahn, The Holocaust History Museum by Moshe Safdie, Corbusier’s work on the United Nations complex, Zaha Hadid’s Jinwan Civic Art Center, Boston City Hall by Kallmann, Mickinnell & Knowles, and the Museum of African American History by David Adjaye are just a very few. And more recently, Polshek Partnership’s Clinton Presidential Library and The Obama Presidential Center by Todd Williams and Billie Tsien are examples of designers responding to the visions and aspirations of public service to create structures that strive to reach outward to the communities they have tried to serve. They are not monuments to a single individual.

Things are very different in Washington today. President Donald Trump’s aesthetic, from his proposals for a grandiose ceremonial arch, a massive, gilded ballroom, a bookless presidential library, to the garish glazing of the Reflecting Pool, and the over-the-top gilding of the Oval Office all miss the mark. It is not by mistake that these efforts seem far more a product of a European monarch or a Roman Emperor. They are designed to celebrate the assumed power of one man, more than the country he was elected to serve. There is a saying that some people would rather ask for forgiveness than permission. But he asks for neither.

Like his military excursions into other countries, this is a man who seems to act out of a sense of personal entitlement. He is unbothered by the ethical or Constitutional requirement for consensus or procedure. When he decided to demolish the East Wing of the White House for example, and begin construction on a grandiose space that will be reserved only for the use by the most wealthy donors, he signaled that this is the kind of country he wishes the US to become. We are not obliged to agree. And he ignores the fact that this is not a decision for him to make. The White House belongs to us, not to him. He is but a temporary steward.

Fundamental to our American way of life and embedded in our Constitution is the fact that we are ruled by the will of the people, not by a monarch. To this end, the Founders gave the sole power of raising funds to the Congress, not to the president. It is all too easy to be offended by Trump’s personal taste. Yes, his penchant for gold and glitz and imperial scale offend many on a personal aesthetic level. But we can miss the fact that the offense is much deeper than simple taste. These are the actions of a man who has forgotten, or does not care, why and how, and for whom America was founded in the first place.

Support Home of the Brave

Thomas W. Schaller is an award-winning artist, architect, and author based in New York City. He is the recipient of the The Arthur Ross Award in Fine Arts 2024, by the Institute of Classical Architecture and Art, NYC. He also received the 2024 and 2025 Raphael Award, a Graham Foundation Grant, and is a two-time recipient of the Hugh Ferriss Memorial Prize. He has authored three books on art and architecture.

Share

By J.C. Sutherland

The president is on a losing streak. His tariffs—a decades-long fixation, which he seems to view as a magic pill for the US economy—are failing in one court case after another.

The first blow came in February, when the Supreme Court struck down Trump’s authority to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a law designed for genuine national security emergencies, not trade policy. I submitted a sworn affidavit in an amicus curiae brief in that case, opposing these tariffs based on what I have personally experienced with my business, writing: “Tariffs have forced us to raise prices at the same time as demand has been weakened with the overall economy softening.”

After this ruling, when the administration moved to re-impose tariffs by other means, those too have been challenged in court.

But all of this is too little, too late for thousands of small businesses across the country—including mine. For us, victories in the courts are welcome news, sure, but they’re cold comfort when we look at the damage that’s been done to our bottom line by Trump’s tariff spree. Many of us fear we won’t make it, and that’s doubly hard to stomach when you consider that the economic headwinds we’re facing are entirely man-made.

De-Fi, my Southern California-based company, designs and manufactures premium studio furniture and acoustic gear—high-end recording solutions differentiated by design and quality, sold to both professional musicians and hobbyist enthusiasts. Even passionate hobbyists are price-sensitive, and our products are often the first crossed off shopping lists when the economy softens.

Tariffs have forced us to raise prices just as demand has weakened with the overall economy. Beyond suppressing demand, tariffs have paralyzed us from making production and supply decisions due to fear of being burned by unpredictable decrees outside the normal legislative process. We have delayed new product introductions because we cannot plan a business case when we don’t know what we’ll have to charge, or even where we can build products. We’re scared of starting any new production lines.

Trump has cited as justification for his tariffs the need to “reshore” industries—that is, bring production back into the US, rather than have it based in China or other nations around the world. Ironically, though, tariff uncertainty has halted our plans to reshore some of our manufacturing because we have no idea how much inputs will cost.

There’s a misconception that companies manufacture abroad simply because it’s cheaper. While that used to be true, automation and increased labor costs abroad have narrowed the gap. What countries like China offer is a huge, reliable, and consistent supply chain with dependable manufacturing capacity: a one-stop shop.

One of the biggest challenges with manufacturing in the US is creating the supply chain that leads up to final assembly. This was improving, making US manufacturing more competitive with China, as NAFTA and the USMCA created a North American manufacturing bloc. Companies in our industry were reshoring or moving closer to home, but these latest rounds of tariffs have completely blown that up.

It’s nearly impossible to build a supply chain for new domestic manufacturing with this level of volatility because lead times are measured in months and years. The reality is that the US does not have the capacity or raw materials to support completely domestic supply chains. Even if we did, using our capable and educated workforce to make simple widgets at the bottom of a supply chain would be a poor use of resources.

We want to bring manufacturing back to the US not only to employ our neighbors, but because there are significant cash flow and quality advantages to just-in-time production closer to home, even if it’s slightly more expensive. Ironically, protectionist policies make this impossible. That’s not even accounting for retaliatory tariffs destroying the viability of US-made products in foreign markets. It’s simply a better bet to pay tariffs once on a finished good made in China—which we can also sell worldwide without additional tariffs—than to navigate paying constantly changing tariffs on imported inputs, then use those inputs to finish products in the US, and then still face retaliatory tariffs when exporting to global markets.

Tariff policies are supposedly in place to encourage domestic manufacturing, but they’re doing the opposite for businesses like mine. We can’t make long-term investments like reshoring when we have no idea what our input costs will be next month, let alone next year. We operate on tight margins with limited cash reserves. We don’t have legal teams parsing executive orders or customs brokers navigating Harmonized Tariff Codes. We’re small business owners trying to create jobs and serve customers, but the unpredictability has frozen us in place.

Support Home of the Brave

Monitoring social media to plan a supply chain is no way to run a business, and the mental toll on me and my colleagues is significant. We haven’t hired people because of this and have cut contractor hours. This tariff adventure isn’t an exercise in the theoretical art of the deal. It’s about livelihoods, family vacations, and paying for little league. When you have small children, you have a small window to create memories and make an impact. It’s maddening that the headwinds affecting my son’s childhood are entirely manufactured in support of a trade theory that nearly all economists (and frankly, history) have debunked. It’s doubly maddening that calling my representatives in Congress is pointless because these tariffs are imposed outside the law.

The administration recently rolled out its tariff refund process, by which businesses that paid tariffs can get repaid. But from the start, the process has been opaque and difficult for small businesses to navigate. Large multinationals with big budgets for highly specialized lawyers are in a good position to capitalize on the refunds. But the rest of us simply don’t have the time, money, or expertise. And even if we did, the payout—assuming it comes at all—would still be just a fraction of what’s been lost.

I never thought I would need to submit an affidavit to the Supreme Court, or write this essay in order to be able to run my small business unencumbered in the United States of America, but here we are.

The Supreme Court and lower courts have moved decisively to restore constitutional checks and balances on tariff policy. In response, the executive has sought one end-run around after another. Congress, not a single executive, should set trade policy with predictability and proper notice. American businesses and American workers deserve better than this chaos.

J.C. Sutherland is the CEO of De-Fi Systems, LLC, a California-based company that designs and sells premium studio furniture and acoustic gear for music production.

Share

Our mission at Home of the Brave is to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies. And now, at the start of a hot, expensive summer, we’re launching an education and mobilization campaign to advance that mission. We’re calling it “Sticker Shock Summer.”

We want Americans to recognize a simple truth: The higher prices we’re paying at the pump and the checkout line are a direct result of the Trump administration’s disastrous economic and foreign policies. Period. It’s that simple.

We’re spending $15 million this summer to amplify this message. We’re starting that effort by spending $1 million on hundreds of billboards across 16 states, and on video advertisements that will run nationwide on digital platforms like YouTube:

As our messages echo throughout the country, we will also amplify the voices of Americans who are feeling the pinch caused by this administration’s policies right now. We will be out on the streets, interviewing people like you, who want to enjoy their summer—but instead have to pay more for less:

This campaign is based on a simple reality: Summer is a season for vacations, cookouts, road trips, friends, and family. But this summer, millions of Americans are bearing the brunt of higher costs—for no good reason other than this administration’s lack of foresight for the obvious impact of its policies.

Despite promising to lower gas prices below $2 per gallon, the Trump administration launched a war in Iran that raised energy prices across the board. Despite promising to bring back manufacturing jobs, Trump’s tariffs forced Americans to pay more for the same goods (and the number of manufacturing jobs actually decreased according to the Labor Department). While he passed a $1 trillion tax cut that benefitted the richest Americans, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act also slashed nearly $1 trillion in Medicaid spending, which could be making your insurance and medical bills even more expensive.

All of this adds up. And this summer, we want all Americans to know that the higher prices they’re paying aren’t the result of regular economic cycles. Today’s higher prices are the predictable consequence of tariffs, combined with a global economic shock driven by the disruption of oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz. And why are oil tankers not flowing through the Strait? Because the Trump administration decided to unilaterally launch a war of choice against Iran.

Sticker Shock Summer exists to help tell this story, with the goal of ensuring that Americans have access to a reliable, fact-driven resource that explains the cost increases of summer staples. Check out our new website and explore how much this administration’s policies are jacking up the cost of your summer fun.

Have increased prices affected your summer plans? We want to hear your story. Visit StickerShockSummer.org and let us know how rising prices of gas, groceries, airfare, or other unexpected costs have impacted you.

Campaigns like this one depend on your support. Share this message with anyone you know who is not excited to pay more this summer. And if you want to help us keep getting this message out all summer long, consider supporting Home of the Brave today:

Support Home of the Brave

Michael Fanone and Sarah Matthews are advisory board members of Home of the Brave, which exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

Share

Prior to being forced out of the FBI last year, Michael Feinberg was Assistant Special Agent in Charge, and spent the majority of his career combating China’s intelligence services.

Michael Fanone is an advisory board member of Home of the Brave. He defended democracy on January 6 and continues the fight against election deniers.

Two former cops—January 6 hero Michael Fanone and FBI Assistant Special Agent in Charge Michael Feinberg—break down Kash Patel’s tenure, and the broader corruption of federal law enforcement.

Prior to being forced out of the FBI last year, Michael Feinberg was Assistant Special Agent in Charge, and spent the majority of his career combating China’s intelligence services.

He recently helped launch the FBI Support Network, which is connecting former Bureau personnel with the legal, mental health, and employment support they need.

Michael Fanone is an advisory board member of Home of the Brave. He defended democracy on January 6 and continues the fight against election deniers.

Subscribe now

Support Home of the Brave

Share

Home of the Brave exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

This week Donald Trump appointed Bill Pulte as Director of National Intelligence. Who is this person and what qualifications does he have to become America’s spy chief?

Pulte, 38, currently heads the Federal Housing Finance Agency and serves as chairman of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. He is expected to keep these titles while serving as DNI, much in the same (unusual) way that Marco Rubio has become Secretary of State and acting National Security Advisor at the same time.

More importantly, Pulte has no national security background and no apparent qualifications for the immensely consequential job of DNI. What he does have is a fearsome loyalty to the president, and a demonstrated track record of politicizing the levers of federal power to advance Trump’s agenda—and silence the president’s critics.

Pulte comes from a wealthy real estate family. In 1956 his grandfather founded the company that would become the homebuilding giant PulteGroup. The younger Pulte’s current net worth is estimated to be $105 million, per Yahoo Finance. It’s predictable, at this point, that Trump would tap an industry scion with no record of public service to run one of the nation’s key federal housing regulators.

The star turn for Pulte came after Trump re-entered office with a self-proclaimed mandate for “retribution.” As the head of FHFA, Pulte set about investigating Trump’s opponents who spoke out against him. To do so, he alleged mortgage “fraud” charges, for which Fannie Mae’s own internal investigators have said there is no clear evidence. Among his targets are New York Attorney General Letitia James, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook.

The blowback was swift. The Government Accountability Office launched an investigation into whether Pulte and other FHFA employees misused federal authority and resources in making the criminal referrals. Democrats in Congress also launched an investigation in response to Pulte’s weaponization of his agency against the president’s political opponents.

Support Home of the Brave

Pulte didn’t make it to the top of the housing sector because of anything he did; he was born into it. He didn’t win Trump’s admiration in his FHFA role because he was competent. And he wasn’t tapped as DNI for his qualifications, or because he knows anything about intelligence-gathering. He got this far because of an unflinching loyalty to the boss.

Let’s call Pulte’s appointment what it is: affirmative action. Trump and his enablers like to rail against DEI, wokeness, and affirmative action—a lot. They say “we’ve ended the tyranny of so-called diversity, equity and inclusion policies,” and “our country will be woke no longer.” They pretend the Trump project is all about restoring meritocracy to America. This, they say, is the only way to return our nation to its once and future greatness.

Pulte’s appointment highlights this administration’s blatant hypocrisy once again. Trump’s Cabinet is stocked with unqualified hacks who made their name sucking up to the boss on TV: Pete Hegseth, Sean Duffy, Kash Patel, the list goes on. Pulte’s appointment is just another log on the fire.

This is a danger to democracy and a detriment to the safety and security of the American people. These are immensely consequential jobs that demand serious people who have been rigorously vetted, and possess the necessary qualifications. Pulte does not. And yet, he now is set to occupy a post that was created in response to 9/11, to ensure the intelligence failures that took place in the lead-up to that attack don’t happen again.

Trump’s last DNI, Tulsi Gabbard, was a pro-Russian stooge (per her own former staffers) whose biggest accomplishment in office was launching a raid against Georgia’s election infrastructure, while being shut out of most consequential intelligence matters. Pulte will probably be as much of an affront to the office of DNI as his predecessor. But if history is a guide, incompetence won’t stop him from failing up.

Share

Home of the Brave exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

This article is part six of a series called The Epstein Administration, in which we break through the noise of the Epstein files, report the truth, and demand transparency and accountability. Read parts one, two, three, four, and five.

On Friday, May 29, after months of anticipation and a high-profile rescheduling, Pam Bondi finally appeared before the House Oversight Committee to answer questions about the Department of Justice’s handling of the Epstein files. In her prepared opening remarks, Bondi wrote that “since day one of this process, this Department has been committed to accountability and transparency.”

It’s an unserious claim to kick off an unserious interview in an increasingly unserious investigation. A transcript has yet to be released, but Democrats on the committee told the press that Bondi answered few questions and largely attempted to shift blame onto Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who served as Deputy Attorney General under Bondi.

Bondi’s prepared remarks began with a full-throated deflection: “As the head of a large Department with broad responsibilities, I did not lead every aspect of this effort or conduct that document review myself. I delegated oversight over this process to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche.”

Her fingerpointing was unquestionably self-serving, but the Oversight Committee should use it as a basis to bring in more DOJ officials for questioning. If she wasn’t overseeing the document review, bring in the people who were, as well as the agents and lawyers who reviewed the documents and made decisions about withholding and redacting information.

This, of course, assumes that the committee is interested in pursuing answers; the conduct of its members around Bondi’s interview casts doubt on that base expectation.

Even without Bondi’s testimony on Friday, the committee should have been planning to call Todd Blanche. As of now, he has not been subpoenaed or otherwise asked to speak to the committee. How could any investigation over the Epstein matter exclude one of the highest officials in the Department of Justice, who has been the administration’s most active spokesperson about the investigation, and who is now auditioning for the Department’s top job?

Bondi also reportedly referenced Kash Patel, dogged by scandals of his own, repeatedly. The New York Times reported that Bondi said several times that the committee needed to “ask Mr. Blanche and Mr. Patel” about the document review. In one such exchange, Bondi maintained that she was not involved in the drafting of the unsigned July 2025 memo in which the DOJ and FBI claimed Epstein had no co-conspirators and further disclosure would not be warranted. Additionally, Rep. Ro Khanna said that Bondi alleged that some FBI documents were “scrubbed” before even reaching her at DOJ.

Support Home of the Brave

If Bondi’s contention that she delegated the “document review” process to Blanche and Patel is correct, the committee should ask them about why DOJ failed to protect witness information and what is hiding behind its voluminous redactions. If she is correct that the FBI edited documents before they were sent to DOJ, Patel should explain what information was so sensitive it could not be shared even within DOJ.

But, even more than Bondi’s silence, perhaps the most telling aspect of her testimony: Chairman Comer was reportedly the only Republican member of the committee to appear at Bondi’s interview. That means at least half the committee did not attend Bondi’s hearing.

How is it possible that the Attorney General who kicked off this inquiry by claiming she had the Epstein list on her desk last year and subsequently oversaw the release of the Epstein files—the issue the committee claims it’s investigating—was not a significant witness in the eyes of half of the committee? The message the Republican members of the committee send with their absence is that the “investigation” amounts to partisan theatre.

Any serious investigation would be flagrantly incomplete without testimony from Bondi. Then again, this is not a serious investigation.

Share

Home of the Brave exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

By William Aldrich

My ancestors chose America. My mother’s side of the family came via Canada and England. My father came to this country from Norway, when he married my mother after World War II. He witnessed the horrors of war-torn Europe firsthand as a navigator pressed into the German merchant marine. His best friend went to Bergen-Belsen, the concentration camp in northern Germany.

My dad saw the full scale of destruction in the lands surrounding the Baltic Sea as he delivered iron ore, under duress, to the German ports. He saw the horrors accompanying the Russian Red Army’s counter-invasion of East Prussia. A Russian plane bombed his hospital ship during Operation Hannibal, while the Germans fled the advancing Russian forces.

In exchange for all of that tragedy and terror, he got his life, a return to Norway, and three German courts-martial. He came here to become a citizen who believed in the promise that America would always be stable, prosperous, and free.

He impressed upon me that when ideologues take power and amass cult-like followings, war almost inevitably follows—with many unintended consequences. That is because war solves issues by eliminating them altogether.

Donald Trump and his administration are not only breaking that arrangement, but also dismantling the pillars of our democracy. Since Trump returned to office, his policies have gutted government funding for research, unleashed masked agents in the streets, and trampled Americans’ civil and human rights. My friends and I see the consequences of these actions all around us on a weekly basis.

DOGE cuts eliminated billions of dollars in scientific research funding. I have friends living in the Bay Area who were working on cutting-edge biotech projects, who suddenly saw their funding dry up. That’s left them with nowhere to turn, and no stability, making it impossible to plan their next move. These are people who should be contributing to our country’s national greatness, who are instead left scrambling and scared.

I know people who have chosen to make a new home for themselves in Canada, a nation that strives to protect people’s rights, their lives, and livelihoods. A good friend of mine, who was born and raised in the United States and was an alternate on a US Olympic team, is far along in the process of obtaining his Canadian citizenship. For his protection, I’m not sharing his name; that says more than enough about the sense of fear and panic that Trump’s administration has spread in our country.

Meanwhile, the Canadians have welcomed new American expats like these with open arms, saying Canada “has welcomed millions of immigrants from all corners of the globe” and “all Canadians are immigrants or the descendants of immigrants.” When Canada, not America, has become the international beacon of freedom, it’s clear we’ve turned a corner in our nation’s history.

The damage doesn’t stop there. We’ve seen Trump’s so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act slash SNAP funding by $187 billion, while showering billionaires and large corporations with tax cuts. These senseless and counterproductive policies bilk the hard-working people who Trump promised he would defend “from the corrupt political class that has spent decades sucking the life, wealth, and blood out of this country.” We citizens have allowed Trump and the corrupt oligarchs that surround him to act in their own best interests—not ours.

Support Home of the Brave

I’m an Eisenhower Republican. I was born in 1948. I know my history, and I know that this country used to be home to a different kind of Republican Party—one that made space for moderates and even liberals, but not for liars and conspiracy theorists. A platform of pragmatism and moderation delivered us the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower, one of history’s truly great men. His policies sustained mid-century prosperity and encouraged minorities to start demanding their equal piece of the American dream that so many people now cherish.

To get an idea of how far the Republican Party has drifted astray, here’s a passage from the Republican Party platform of 1956, the year Ike won his second term:

“In all those things which deal with people, be liberal, be human. In all those things which deal with people’s money, or their economy, or their form of government, be conservative … The individual is of supreme importance. The spirit of our people is the strength of our nation. America does not prosper unless all Americans prosper. Government must have a heart as well as a head. Courage in principle, cooperation in practice make freedom positive. To stay free, we must stay strong.”

Does that sound like Trump to you? Not me.

This administration’s blatant corruption, contempt for the rule of law, and wrecking-ball approach to funding essential governmental services is an ongoing, slow-motion tragedy. I no longer recognize the party that I’ve supported for so many years. I do, however, often receive racist and isolationist literature from MAGA groups promoting policies that caused my ancestors to flee Europe years ago.

If my father were alive today, I know he would share my horror at what’s happening here, and my resolve in speaking out against it. Because he knew what it looked like when the candle of freedom stopped flickering during World War II.

Share

William Aldrich is a participant in Home of the Brave, which exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

Shante Benfatto served six-and-a-half years in the Army and deployed to Afghanistan. She was honorably discharged on a medical retirement, and is a 100 percent disabled veteran. She is proud of her service, and she and her husband Mark sought to build a life for themselves in Tennessee after that service ended. They bought a house, with the mortgage loan backed by the Veterans Administration (VA).

What they didn’t expect was to be caught up in a never-ending bureaucratic nightmare that seems designed to keep veteran homeowners in limbo, with the risk of losing their home, savings—or both. But that’s exactly what happened.

This all starts with a program called VA Servicing Purchase program, or VASP, which is a rescue plan that’s designed to help veterans avoid foreclosure. The program made headlines when the Trump administration abruptly shut it down on May 1, 2025. That closure left many families—including the Benfattos—without options for keeping their homes.

Per an in-depth NPR report on the situation:

[Shante] and her husband fell behind on payments when he was between jobs. They say they tried for months to get into the VASP program but that their lender didn’t get all their paperwork together before the VA suddenly shut it down.

After receiving letters threatening foreclosure, the Benfattos reluctantly accepted a new modified mortgage with payments about $300 a month higher than their original loan.

“We’re paying late because we can’t afford to pay the extra money until the end of the month, until she gets her disability,” said her husband, Mark. The late fees add an additional $105 to their monthly mortgage bill.

Let’s call this what it is: a direct Trump administration action that leaves veterans like the Benfattos “out to dry,” and without any good options for how to proceed. Shante put on the uniform and served her country without any expectation for special treatment. But she at least believed in the promise that, in return for that service, her country would have her back when she needed it. This administration broke that promise.

“Honestly, I just—I was baffled,” she said, tearing up. “I mean, why would you start to take care of veterans and then just stop? Like, make it make sense.”

“We felt like the system just failed us,” Mark, her husband, said. “I mean, veterans, they do serve the country and provide us our freedom, and this is how they get treated?”

Support Home of the Brave

It’s not like this administration wasn’t warned. Back in March 2025, Elizabeth Balce—a Mortgage Bankers Association expert—testified before the House Committee on Veterans Affairs about exactly what would happen to families like the Benfattos if the VASP program were discontinued: “Foreclosure, period. That’s really where it’s really going to come to.” Sadly, Balce was exactly right.

The Benfattos feel especially betrayed because, at the same time as they are navigating this man-made crisis, they’re watching the Trump administration wage war on Iran. The optics are pretty clear:

The US government has the money to go to war against a foreign country (a war that costs $1 billion per day), but no money to take care of the veterans who have already fought for America. And what will happen to those veterans who return from this Iran war, including the hundreds who have already been wounded in action?

Mark had some direct advice for the administration: “Stop blowing up fricking Iran, man. That’s costing us hundreds of millions of dollars a day, if not more. This is something you’re not going to win. You’ve got to take care of your own home first.”

This administration isn’t doing that, and families like the Benfattos are suffering the consequences. But despite it all, they still refuse to give into complacency or despair. Mark said: “My wife’s a veteran. We’re not going to give up. We fight. That’s what we do. And if we get injured, guess what? We get right back up.”

These are exactly the kind of people who deserve a helping hand. Instead, our government is leaving them out in the cold.

Share

Home of the Brave exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

Barbara represented Virginia’s 10th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives. Sarah served as the White House Deputy Press Secretary until she resigned on January 6, 2021. They bring an insider’s perspective on the constant game of tug-of-war between the President and the Legislative Branch.

You can subscribe to The Home of the Brave Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, and Substack. And to help us reach more people, please rate and subscribe to the show, and share it with your friends.

Support Home of the Brave

Home of the Brave exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.

Join us today for a live taping of The Home of the Brave Podcast featuring former Representative Barbara Comstock and Home of the Brave’s very own Sarah Matthews. We’ll be live on all platforms starting at 1:30 pm ET today, Thursday, May 28. Catch us on Substack, YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter.

Barbara and Sarah will break down Congress’s actual power when it comes to overseeing the Executive Branch, starting with the fight over the $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund.” Having worked on both sides of the White House-Capitol Hill divide, they bring an insider’s perspective on the constant game of tug-of-war between the President and the Legislative Branch.

You won’t want to miss it.

Support Home of the Brave

Home of the Brave exists to show Americans the real-world consequences of this administration’s policies, and to highlight what bravery looks like in defense of American democracy.