Given the players involved, that honestly seems to be quite controversial.
She should be the POTUS if she's really a felon.
This has been asserted but not proven to be true.
“…she shouldn't be in charge of anything.“
Even if sensible, this is clearly not a heuristic that is being applied universally.
It is not proven. Trump is merely alleging - it is a manufactured allegation.
> If she committed a felony, she shouldn't be in charge of anything
Apply the same logic to the 34 count felon in the office of the President. Until you apply the harshest standard to the President, none of your other complaints hold any value.
Big if, especially since she hasn't been formally charged with anything. In any case, even if she has, Trump and Pulte's authority to fire her is questionable. It would be like a mayor attempting to fire a private security guard that's contracted with the city, pending an investigation.
A couple of points: if it were a LEO, they would generally be put on leave, not fired. But, again, officer of a private entity (which the Fed) is; the mayor/president's ability to influence that entity's activity ends at the contracts/relevant statutes's stipulations - and if there's a dispute, it gets hashed out in civil court. Of course, if a felony has been committed, one could just wait for the conviction, which would likely lead to termination by one of several exigencies.
But, again, big if.
When Al Franken resigns because of allegations of sexual misconduct, it proves Democrats are evil. When Donald Trump is convicted of dozens of felonies, it proves Republicans are victims of politically motivated witch hunts. It shouldn't be a controversial opinion that being a felon should disqualify you from public service, but because of that very opinion, labeling someone as a felon as been weaponized to the point where the label can be dismissed by supporters
How are markets supposed to react to that?
If markets are going to go up, and then down, do you buy or sell?
If Trump is going to take over the Fed, the smart move is to buy. If there's going to be a huge party before the world ends, you go to the party.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Transparency_A...
“Of these four interventions (deleting, killing, burying, and downweighting), the only one that moderators do frequently is downweighting. We downweight posts in response to things that go against the site guidelines, such as when a submission is unsubstantive, baity or sensational. Typically such posts remain on the front page, just at a lower rank.”
My personal encounter with the situation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45036597 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44939626
There isn’t some secret cabal of MAGA types censoring you.
I think a lot of people don’t come here for politics and would like to filter some of the noise out.
I suppose we could paraphrase that by changing "salary" to "retirement" or "national economic health".
Seriously that's the allegation? When I heard false information on a mortgage I assumed inflated income or assets or concealing the source of a downpayment. Is this even material? Can't a person have 2 homes and live in both?
justin66•1h ago