Trump’s Persecution of Jerome Powell and Political Opponents Must End

January 13, 2026

Trump’s Persecution of Jerome Powell and Political Opponents Must End​

Bernie Sanders

Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell is a conservative Republican. I voted against his nomination based on policy disagreements. In a democracy, debate and disagreement are normal.

But Donald Trump does not “disagree” with his opponents. In his pursuit of absolute power, he attempts to destroy anyone who stands in his way. He is actively prosecuting Powell not because the Fed Chair broke the law, but because he won’t bend the knee to Donald Trump. This is what happens in dictatorships, not democracies.

When Senator Mark Kelly spoke out against Donald Trump’s authoritarian rhetoric and threats toward political opponents, Trump didn’t disagree. He had his Defense Department investigate Kelly for misconduct and threatened to have him executed.

When Letitia James, the Attorney General of New York, enforced the law in her state — and won the case based on the evidence — Trump had her charged with a crime.

From former FBI Director James Comey to Special Counsel Jack Smith, Senator Adam Schiff, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, John Bolton, Mark Milley, Anthony Fauci, and Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama, Donald Trump doesn’t disagree with his opponents.

He seeks to intimidate and destroy them as part of his march to authoritarianism.

Republicans, Democrats and independents have profound disagreements today regarding some of the major issues facing our country. But there is one issue on which we must be united. We must not allow political disagreement to become a crime. We must not allow our great country, the United States of America, to become an authoritarian society.

Trump’s persecution of his political opponents must end.
-------
I don't really have anything to add as I agree with Sanders. More info:

Frustration mounts inside White House over Pirro’s handling of Powell investigation​

https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/13/politics/jeanine-pirro-powell-investigation-frustration
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/13/politics/jeanine-pirro-powell-investigation-frustration

No justificatiin except to try to intimidate.

Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan says she has learned that federal prosecutors are investigating her after she took part in a video urging military service members to resist illegal orders.

Ms. Slotkin, a Democrat, said in an interview on Monday that she found out about the inquiry from the office of Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia and a longtime ally of President Trump’s. In an email sent to the Senate’s sergeant-at-arms, Ms. Pirro’s office requested an interview with the senator or her private counsel.

A spokesman for Ms. Pirro’s office declined to confirm or deny any investigation, and it is unclear exactly what officials have identified as a possible crime related to the video.

Click to expand...

Lots of stuff in the story.

This Pirro is turning oit to be a real shitbag.

crazyfingers said:

This Pirro is turning oit to be has always been a real shitbag.

Click to expand...

FTFY

Although in spirit I agree with the OP, this is exactly what could and would have happened during FDR's administration. And most people regard FDR as one of the best POTUS in US history.

IMO the fed should be completely abolished. If people can just let the free market establish interest rates Jerome Powell would not even matter

RVonse said:

Although in spirit I agree with the OP, this is exactly what could and would have happened during FDR's administration. And most people regard FDR as one of the best POTUS in US history.

IMO the fed should be completely abolished. If people can just let the free market establish interest rates Jerome Powell would not even matter

Click to expand...

Citation please?

IMO, ignorance should be abolished but that would require the capacity and willingness to learn and to appreciate facts, reasoning, cause and effect and an appreciation of exactly why the Fed was established and what its functions are and how it affects the economy.

RVonse said:

Although in spirit I agree with the OP, this is exactly what could and would have happened during FDR's administration. And most people regard FDR as one of the best POTUS in US history.

Click to expand...

But it didn’t, so you really have no point.

RVonse said:

IMO the fed should be completely abolished. If people can just let the free market establish interest rates Jerome Powell would not even matter

Click to expand...

What free market are you talking about? Financial markets are integrated globally. No Fed means China or the European Central Bank ends up influencing interest rates.

It "must end?" Not anytime soon. All through December and into this year, Trump has gotten wilder and more performative, seeking to grab the spotlight and dominate the news. You know...o-nay ore-may Epstein-ay. Is it working? Sort of. In his brain, even the ICE atrocities serve his purpose. And the Greenland insanity. And the threat to attack Iran. We're looking at a hyperventilating, self-idolizing thug with delusions of omnipotence. He's never learned a sobering lesson in his life, and he may not have to, given what SCOTUS did for him. He told a reporter that he won't be constrained by international law, but only by -- psychosis alert -- his own morality. (Seeing things that don't exist = psychosis symptom.)
Positive note: the increased evidence of extreme drowsiness in the past three months, even on his reduced workday, which is reportedly noon to five, with the evenings set aside for mad media posting. Positive note #2: increasingly incoherent, rambling, ricocheting responses to questions from the press. Pres. Wilson got away with incapacity back in 1920-21, but Trump is on camera every day, and he's looking worse every month. Sleepy Joe is probably amused.

ideologyhunter said:

It "must end?" Not anytime soon.

Click to expand...

Zackly.
What must END is the orange scourge.
Repugs are never going to grow a pair.

RVonse said:

Although in spirit I agree with the OP, this is exactly what could and would have happened during FDR's administration. And most people regard FDR as one of the best POTUS in US history.

IMO the fed should be completely abolished. If people can just let the free market establish interest rates Jerome Powell would not even matter

Click to expand...

As a reminder, the free market (read deregulated derivatives trading) is what imploded the global economy in 2008. Had extraordinary measures not been undertaken, we could still be living in the ashes of that free market collapse.

Toni said:

Citation please?

Click to expand...

Make yourself comfortable, it's going to be a wait. Although I admit I was surprised - I thought RVonse would pull out the MAGA lie that "Biden did it first!!!111oneone"

Toni said:

Citation please?

Click to expand...

A citation isn't needed. Just common sense. The fed mandate is to keep inflation low and they have failed miserably. They have failed so bad keeping inflation low inflation this has actually changed the course of society.

When a society is flourishing homes and automobiles have color. Look at some of the homes during the 1960's. Homes and cars had color (sometimes ridiculous colors) because people (when currency was still stable) could buy these items for their own pleasure instead of using these assets only to hedge inflation as their savings vehicle. People didn't need to care whether they got top resale value because they did not look at these items as temporary assets in their portfolio. Look at all the grey cars and homes today. It's because people buy these items with neutral color knowing they are only a temporary owner anticipating to optimize top resale after they cash in the asset. Thanks to the fed they can not save their cash in the bank anymore so they use their homes and cars.

When the average Joe has to buy a car as a savings investment just to reduce exposure to the feds inflation, that's when you know the fed has been worthless. Less than worthless considering they draw salaries at tax payer expense.

Get rid of the fed and you won't have anyone printing more dollars causing predictable and massive inflation.

RVonse said:

Get rid of the fed and you won't have anyone printing more dollars causing predictable and massive inflation.

Click to expand...

The increase in our nation’s money supply comes chiefly through the actions of the private banking system, not the printing of currency by the US Treasury.

BTW, the Fed earns a profit, so its operations are not funded by taxpayers. In fact, it remits any surplus to the US Treasury.

RVonse said:

Toni said:

Citation please?

Click to expand...

A citation isn't needed. Just common sense. The fed mandate is to keep inflation low and they have failed miserably. They have failed so bad keeping inflation low inflation this has actually changed the course of society.

When a society is flourishing homes and automobiles have color. Look at some of the homes during the 1960's. Homes and cars had color (sometimes ridiculous colors) because people (when currency was still stable) could buy these items for their own pleasure instead of using these assets only to hedge inflation as their savings vehicle. People didn't need to care whether they got top resale value because they did not look at these items as temporary assets in their portfolio. Look at all the grey cars and homes today. It's because people buy these items with neutral color knowing they are only a temporary owner anticipating to optimize top resale after they cash in the asset. Thanks to the fed they can not save their cash in the bank anymore so they use their homes and cars.

When the average Joe has to buy a car as a savings investment just to reduce exposure to the feds inflation, that's when you know the fed has been worthless. Less than worthless considering they draw salaries at tax payer expense.

Get rid of the fed and you won't have anyone printing more dollars causing predictable and massive inflation.

Click to expand...

A citation would help support your assertion which, to anyone even remotely literate in economics, or with even a very passing understanding of history, is ridiculous.

Your definition of ‘common sense’ seems to lack and semblance of sense.

In what way is a car a good investment vehicle (pun intended)? Don’t they drastically lose value over time?

Shadowy Man said:

In what way is a car a good investment vehicle (pun intended)? Don’t they drastically lose value over time?

Click to expand...

If you had bought a new 57 Chevy Belair convertible for $3k and stored it for 70 years at zero storage expense, you could get over 300k for it, while the 3000 1957 dollars you spent would only be worth about 35k today.

Trump, Bondi and Pirro again acting like a police state. These lawmakers only stated existing law. And even if not, are protected by the speech and debate clause in the US Constitution.

I believe that this is another in a very long list of impeachable offenses on the part of Trump, Bondi and Pirro

4 More Lawmakers in Video Say Federal Prosecutors Are Investigating Them​

The lawmakers, all Democrats who urged military service members not to follow illegal orders, said prosecutors had contacted them. But it is unclear what crime they might have committed.

Mr. Trump and other administration officials have described the video, which restates a fundamental principle of military law, as “seditious.” But it is unclear what possible crime the lawmakers are believed to have committed.

Click to expand...

RVonse said:

Toni said:

Citation please?

Click to expand...

A citation isn't needed. Just common sense. The fed mandate is to keep inflation low and they have failed miserably. They have failed so bad keeping inflation low inflation this has actually changed the course of society.

When a society is flourishing homes and automobiles have color. Look at some of the homes during the 1960's. Homes and cars had color (sometimes ridiculous colors) because people (when currency was still stable) could buy these items for their own pleasure instead of using these assets only to hedge inflation as their savings vehicle. People didn't need to care whether they got top resale value because they did not look at these items as temporary assets in their portfolio. Look at all the grey cars and homes today. It's because people buy these items with neutral color knowing they are only a temporary owner anticipating to optimize top resale after they cash in the asset. Thanks to the fed they can not save their cash in the bank anymore so they use their homes and cars.

When the average Joe has to buy a car as a savings investment just to reduce exposure to the feds inflation, that's when you know the fed has been worthless. Less than worthless considering they draw salaries at tax payer expense.

Get rid of the fed and you won't have anyone printing more dollars causing predictable and massive inflation.

Click to expand...

"Because I said so", isn't the compelling argument you might think it is. Especially considering your history of being consistently being proven wrong.

Although I must admit, determining the measure of a country's inflation based on the colour of houses is certainly a novel approach.

Elixir said:

Shadowy Man said:

In what way is a car a good investment vehicle (pun intended)? Don’t they drastically lose value over time?

Click to expand...

If you had bought a new 57 Chevy Belair convertible for $3k and stored it for 70 years at zero storage expense, you could get over 300k for it, while the 3000 1957 dollars you spent would only be worth about 35k today.

Click to expand...

Sure, but that isn’t relevant to RVonse’s post because 1957 was when he claims one didn’t need to purchase a car as an investment.

RVonse said:

Toni said:

Citation please?

Click to expand...

A citation isn't needed. Just common sense. The fed mandate is to keep inflation low and they have failed miserably. They have failed so bad keeping inflation low inflation this has actually changed the course of society.

When a society is flourishing homes and automobiles have color. Look at some of the homes during the 1960's. Homes and cars had color (sometimes ridiculous colors) because people (when currency was still stable) could buy these items for their own pleasure instead of using these assets only to hedge inflation as their savings vehicle. People didn't need to care whether they got top resale value because they did not look at these items as temporary assets in their portfolio. Look at all the grey cars and homes today. It's because people buy these items with neutral color knowing they are only a temporary owner anticipating to optimize top resale after they cash in the asset. Thanks to the fed they can not save their cash in the bank anymore so they use their homes and cars.

When the average Joe has to buy a car as a savings investment just to reduce exposure to the feds inflation, that's when you know the fed has been worthless. Less than worthless considering they draw salaries at tax payer expense.

Get rid of the fed and you won't have anyone printing more dollars causing predictable and massive inflation.

Click to expand...

Coming back to correct some of your assumptions:

1.Gray became ubiquitous with millennials and Gen X who thought gray was cool and it reflected their mood. Lots of designers embraced gray as a neutral and ran with the trend. But as with everything, gray has ( mostly) faded from trend. Currently, saturated, rich colors are on trend as far as interior decorating goes, with lots of patterns.

A realtor will tell you to paint your interiors in neutral colors and to remove personal photos so that potential buyers can better imagine themselves in your space if they buy.

I don’t see many gray cars on the road. A lot of white ones, which is not smart, imo, as snow is a distinct possibility 6 months of the year here. Some silver cars, as well as gold, but most of those still running are grandma or grandpa’s old cars that they aren’t allowed to drive any more.

The last time we purchased a motor vehicle, our choices of color were extremely limited. Pandemic, eh? I’m seeing a lot of newer and smaller vehicles in lovely creamy pastels. Otherwise, it’s a lot of black and navy blue. With some red ones interspersed.

AFAIK, no one with a lick of sense buys a car as an investment—except, perhaps a commercial vehicle which is part of the company assets. In our family, we drive our vehicles until it starts costing a lot to keep them going or if there is some practical to trade: you need a smaller or larger vehicle. reason to buy another one, for example.

Home purchases have some failsafes built in. Almost everyone uses a mortgage to purchase a home and lenders are loathe to lend if they don’t believe an asset will maintain value over the life of the loan. Huge growth in home value is a recent phenomenon, and is geographically dependent. My current home would be worth 2-3 times or more its current t value if it were located a mere 120 miles north of its current location. In NYC or LA, at least 10 but probably 20 times what I could sell it for.

Most people purchase houses to make their home, sometimes for decades, sometimes for a short while. Many buy small, intending to ‘upgrade’ when they earn more or need more space, or whatever. Sure, there are real estate investors/speculators. They do us all a grave disservice by driving up the price of home ownership.

Shadowy Man said:

Elixir said:

Shadowy Man said:

In what way is a car a good investment vehicle (pun intended)? Don’t they drastically lose value over time?

Click to expand...

If you had bought a new 57 Chevy Belair convertible for $3k and stored it for 70 years at zero storage expense, you could get over 300k for it, while the 3000 1957 dollars you spent would only be worth about 35k today.

Click to expand...

Sure, but that isn’t relevant to RVonse’s post because 1957 was when he claims one didn’t need to purchase a car as an investment.

Click to expand...

lol! This only proves that when you don’t need to invest in a car, it is the best time to invest in a car!
No wonder Jay Leno is so rich