transparency

Maryland Admits Nearly 1,000 Foster Children Missing Since 2020 — Most Are Teenage Girls

In a letter released on October 22, 2025, Maryland’s Department of Human Services (DHS) confirmed what advocates had long suspected but could never prove: 990 children in state foster care have been reported missing between January 1, 2020, and August 17, 2025. The data, disclosed through an MPIA request filed by survivor-advocates Jennifer Guskin and Bailey Templeton, offers the first detailed look at how many children disappear while under Maryland’s supervision—and how quietly the system has been redefining what “missing” means. “Let that sink in—nearly 1,000 children under state supervision have gone missing in just five years,” Guskin said. “Most are teenage girls, and even toddlers are being labeled as… Read More »Maryland Admits Nearly 1,000 Foster Children Missing Since 2020 — Most Are Teenage Girls

The Hidden War: Inside America’s Military Family Court Crisis

For years, the Department of Defense’s Family Advocacy Program (FAP) has operated as a hidden court system — issuing life-altering judgments without judges, lawyers, or appeals. What began as a protective mission for military families has morphed into an opaque bureaucracy capable of labeling service members as “abusers,” ending careers, and driving suicides—all in secret. “We track lost weapons more carefully than we track lost parents,” says one DoD insider. The Hidden War series by Fatherand.Co and The Thunder Report exposes how this shadow system destroys the very families it claims to protect—and why Congress can no longer look away.

Shaka Cheka

Connecticut’s court system faces renewed scrutiny after reports surfaced of an internal “judicial intelligence” network operating beyond public oversight. Critics claim the system shields misconduct and suppresses constitutional rights under the guise of confidentiality. Judge Peter Brown’s recent protective order, sealing a 96-page report tied to a high-profile political commentator, has sparked outcry among legal observers and civil libertarians. They argue the order expands state secrecy at the expense of public accountability. The controversy underscores a broader concern: that Connecticut’s judiciary has evolved into a self-policing institution immune from the transparency it demands of others.