Attacking the FED again
Is there not one person in Congress who will be our leader who will tell Tr__P to shut up? Is it up to the constituency to do the dirty work every 4 years?
I can only imagine where we would be it Tr__p succeeds.
Trump attacks Fed again in open letter to Powell calling for lower rates AXIOS
President Trump sent a letter to Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell urging the central bank to lower interest rates “by a lot,” the White House said on Monday.
Why it matters: The administration has stepped up public pressure on the Fed, with top officials floating the possibility of announcing Powell’s replacement months before his term expires.
What they’re saying: “Jerome ‘Too Late’ Powell, and his entire Board, should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this to happen to the United States,” Trump posted on Truth Social.
The intrigue: Trump’s post included what appeared to be the letter, which White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump sent to the Fed on Monday.
- “You have cost the U.S.A. a fortune — and continue to do so,” the letter, which was written on a document that lists foreign nations’ interest rate levels, says. “You should lower the rate by a lot!”
- Trump again said that the Fed should be lowering rates to help save the government money on interest payments, a suggestion that is at odds with the Fed’s mandates.
What to watch: The Fed browbeating of Trump’s first term looks mild relative to that of recent months.
- The threat of a “shadow Fed chair” might become reality, with reports that the Trump administration is considering naming Powell’s successor as soon as this summer — a move that risks undermining Powell, whose term does not expire for another 11 months.
- A spot on the Federal Reserve Board opens in January, “so we’ve given thought to the idea that perhaps that person would go on to become the chair when Jay Powell leaves in May,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Bloomberg on Monday.
- On Friday, Trump made the clearest suggestion yet that he wants the next Fed chair to do his bidding, saying he was going to nominate somebody who “wants to cut rates.
“Reality check: Powell told lawmakers last week that the Fed would have likely kept cutting rates, if not for the economic threats posed by Trump’s trade policy.
- Inflation is at a four-year low, but projections suggest that tariffs will stoke higher prices. “If you just look at the basic data and don’t look at the forecast, you would say that we would’ve continued cutting,” Powell said at a congressional hearing.
- Two Trump-nominated Fed governors, Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, support cuts as soon as July — though that stance does not appear to be widely shared among other officials on the Fed’s rate-setting committee.
It’s going to take a lot more than a change of leadership to cure what ails the Democratic Party and get somebody to finally tell Trump to shut up. The problem is systemic and cultural. Being largely a hierarchical organization, the leadership hand picks most non-incumbent candidates via the DCCC and the DSCC, after having been recruited, vetted and approved by big donors and major interest groups, such as AIPAC. Non-conforming voices are quickly weeded out. Loyalist incumbents get to stay as long as they like and rise in power in Congress. When DSCC/DCCC candidates do face primary challengers, such as popular grass roots insurgents, the money flows to loyalist incumbents and DSCC/DCCC chosen candidates. Incumbent congressmen who turn out to be non-conforming are quickly primaried by DCCC loyalists.
Zohran Mamdani’s case is atypical and illustrates what it takes to wrest power from entrenched, corrupt party leaders. His party, the Democratic Socialists, is a grass roots organization that has built strength over time in New York City. Besides walking the streets to meet voters, Mamdani recruited a volunteer organization to amplify his efforts. He received contributions from more than 18,000 individuals. He received significant amounts of public funding, something not common in the United States. And he faced a tainted candidate, Andrew Cuomo, who got rejected despite endorsement by major Democratic figures and funding by dark money groups. He still faces vilification by Republicans and major Democratic donors, and marginalization by the Democratic establishment.
It’s not easy to get Democrats to stop playing Tweedledee to Trump’s Tweedledum…and it’s up to voters to stop voting for one of the two evils.
John:
I can not disagree with you on your analysis. Perhaps because of the lack of standout candidates (they will accept) who would challenge the other face to face, the public does take the “lesser of two weevils” if no other acceptable (to them) choice is made available.
I (we) voted for Kamala Harris. She put Trump in his place and he started to panic. Being female and a Black American was too much for voters to take on at one time. And now we pay the price.
The question is the same as what occurred in the last election, will White Americans vote for a Zohran Mamdani? People turned out for Clinton but states did not and she lost to an Electoral vote as determined by states which did not want a woman as the president. People stay home or vote for others and then whine.
NY city is only 31% white, which gives Mamdani a chance. PlusEric Adams has very low approval ratings. Cuomo May drop out or run as a spoiler. It should be interesting!
I think Tulsi Gabbard could become the first female President if she can positions herself right. She presents well on TV, has sufficient gravitas, speaks simply and directly. Question is, will the national security state accept her, even after her stint as DNI? Her main black mark is opposition to Iraq War.
@John,
да, товарищ. Vladimir agrees with you.
‘Just plain weird’: Tulsi Gabbard warns of a ‘nuclear holocaust’ in a new social media video
Maddow Blog | Even Republicans aren’t sure what to make of Tulsi Gabbard’s weird new video
I happen to be grateful to Tulsi for the video and her recognition that “As we stand here, closer to the brink of nuclear annihilation than ever before, political elite and warmongers are carelessly fomenting fear and tensions between nuclear powers.”
People don’t seem to appreciate the dire consequences of nuclear war as we did in the 1950s. Most disturbing is that policy makers seem happy to bait the bear and engage in a game of chicken under the assumption that Russia “wouldn’t dare” respond when his strategic assets get attacked.
Finding a sober, principled and realist actor at the highest levels of the national security state is reassuring, though Dr. Strangeloves seem to infest the agencies.
@John,
LOL! I agree that finding a sober, principled and realist actor at the highest levels of nation security would be reassuring. Sadly, Putin seems to have infested the DNI in his game of chicken under the assumption that NATO wouldn’t dare respond when he tries to undo Baltic autonomy. Your support of Gabbard is noted.
Gabbard is a well-known peddler of Russian propaganda.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/tulsi-gabbard-russian-connection-dni-trump-syria-b2692244.html
Regardless of policy preferences, it seems to me that if the Fed is independent, then they ought to be fair game for public criticism from Presidents, other public officials and everyone else. By now, we are all used to Trump’s style, so to me the useful discussion is whether lower rates make sense now or not. Powell can respond if he wants to.
Bill, you seemed convinced that Harris’ race and sex were a crucial factor in her losing, but I don’t see supporting evidence of it. The Democrats removed a white male who had won their nomination process for her, totally aware of her race and sex. They did this because they strongly felt she would do better against Trump. We can never prove it, but I don’t think they were wrong. Name the white male Democrat who you think would have won. I can”t easily think of one that would have done better in Wisconsin for example. Here in Wisconsin you sort of look to Kelly or Shapiro, but mainly since they were not well-known here folks can imagine anything they want. Pritzker or Newsom would have harder time than Harris did. Trump dominated the results: a high percentage of votes – for and against – were all about him.