Connect with us

Top Stories

Lisa Cook standing up for the Federal Reserve is a ploy to turn a blind eye from her mortgage scandal

Published

on


Fed Governor Lisa Cook is standing up to Donald Trump, suing to keep her job because she says the president is trumping up a scandal and she’s fighting for Fed independence.

Trump has called for Cook’s head for allegedly committing mortgage fraud by signing documents that she had two primary residences.

We should let the courts decide that one.

But Cook’s notion that she’s standing up for the sanctity of the Fed should be taken with a grain of salt.

The Fed has long been distracted by side hustles to its “dual mandate” of price stability within the context of maximum employment. It’s far from an apolitical agency.

Even more, Cook’s own appointment by Joe Biden in 2022 is an example of how politics, particularly of the left-wing variety, has been infused into the Fed’s plumbing.

In getting rid of Cook, you can make the case that Trump — in his own messy way — is righting the ship.

The markets may be signaling this — despite media talking heads and those of some Fed watchers exploding over Trump’s latest alleged apostasy.

The establishment commentariat is arguing that not being able to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell or even Cook except for some on-the-job crime, aka cause — is why people keep buying our debt.

The nation’s central bank created by Congress to manage the money supply doesn’t report to the president.

It’s not subject to his political whims to juice economic growth at the expense of “King Dollar.”

OK, all good points.

But stocks and bond yields have barely budged.

The stated reasons in a recent Wall Street Journal piece: Traders believe Trump will appoint seasoned pros to fill the jobs of both Cook and his main Fed nemesis, Powell.

Big investors unfazed

Yes, but my sources provide a more prescient analysis of the market’s insouciance: Trump is merely putting his MAGA stamp on the independence charade.

Many big investors are unfazed by Trump’s power grab because for years the Fed has been straying from its mandate — constantly intervening in the economy by playing with the money supply when it isn’t needed and most recently becoming woke.

Lisa Cook’s nomination in 2022, subsequent confirmation by the then Democrat-controlled and woke-obsessed Senate is part of the proof.

Don’t believe me?

Here’s what Larry Summers, Bill Clinton’s former treasury secretary, former Harvard president and one of the most important economic minds on monetary policy said in 2021 about the Fed’s mission-creep:

“We have a generation of central bankers who are defining themselves by their ‘wokeness.’ They’re defining themselves by how socially concerned they are. They’re defining themselves how concerned they are about the environment . . . business ethics.”

In 2022, the Fed developed a “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Strategic Plan” to reflect the Federal Reserve Board’s “strategic initiative on diversity, equity, and inclusion, which is a shared responsibility of all Board employees.”

Now tell me exactly how DEI, which the Supreme Court says is discriminatory and common sense tells you erodes the nation’s meritocracy, helps the Fed figure out if it’s stoking inflation as it did just a few years ago during Joe Biden’s reign of error?

Or maybe I should be directing that question to Lisa Cook.

Her lawyer argued Friday before a federal judge that her firing by Trump is “unprecedented and illegal” in that it exceeds the president’s authority over an independent, nonpolitical agency.

Go back a few years to her messy confirmation battle and you will see how Cook is anything but apolitical.

Yes, she has a Ph.D. in econ, from Berkeley no less, and was a longtime academic.

She is the first African-American woman to serve as a Fed governor, which should be celebrated.

But during the hearings we discovered that her areas of interest in economics, based on her publishing record, are dominated by stuff like how lynchings hindered the economic growth of black Americans.

There is a place for such research at the university — though you gotta ask yourself why we need an economist to explain something so fundamentally obvious.

Look into Cook’s résumé and you see this is an economist who seems more obsessed with being a social-justice warrior than weighing the vicissitudes of M2 and how it impacts price stability.

Presumed innocent

Again, I’m giving Cook the presumption of innocence on the mortgage inquiry.

For the record, I hate the lack of due process she received.

Instead of a simple referral to the DOJ to determine probable cause — cause is what Trump needs to boot her from the post — Bill Pulte, the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, has been announcing criminal referrals on the mortgage charges via social media.

Music to the ears of his social-media-obsessed boss, who announced Cook’s firing on Truth Social.

To date, Cool hasn’t denied the central charges that she purposely stated two primary residences to get a lower mortgage rate.

(Her lawyer has suggested she possibly erred.)

I also wonder if she would ­accord the same due process to someone who encroached on her woke-obsessed boundaries.

Good evidence says probably not.

Consider what she did in 2020, during the insane Summer of Love when Black Lives Matter riots spread across the country, demanding that the police be defunded.

A fellow academic at the University of Chicago, Harald Uhlig, also the editor at the influential Journal of Political Economy, criticized BLM and defunding.

She joined the online assault to get him fired.

(He was placed on leave by the publication and reinstated.)

Her rationale: “Free speech should have its limits,” adding that it shouldn’t be used to “spread ­hatred and violate the dignity of other people.”

Now do you really want someone like that helping run the ­nation’s central bank?

Maybe that’s why the markets don’t care about Trump’s power play.



Source link

Top Stories

This is why you need to check your Powerball ticket, even if you don’t win the $1.8 billion jackpot

Published

on


Chances are very good that if someone wins Saturday’s promised Powerball prize of $1.8 billion, they will cash in their ticket. But it’s not certain.

Not every jackpot-winning ticket sold over the years has been cashed in. And if you totaled up all the missing smaller “winners” who could claim anywhere from a few dollars to millions of dollars, their total-lost winnings likely stretch to the 10-figure range annually.

Prizes worth about 1% of yearly lottery revenue go unclaimed, said Victor Matheson, an economics professor at the College of the Holy Cross and an expert on gambling and lotteries, citing an annual report from the New York Lottery Commission.

“The amount of unclaimed prizes are similar nationwide,” said Matheson. And since so many lotto tickets are sold each year, that 1% estimate adds up to more than $1 billion.

One of the unclaimed prizes last year was a winning lottery ticket sold on July 3, 2024, at a Walmart Supercenter in Huber Heights, Ohio. That unclaimed ticket would have paid the holder $138 million spread over 20 years, or $65.8 million as a lump sum.

Eight Mega Millions or Powerball jackpots have gone unclaimed in the last 25 years, according to data on the two lottery sites. Those jackpots have a combined worth of $646 million, or $821 million when adjusted for inflation.

But those eight missed prizes are about 1.5% of all 520 jackpots won during that time. Most of the unclaimed potential winnings come from the smaller prizes, and far more of them don’t ever get cashed.

Many lottery players likely never check their tickets after they hear there was no jackpot winner, or that the winning ticket was sold far from where they bought their ticket, according to Matheson. Most probably are unaware they are leaving potential winnings on the table, or stashed their winning ticket in their pockets or junk drawers.

Some prizes are as low as $4 for those who match only the Powerball number in that game. But it can also be millions for those who get the five regular numbers but not the Powerball or Mega Ball number. Mega Millions pays $2 million for that prize, while Powerball pays either $1 million or $2 million, depending on whether the player paid extra for a “power play option.”

Beyond the million-dollar prizes, there are also modest prizes of between $4 and $500 in Powerball and between $10 and $800 in Mega Millions. And there are also prizes for up to six figures offered in the two games, ranging from $1,000 to as much as $500,000.

Different states have different time limits to turn in a winning ticket. Powerball’s site has a list of prizes of $50,000 or more that have not been claimed, as well as the time remaining for the winner to claim them. One of those listed prizes, a $50,000 winning ticket sold in March in Covington, Louisiana, just expired Friday without being claimed.

Most of the money wagered in lotteries isn’t in these jackpot drawing games, said Matheson. About 70% of the $110 billion in tickets sold are for instant scratch-off games. And while he has no firm data to back it up, he suspects relatively few of those winning tickets end up not being cashed.

“There’s just less time between when the tickets are sold and when the player knows if they won, less time for the ticket to be lost or forgotten,” Matheson said.





Source link

Continue Reading

Top Stories

Trumps says Venezuelan jets will be ‘shot down’ if they endanger US ships

Published

on


Donald Trump has warned that, if Venezuelan jets fly over US naval ships and “put us in a dangerous position, they’ll be shot down”.

The president’s warning comes after Venezuela flew military aircraft near a US vessel off South America for the second time in two days, US officials told the BBC’s US partner CBS News.

The reports follow a US strike against what Trump officials said was a “drug-carrying vessel from Venezuela” operated by a gang, killing 11 people.

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has said that the US allegations about his country are not true, and that differences between the nations do not justify a “military conflict”.

“Venezuela has always been willing to talk, to engage in dialogue, but we demand respect,” he added.

When asked by reporters in the Oval Office on Friday what would happen if Venezuelan jets flew over US vessels again, Trump said Venezuela would be in “trouble”.

Trump told his general, standing beside him, that he could do anything he wanted if the situation escalated.

Since his return to office in January, Trump has steadily intensified his anti-drug-trafficking efforts in Latin America.

Maduro has accused the US of seeking “regime change through military threat”.

When asked about the comments, Trump said “we’re not talking about that”, but mentioned what he called a “very strange election” in Venezuela. Maduro was sworn in for his third term in January after a contested election.

Trump went on to say that “drugs are pouring” into the US from Venezuela and that members of Tren de Aragua – a gang proscribed as a terrorist organisation in the US – were living there.

The US military has moved to bolster its forces in the southern Caribbean, including through the deployment of additional naval vessels and thousands of marines and sailors to stem the flow of drugs.

The White House said on Friday that it is sending 10 F-35 fighter jets to Puerto Rico.

When asked about the build-up of military assets in the Caribbean, Trump said: “I think it’s just strong. We’re strong on drugs. We don’t want drugs killing our people.”

Trump is a long-time critic of Maduro, and doubled a reward for information leading to his arrest to $50m (£37.2m) in August, accusing Maduro of being “one of the largest narco-traffickers in the world”.

During Trump’s first term in office, the US government charged Maduro and other high-ranking Venezuelan officials with a range of offences, including narco-terrorism, corruption and drug trafficking.

Maduro has previously rejected the US allegations.



Source link

Continue Reading

Top Stories

HHS responds to report about autism and acetaminophen : Shots

Published

on


Inna Kot/Getty Images/iStockphoto

The Trump administration is planning to release a report this month that will reportedly link use of the common painkiller acetaminophen (sold under the brand name Tylenol) during pregnancy, as well as certain vitamin deficiencies, to autism spectrum disorder, despite lacking the scientific research to back up such claims.

This is just the latest controversy surrounding the actions of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has repeated unsupported claims about autism in the past, and promised to “get to the bottom” of its cause.

The agency confirmed it is working on a report, but declined to comment on its conclusions. “Until we release the final report, any claims about its contents are nothing more than speculation,” a spokesperson for HHS emailed in a statement.

There is no credible scientific evidence that acetaminophen causes autism or that leucovorin (a derivative of folic acid) can prevent the disorder, as the HHS report purportedly will suggest, according to reporting by the Wall Street Journal.

In fact, those in the medical community, including the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, said in a statement that acetaminophen is safe and recommended for use in pregnancy, especially to treat fever and pain. “Untreated fever, particularly in the first trimester, increases the risk of miscarriage, birth defects, and premature birth, and untreated pain can lead to maternal depression, anxiety, and high blood pressure,” the society said in its statement.

“It is disingenuous and misleading to boil autism’s causes down to one simple thing,” said Dr. Alycia Halladay, chief science officer at the Autism Science Foundation, in a statement. There are hundreds of genes that are linked to autism, and while there are also thought to be other complex environmental factors, the foundation says “any association between acetaminophen and autism is based on limited, conflicting, and inconsistent science and is premature given the current science.”

A few small studies have suggested an association between fetal exposure to acetaminophen and the subsequent risk of diagnosis with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). But the largest study to date, an NIH-funded collaboration between U.S. and Swedish scientists, found no increased risk.

Even before that study was published in 2024, a U.S. District Court had reached a similar conclusion in a product liability case.

Leucovorin, also known as folinic acid, is a form of vitamin B9 (also known as folate) that is used to treat certain types of vitamin B9 deficiency that are usually caused by cancer chemotherapy. It is sometimes prescribed off-label as a treatment for autism, though the evidence that it works is scant.

The use of leucovorin is based on research suggesting that many people with autism have a metabolic difference that could reduce the amount of folate that reaches the brain. Leucovorin appears to offer a way around that metabolic roadblock.

Folate is important for brain and nervous system development, which is why pregnant women are often prescribed supplements that contain folic acid, a synthetic version of folate. Folate deficiency in a mother increases the risk of neural tube defects including spina bifida, but the link to autism is unclear.

The Autism Science Foundation said in its statement that there are four studies suggesting low folate levels in pregnant women could increase the risk of autism, but it said “this science is still in very early stages, and more studies are necessary before a definitive conclusion can be reached.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending