In 1958, the National Election Study began surveying Americans’ trust in government, revealing that approximately 75% believed the federal government would do the right thing almost always or most of the time. However, according to Pew Research in 2023, this trust has plummeted to a seven-decade low of merely 16%. 

Alarmingly, only 2% of Americans now believe that the government consistently acts correctly, and confidence in elected officials continues to erode. The primary reason for this decline is clear: our government leaders no longer take responsibility for their decisions.

In the upcoming 100 days leading up to the election, consider whether you hear either candidate admit to mistakes on the campaign trail. Statements such as ‘I made a mistake,’ ‘That was a bad decision,’ or ‘We shouldn’t have gone down that path’ have become rare. 

True leadership is challenging and often solitary. It requires making tough decisions and, more importantly, acknowledging both successes and failures. Unfortunately, our politicians no longer engage in this level of honesty, contributing significantly to the diminishing trust in the federal government. People understand that no one can be right all the time… we are only human.

During this election season, you will also witness both sides of the political spectrum engaging in the blame game. Whether through television soundbites, newspaper columns or social media, it is common to see one side blaming the other for current issues, including the economy, immigration, crime, abortion or climate change.

When leaders resort to blaming others, it sets a precedent that if we cannot solve our problems, we are justified in blaming someone else for the difficulties or inaction. 

True leaders do not solve problems by shifting blame. Instead, they strive to unite people around a shared vision and actionable solutions. When top elected officials indulge in blame games, it further erodes public trust in their ability to accomplish anything meaningful.

Restoring trust in government requires addressing the disconnect between what politicians say and what people perceive. For instance, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., once remarked, ‘Anyone who would think that they’re at some advantage because of Joe Biden’s age thinks that at their peril because he’s very sharp.’ Yet, a few months later, she questioned Biden’s capability to run for president and immediately endorsed Kamala Harris once he dropped his re-election campaign.

Similarly, Harris famously deflected when asked about her plans to visit the border by saying, ‘And I haven’t been to Europe yet.’ Despite her role in addressing illegal migration, she failed to acknowledge the incomplete efforts.

Even more starkly, in the years following the 2020 election, President Trump continually described the election as ‘rigged.’ True leaders accept defeat graciously and work toward a comeback, akin to athletes in sports who often achieve remarkable comebacks.

As we approach the upcoming election, it remains to be seen whether voters will prioritize personality over policies. Social media also plays a significant role in eroding trust, with many people relying on their smartphones for information. The rapid consumption of news through brief soundbites often prevents people from getting the full story, influencing their perceptions and actions significantly.

Americans yearn to restore their trust and faith in their leaders. Politicians need to understand that showing vulnerability and admitting to mistakes does not signify weakness but strength. 

In any leadership role, be it in corporate America or a family-run business, making wrong choices is inevitable. However, confidence is instilled by leader.s who can persist in their vision despite setbacks. 

It’s time for our leaders to rebuild our trust, starting with three simple words: ‘I was wrong.’ 

Venezuela’s current political upheaval following an allegedly fraudulent presidential election will not be resolved simply by putting the opposition candidates in power, though it is a strong first step, experts told Fox News Digital. 

‘I certainly think that these are patriots,’ Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., told Fox News Digital during a digital press conference. ‘Maria Corina Machado is … one of the bravest people I’ve ever encountered and one of the greatest political figures in the world.’

‘She’s remained in the country steadfast,’ Rubio continued. ‘She put aside any personal ambitions she may have had in her hand and allowed her to be the candidate for the opposition, and didn’t let that get in the way.’

‘So these are extraordinary people, and the only reason you do that is because you love your country,’ he added. 

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro intervened in the November 2023 primaries to prevent the immensely popular Machado from standing against him, instead forcing her to stand aside and allow Edmundo Gonzalez to pick up the banner of the opposition.

Pre-election polling (which is illegal in the country) showed Gonzalez had double the support that Maduro and his United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) had, but the Maduro-controlled National Electoral Council handed to the incumbent with an alleged victory margin of 51%, compared to 44% support for the opposition. 

Venezuelans took to the streets in peaceful protest following the decision, but Maduro sent out police to crack down on them and to clear the streets, leading to violent clashes and escalation. 

Ultimately, the Biden administration on Thursday declared Gonzalez the rightful winner of the election, arguing, ‘Given the overwhelming evidence, it is clear to the United States and, most importantly, to the Venezuelan people that Edmundo González … won the most votes in Venezuela’s July 28 presidential election.’ 

Joseph Humire, the executive director of the Center for a Secure Free Society, stressed that ‘real change to Venezuela will not happen with one election, but it’s a starting point.’ 

‘After 25 years of autocratic, socialist rule, Venezuelans have lost most if not all of their freedoms,’ Humire told Fox News Digital. 

‘They have little to no economic freedom, political freedom, and even severely limited freedom of speech,’ Humire explained. ‘The main reason Venezuelans voted in such high numbers for Edmundo Gonzalez in this election (and de facto for Machado as well even though she was barred from being on the ballot) is because they want their freedoms back.’

‘Venezuela is run by a criminal system that is embedded with most state institutions and has an equal power network outside the government through armed non-state actors,’ Humire continued. ‘Maduro losing and leaving is a necessary but insufficient condition for real change in Venezuela.’

‘But even if Maduro and his cohorts (regime leaders) leave Venezuela, the Chavista criminal system remains and will, no doubt, try to subvert and manipulate the transition process,’ he added, pointing to Bolivia as a nation where a leader resigned but returned because the country couldn’t dismantle the power structure he established. 

Humire suggested that Machado and Gonzalez continue working to ‘delegitimize the Chavista regime,’ referring to Hugo Chavez and the government structure he established in Venezuela and Maduro inherited after taking office in 2013. He cautioned that the opposition may have ‘adaptive agents’ within it that remain sympathetic to Maduro’s party. 

‘The opposition has always been filled with what the Venezuelans call ‘enchufados,’ which is a Spanish term for those who are ‘plugged into’ the regime,’ Humire said. ‘These are fake opposition members that have back-door business and political deals with the Maduro regime.’

‘My concern is that these ‘enchufados’ will either a) shift the narrative to one that legitimizes Maduro’s electoral fraud; and/or b) subvert the transition process in Venezuela even if Edmundo Gonalez is accepted as the president-elect,’ he warned. 

Isaias Medina III, a former United Nations Security Council diplomat and Edward Mason Fellow at Harvard University, told Fox News Digital that the ‘massive marches’ in Venezuela this week ‘reflect a grassroots demand for change,’ but he also acknowledged the steep challenge that comes with ‘challenging a cruel regime willing to use force against its population.’

‘Venezuelan politics requires profound renovation,’ Medina said. ‘Regrettably, an exit strategy for Venezuela is necessary. However, is it truly Maduro’s decision to agree to any negotiation or amnesty proposal? Numerous dubious stakeholders manipulate Venezuela’s lost sovereignty, turning the situation into a transnational crisis threatening regional peace and security.’ 

‘Venezuela needs a new political approach free from ‘politiqueros’ who prioritize personal gain over national welfare and from governmental paternalistic policies: governments must serve its citizens not the other way around,’ he argued. ‘The focus must shift towards education, job opportunities, and a real representative congress to debate issues and find effective solutions.’

‘If Gonzalez and Machado cannot solve the ‘ousting’ of the puppet usurper in ‘Miraflores’ (the Venezuelan White House), they will struggle to rebuild the country,’ he insisted. ‘However, I hope they prove me wrong.’

‘Venezuela needs more than messianic ‘Presidents’; it requires a transitional government with a strong purpose to restore the rule of law, reverse distorted governance, and evict illegal pirate occupants,’ Medina added.

‘Real change requires integrating merit-based qualified individuals across sectors and transforming the state’s paternalistic socialist practices into self-development opportunities for a poverty-stricken nation with abundant resources,’ he stressed. ‘Venezuela needs a ‘New Way’ away from 21st-century socialism that effectively combines citizen-public-private policies with economic development incentives.’

A new report shows that countries within the Five Eyes intelligence partnership – the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand – heavily rely on China for rare earth elements (REEs), a set of metallic elements that play a crucial role in the mineral supply chain market.

The Five Eyes alliance has become an integral part of global intelligence and security operations. The group collaborates on intelligence matters and shares sensitive information to ensure collective security and thwart global threats. 

Rare earth elements are necessary to produce military equipment, and the report notes that Western military supply chains are also highly vulnerable to Chinese decisions to limit REEs exports.

The report titled ‘Decreasing Rare Earths Dependency: How the Five Eyes Alliance can Minimize Rare Earths Trading Risk with China’ argues that Five Eyes countries must diversify away from China for their supply of REEs. 

The U.S. had once been a key player in the rare earth elements market. Now, the U.S. is very dependent on China, importing as much as 80% of its REEs from China, according to the report.

‘The Five Eyes countries are dangerously exposed to China when it comes to rare earth minerals, as they are all over reliant on China for this critical resource,’ Helena Ivanov, associate fellow at the Henry Jackson Society and author of the report, told Fox News Digital.

The report highlights that rare earth elements are used for defense technologies like fighter jets and that China can leverage its dominance of the industry for political purposes, using this advantage to project its influence on the global stage.

Speaking on background, a spokesperson for the House Select Committee on the CCP told Fox News Digital that ‘the CCP increasingly leverages its markets, technology, and control over critical minerals to pressure the United States and its allies and partners. To counter these predatory practices, the United States must enhance U.S. trade and technology collaboration with its allies and partners while decreasing dependence on the PRC in critical supply chains.’

China overwhelmingly dominates the industry’s supply chain, accounting for 60% of global production and almost 90% of processing in the market.

In addition to being a valuable resource for military technology, rare earth elements are also critical in manufacturing smartphones, digital cameras, computer hard drives, fluorescent and LED lights, flat-screen TVs, computer monitors and electronic displays.

‘If no alternatives are found, the report warns that North American producers of critical minerals estimate that should confrontation occur, China could cut short the supply of critical minerals to the U.S. in an event of war and exhaust the U.S. stock of minerals necessary for its defense apparatus in less than 90 days.’

Admiral John Aquilino, leader of the Indo-Pacific Command, testified before the House Armed Services Committee in 2023 that China will meet President Xi’s goal to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Given recent tensions over Taiwan, the group’s overreliance on an adversarial China is worrisome.

China is not shy about its willingness to exploit its market dominance by restricting exports when it suits its interests and has used its monopoly over the industry for political purposes in the past. In 2023, the report points out, China explored limiting the export of rare earth minerals that are critical to the manufacturing of the F-35 fighter jets and other weaponry.

The U.S. is keenly aware of its vulnerabilities to China’s dominance of the market and has taken some measures to reduce its dependence on Beijing. The Department of Defense and other agencies are building programs to strengthen the domestic supply chain of REEs. In April, the Department of Energy announced $17.5 million as part of President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for four projects to help lower the cost and reduce the environmental impacts of extracting REEs.

Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm said in a statement at the time that the investments announced ‘will increase our national security while helping rebuild America’s manufacturing sector and revitalize energy and mining communities across the country.’

The vulnerabilities highlighted in the report shows the importance for the Western alliance to reduce its dependency on China overall. Without such risk reduction, the report argues that democratic countries may face a situation similar to Europe’s past reliance on Russian gas prior to Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. 

The only way out of this situation, the report says, is collaboration within the Five Eyes Alliance, as countries like Canada, Australia and the U.S. can ramp up domestic production and decrease China’s influence in the market.

‘In the last few years, China has become a bad faith actor, and substantial issues and risks are involved with relying on China for REEs,’ the report said.

Many have questioned the lessons learned from the 20-year war in Afghanistan following the chaotic withdrawal and subsequent Taliban takeover, but one major accomplishment from the U.S.’s time fighting the Taliban has emerged – the use of Artificial Intelligence to track terrorist attacks. 

In 2019, U.S. and coalition forces began drawing down their troop presence across the country, which left remaining forces strapped when it came to their ability to maintain human intelligence networks used to monitor Taliban movements.

By the end of 2019, the number of Taliban attacks levied at U.S. and coalition forces spiked to levels not seen since the decade prior, prompting security forces in Afghanistan to develop an AI program known as ‘Raven Sentry.’

In a report released earlier this year, U.S. Amy Colonel Thomas Spahr, chair of the Department of Military Strategy, Planning, and Operations at the U.S. Army War College, quoted A.J.P. Taylor and said, ‘War has always been the mother of invention.’ Spahr pointed to the development of tanks during World War I, the atomic weapon in World War II and the use of AI to track Open-Source Intelligence as the U.S.’s longest lasting war began to wind down.

Raven Sentry looked to take the load off human analysts by sorting through vast amounts of data that drew from ‘weather patterns, calendar events, increased activity around mosques or madrassas, and activity around historic staging areas.’

Despite some initial challenges when the technology was first developed, a team of intelligence officers pulled together to form a group dubbed the ‘nerd locker’ to develop a system that could ‘reliably predict’ a terrorist attack. 

‘By 2019, the digital ecosystem’s infrastructure had progressed, and advances in sensors and prototype AI tools could detect and rapidly organize these dispersed indicators of insurgent attacks,’ Spahr, who was also involved with the program, first reported The Economist.

Though the AI program was cut short by the withdrawal on Aug. 30, 2021, its success was attributed to a ‘culture’ of tolerance for early failures and technological expertise. 

Spahr said the team developing Raven Sentry ‘was aware of senior military and political leaders’ concerns about proper oversight and the relationship between humans and algorithms in combat systems.’

He also pointed out that AI testing is ‘doomed’ if leadership does not tolerate experimentation when programs are developing. 

By October 2020, less than a year before the withdrawal, Raven Sentry had reached a 70% accuracy threshold in predicting when and where an attack would likely occur – technology that has proven critical in major wars today, both in the Middle East and Ukraine.

 ‘Advances in generative AI and large language models are increasing AI capabilities, and the ongoing wars in Ukraine and the Middle East demonstrate new advances,’ the U.S. Army colonel wrote.

Spahr also said that if the U.S. and its allies want to keep its AI technology competitive, it must ‘balance the tension between computer speed and human intuition’ by educating leaders who remain skeptical of the ever-emerging technology. 

Despite the success the AI program saw in Afghanistan, the Army colonel warned that ‘war is ultimately human, and the adversary will adapt to the most advanced technology, often with simple, common-sense solutions.’

‘Just as Iraqi insurgents learned that burning tires in the streets degraded US aircraft optics or as Vietnamese guerrillas dug tunnels to avoid overhead observation, America’s adversaries will learn to trick AI systems and corrupt data inputs,’ he added. ‘The Taliban, after all, prevailed against the United States and NATO’s advanced technology in Afghanistan.’