Trump removes Fed Governor Lisa Cook

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is Trump doing everything possible to cause even more inflation?

Because he was installed to destroy us.

It's like people didn't read or take P2025 seriously.

People don’t read or watch the news but still vote. I know several people like this, it’s kind of embarrassing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is Trump doing everything possible to cause even more inflation?

Because he was installed to destroy us.

It's like people didn't read or take P2025 seriously.

It’s truly shocking to me how many people not only ignored that, but everything else in the past 10 years.


Everyone who read Animal Farm, 1984, and The Diary of Anne Frank in high school and reads real news saw this coming a decade ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fundamental question here is whether a criminal referral for mortgage fraud constitutes sufficient "cause" for termination. Generally, "cause" is malfeasance or dereliction of duty, which means serious misconduct or failure to perform their responsibilities properly. Some have argued that criminal activity prior to taking office can also be sufficient cause, particularly if it calls into question the credibility of the person performing such responsibilities.

Everything else is irrelevant, including whether Trump is the first President to fire a Federal Reserve Board member, she is black, she is a woman, whether Trump desires to control the Federal Reserve, whether Trump wants interest rates lowered, etc...

What about the fundamental question of a man with 34 felony convictions becoming the president of this country? Is that allowed? Do you think a man with 34 convictions and a known rapist can perform presidential responsibilities? He is just mad that he was convicted of mortgage fraud repeatedly and wants to get back and is using black women as his scapegoat.

Beyond being untrue, all of those are irrelevant. He is the duly-elected President of the United States. The issue is whether the President has the authority.

Wow so his felony convictions and the fact that he is a rapist are untrue but an unsubstantiated, unproven claim against a black, female Fed governor is cause for the orange clown to fire her?

He doesn't need cause. He exercised his power.

Article II, Section 1, first sentence (AKA the Vesting Clause).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fundamental question here is whether a criminal referral for mortgage fraud constitutes sufficient "cause" for termination. Generally, "cause" is malfeasance or dereliction of duty, which means serious misconduct or failure to perform their responsibilities properly. Some have argued that criminal activity prior to taking office can also be sufficient cause, particularly if it calls into question the credibility of the person performing such responsibilities.

Everything else is irrelevant, including whether Trump is the first President to fire a Federal Reserve Board member, she is black, she is a woman, whether Trump desires to control the Federal Reserve, whether Trump wants interest rates lowered, etc...

What about the fundamental question of a man with 34 felony convictions becoming the president of this country? Is that allowed? Do you think a man with 34 convictions and a known rapist can perform presidential responsibilities? He is just mad that he was convicted of mortgage fraud repeatedly and wants to get back and is using black women as his scapegoat.

Beyond being untrue, all of those are irrelevant. He is the duly-elected President of the United States. The issue is whether the President has the authority.

Wow so his felony convictions and the fact that he is a rapist are untrue but an unsubstantiated, unproven claim against a black, female Fed governor is cause for the orange clown to fire her?

He doesn't need cause. He exercised his power.

Article II, Section 1, first sentence (AKA the Vesting Clause).

Y'all are nuts. Article II is more than one sentence long. Keep reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fundamental question here is whether a criminal referral for mortgage fraud constitutes sufficient "cause" for termination. Generally, "cause" is malfeasance or dereliction of duty, which means serious misconduct or failure to perform their responsibilities properly. Some have argued that criminal activity prior to taking office can also be sufficient cause, particularly if it calls into question the credibility of the person performing such responsibilities.

Everything else is irrelevant, including whether Trump is the first President to fire a Federal Reserve Board member, she is black, she is a woman, whether Trump desires to control the Federal Reserve, whether Trump wants interest rates lowered, etc...

What about the fundamental question of a man with 34 felony convictions becoming the president of this country? Is that allowed? Do you think a man with 34 convictions and a known rapist can perform presidential responsibilities? He is just mad that he was convicted of mortgage fraud repeatedly and wants to get back and is using black women as his scapegoat.

Beyond being untrue, all of those are irrelevant. He is the duly-elected President of the United States. The issue is whether the President has the authority.

Wow so his felony convictions and the fact that he is a rapist are untrue but an unsubstantiated, unproven claim against a black, female Fed governor is cause for the orange clown to fire her?

Irrelevant and also untrue.

Hardly irrelevant when Trump's felony convicitions are for the basically the same thing -- lying on real estate loan applications -- though more scheming and involving multiples more money.

Still irrelevant. No court, except the court of public opinion on DCUM, would consider such extraneous facts.

We are talking about Fed Governor Lisa Cook and whether the President of the United States (regardless of who occupies the office) has the authority and if so, whether her actions constitute sufficient "cause" for removal.

Please stay on topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fundamental question here is whether a criminal referral for mortgage fraud constitutes sufficient "cause" for termination. Generally, "cause" is malfeasance or dereliction of duty, which means serious misconduct or failure to perform their responsibilities properly. Some have argued that criminal activity prior to taking office can also be sufficient cause, particularly if it calls into question the credibility of the person performing such responsibilities.

Everything else is irrelevant, including whether Trump is the first President to fire a Federal Reserve Board member, she is black, she is a woman, whether Trump desires to control the Federal Reserve, whether Trump wants interest rates lowered, etc...

What about the fundamental question of a man with 34 felony convictions becoming the president of this country? Is that allowed? Do you think a man with 34 convictions and a known rapist can perform presidential responsibilities? He is just mad that he was convicted of mortgage fraud repeatedly and wants to get back and is using black women as his scapegoat.

Beyond being untrue, all of those are irrelevant. He is the duly-elected President of the United States. The issue is whether the President has the authority.

Wow so his felony convictions and the fact that he is a rapist are untrue but an unsubstantiated, unproven claim against a black, female Fed governor is cause for the orange clown to fire her?

He doesn't need cause. He exercised his power.

Article II, Section 1, first sentence (AKA the Vesting Clause).

Y'all are nuts. Article II is more than one sentence long. Keep reading.

I told you what the vesting clause was. Now pipe down.

[Anonymous]

Lisa Cook has retained an attorney and will be suing the government over her removal.

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/26/lisa-cook-sue-trump-fed.html

[Anonymous]

How is it legal for these agency heads to selectively investigate Trump’s enemies??? They all said under oath they would not.

And how can Pluge tweet images from a citizen’s confidential file that he is only allowed to access for legit government purposes??

Where are the checks on Executive power built into the Constitution. So much for R’s favoring small government.

[Anonymous]

Market is up!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is it legal for these agency heads to selectively investigate Trump’s enemies??? They all said under oath they would not.

And how can Pluge tweet images from a citizen’s confidential file that he is only allowed to access for legit government purposes??

Where are the checks on Executive power built into the Constitution. So much for R’s favoring small government.

Are they selectively investigating, or are matters being reviewed and the names of prominent people - who should know better - coming to light? Nobody forced Schiff, James, or Cook to sign their mortgage papers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is it legal for these agency heads to selectively investigate Trump’s enemies??? They all said under oath they would not.

And how can Pluge tweet images from a citizen’s confidential file that he is only allowed to access for legit government purposes??

Where are the checks on Executive power built into the Constitution. So much for R’s favoring small government.

Are they selectively investigating, or are matters being reviewed and the names of prominent people - who should know better - coming to light? Nobody forced Schiff, James, or Cook to sign their mortgage papers.

"Selectively investigating" without probable cause is illegal.

Every member of Congress who owns a property in their home state/district and a home in the DC area is guilty of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lisa Cook has retained an attorney and will be suing the government over her removal.

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/26/lisa-cook-sue-trump-fed.html

Trump will be shaking in his boots. Haha.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lisa should have been gone a long time ago.

No. She’s a well-respected economist who is well-liked by her peers. Trump fired her because she is a black women who had the audacity to disagree with him about raising interest rates (as do most people who have more than a high school student’s knowledge of the economy.)

He can't stomach the idea of a woman-- especially a woman of color-- having any sort of money that wasn't provided to her by a man. And to be able to talk about money intelligently? Oh god, the idea gives the man a nosebleed. It probably makes him sick to his stomach that she has the audacity to have a PhD in economics.

You’re overthinking it. He wants to replace her with someone who will vote his way. He is taking over every institution in this country.

DP. Both things can be true. She is black woman. He’s fired more women and black women than white men.

He has fired many women

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lisa should have been gone a long time ago.

No. She’s a well-respected economist who is well-liked by her peers. Trump fired her because she is a black women who had the audacity to disagree with him about raising interest rates (as do most people who have more than a high school student’s knowledge of the economy.)

He can't stomach the idea of a woman-- especially a woman of color-- having any sort of money that wasn't provided to her by a man. And to be able to talk about money intelligently? Oh god, the idea gives the man a nosebleed. It probably makes him sick to his stomach that she has the audacity to have a PhD in economics.

You’re overthinking it. He wants to replace her with someone who will vote his way. He is taking over every institution in this country.

DP. Both things can be true. She is black woman. He’s fired more women and black women than white men.

He has fired many women

He knows the intelligent ones don't have time for his dictator nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is Trump doing everything possible to cause even more inflation?

Because he was installed to destroy us.

It's like people didn't read or take P2025 seriously.

It’s truly shocking to me how many people not only ignored that, but everything else in the past 10 years.


Everyone who read Animal Farm, 1984, and The Diary of Anne Frank in high school and reads real news saw this coming a decade ago.

THIS!!!!