Statement from Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell

Mr. Powell’s position has now made the issue unmistakably clear: this is no longer about policy disagreement, but about a growing trust deficit in institutional governance. Undermining the rule of law, central bank independence, and the separation of powers carries serious consequences for market confidence.

There was no strategic necessity for this confrontation. Allowing the Fed Chair to complete his term and then proceeding with a leadership transition would have preserved institutional credibility while achieving the same political objectives. Targeting an institutional head who is only months away from retirement signals impulse over discipline and raises concerns about respect for established norms.

From a market perspective, this risks being interpreted as political interference in monetary policy, which directly weakens confidence in the U.S. dollar as a reserve currency. While short-term reactions may be mixed, the broader implication is a gradual erosion of trust. Capital does not flee suddenly, but it does reprice risk over time.

If this pattern continues, diversification away from the U.S. dollar will likely accelerate—not through abrupt abandonment, but through steady, incremental shifts in reserves, trade settlement, and portfolio allocation. Reserve currency status is sustained by credibility and predictability; once those pillars weaken, the cost of maintaining that status rises permanently.

The world is burning, and all it takes is to stupid people elect pedophile..

This nonsense will backfire on Trump.

Wake up, Americans.

You elected the wrong guy.

I agree with you. Elections can be manipulated.
At that point, at the latest, civil courage is needed.
Powell has shown civil courage on several occasions.

you’re correct to that regard. the unfortunate truth is that the families really in charge couldn’t care less about civility, all they know is control by any means necessary. the thing most people forget to remember is that no one that’s at the forefront of the world, in any capacity, is ever trying to do good for the people. they’re not allowed.

Kamala Harris is not a "guy" and neither was her running mate.

Unfortunately, you can never elect a good "guy", because they don't exist in politics...good people do not even start in politics in the first place. And then you have that scam of 2 parties and no other choice and both parties basically work for the same people. Democracy is an illusion to keep people in order.

made 55k thank to trump on gold

It's nice to see there are still people of integrity. Don't back down, Powell.

Meanwhile, this corrupt administration needs to go. Its hostility towards decency and the rule of law is breathtaking.

Team Trump will continue to "flood the zone", as they may have some fear that their ability to do so will be curtailed after the mid-term elections. They will try to subvert those. Trump has already teased that he will cancel them.

when you get caught in a lie go to the media and put your case to halfwitts

It's been mostly a 2-party system for the last century, but there were times in the 1800's when multiple parties were active. Now, in almost all the States, if you want to go into politics and have a chance of getting elected, you have to join one of the two parties. Independents are just a few in the Senate and none in the House.

AI Overview
The United States had the most significant number of political parties competing and holding seats in government during the mid-to-late 19th Century, particularly in the time surrounding the Civil War and the subsequent Gilded Age.
While the U.S. has always primarily functioned as a two-party system, the 19th Century saw multiple minor parties gain varying levels of success and notoriety at both the state and federal levels.
Pre-Civil War Era: The lead-up to the Civil War saw the collapse of the Whig Party due to internal divisions over slavery. This led to a period of flux and the formation of several parties, including the Free Soil Party, the Anti-Masonic Party, the Liberty Party, and the new Republican Party, with members of these parties gaining seats in the House and Senate.
Civil War and Reconstruction: During the 37th Congress (1861-1863), members of the House included individuals from the Republican, Democratic, Constitutional Union, Unconditional Union, National Union, and Independent Democratic parties.
Gilded Age: The Gilded Age (c. 1870–1900) was another era of intense political activity and shifting loyalties, with minor parties like the Greenbacks and Virginia's Re-Adjuster party existing alongside the main Democratic and Republican parties.
This period of multiparty activity was a notable exception to the dominant two-party dynamic that has generally characterized American politics throughout its history

In the US, now you can be indicted for not lowering interest rates fast enough, but you can get a pardon if you're a pedo, an insurrectionist, run ponzy schemes, etc. Got enough crypto to hand over to the King? You're free.
The craziest thing is that communist China now, compared to the US, is a beacon in international law. They don't even have to try; the US is making it too easy for them.
Crazy how tables turn.

I have always wondered why Americans cannot create other political parties to compete with the democrats and republicans, and why they seem fixated on those two political parties. I think the following explanation from Copilot gives some clarity as to why the American political system behaves the way it does.

A democracy emphasizes majority rule and direct participation, while a republic focuses on elected representatives and constitutional protections for individual rights.
Definitions
•Democracy: Derived from the Greek word "dēmokratia," meaning "rule by the people," democracy generally refers to a system of government where the populace has the power to make decisions, either directly or through elected representatives. In a pure democracy, laws and policies are determined by majority vote, which can sometimes lead to the "tyranny of the majority," where the rights of minority groups may be overlooked.

•Republic: The term "republic" comes from the Latin "res publica," meaning "public matter." In a republic, the government is considered a public matter, and officials are elected to represent the citizens. A key feature of a republic is that it operates under a constitution that protects certain inalienable rights, ensuring that the majority cannot infringe upon the rights of the minority.

Key Differences
1.Majority Rule vs. Constitutional Protections:
•In a democracy, decisions are made based on majority rule, which can lead to the potential for the majority to impose its will on the minority without legal constraints.
•In a republic, laws are made by representatives elected by the people, and these laws must comply with a constitution that protects individual rights, preventing the majority from overriding the rights of the minority.

2.Direct vs. Representative Governance:
•Democracies can be direct, where citizens vote on laws and policies themselves, or representative, where they elect officials to make those decisions on their behalf.
•Republics are inherently representative, as they rely on elected officials to govern according to established laws and principles.

3.Focus on Individual Rights:
•Democracies may prioritize the will of the majority, which can sometimes lead to the neglect of individual rights.
•Republics emphasize the protection of individual rights through a constitution, ensuring that all citizens are treated equally under the law, regardless of the majority's preferences.

Conclusion
While the terms "democracy" and "republic" are often used interchangeably in modern discourse, they represent distinct concepts in governance. Most contemporary governments, including the United States, are classified as democratic republics, combining elements of both systems to ensure representation while protecting individual rights through constitutional law. This hybrid approach aims to balance the power of the majority with the rights of all citizens, fostering a more stable and equitable society.

chf is a proven curse for trade

what makes you think he was elected ? you’d be very naive to think elections haven’t been compromised for a very, very long time.

._.

Truths. It ALWAYS comes down to the money. Controlling money is controlling Power. Power ALWAYS seeks to become more powerful. Nobody ever gives up Power, fairly, NOT EVER.

So dumb

are you hinting at rallies?

Well he did just push my trade to tp, but i think the price action in the future will be very unpredictable

Basically, it means XAU is 5000 soon.

[quote]No one—certainly not the chair of the Federal Reserve—is above the law. But this unprecedented action should be seen in the broader context of the administration's threats and ongoing pressure...[\quote]


No a good way to defend yourself right from the start. Democrats embezzled billions in Minnesota, I bet there's embezzling going on in the Fed, too. No one is above the law. Enjoy your audit, criminals.

Nay

Bruh

Trumpsein will bring you all undone you halfwits, you all are lemmings headed for the precipice, the fall won't get you, the stop at the bottom will ...

So many morons defending the fed in here. The fed, of all things, deserve to be run through with a fine tooth comb, ffs.

Good! I love this, and Trump!

Powell seems to be the most corrupted Fed Chair. Otherwise, attorney general would not issue the warrant.

I love trump we make money together