The White House sought greater control over the Federal Reserve by pursuing the removal of Governor Lisa Cook after an anonymous tip prompted allegations of mortgage fraud. Early evidence appears damning, but Cook retains over a dozen years in her appointed term and has not been proven to have intentionally broken any laws; some discrepancies may be clerical. The episode draws parallels to selective enforcement and potential hypocrisy when legal standards are applied unevenly, especially compared to the president's own convictions. The situation raises fundamental concerns about fairness, due process, and the preservation of constitutional principles that protect unpopular or unsympathetic individuals.
The White House's latest effort to tighten control over the Federal Reserve exemplifies President Trump's typical tactics in battle. He has an uncanny knack for pushing the limits of protocol, precedent, constitutional boundaries, and American values by targeting individuals or organizations that are often seen as difficult to defend. In his latest bid, Trump has tried to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook from her position
Still, any alleged misconduct on her part seems almost as reprehensible as the bank fraud that led to Trump's conviction for inflating the value of his assets to obtain favorable loan and insurance rates. This is not to defend Cook, but rather to illustrate the parallelism and hypocrisy of the rule of law being subordinated to the law of the ruler.
Collection
[
|
...
]