One (Losing) Battle After Another

The worst advice I have ever gotten is stay in your lane. I am Robin Upson, athlete, executive, founder, and staying in my lane would have kept me small. Don't protect other people. This week on the

Hey everyone, Ellie here, wishing you a happy Friday. Well, before we get to this week's piece, I noticed an item that sort of shot through the news very quickly. I was asked. Asked one question about it on CNN by Jake Tapper, which I was grateful for. And here's the story. So the Justice Department has long had, apparently, A requirement that in order to get hired as a federal prosecutor, you have to have at least one year of legal practice.

of legal experience. As you can probably tell, I had no idea. that was even a regulation. I mean, it seems so minimal. Why would you even have it? It's like saying, well, in order to be a brain surgeon, you have to have one year of being a doctor first. Of course, obviously, you need a lot more than that. I wasn't aware that this was a regulation, but it's a reasonable one. I mean, I think it maybe should even be higher. The news though is DOJ has now gotten rid of that.

Meaning they can hire people with less than one year of legal experience as AUSAs, as federal prosecutors. They can hire people with no legal experience. I guess presumably you still have to graduate law school and take the bar. Boy, though, what a sad statement about the current status. Of the Justice Department. I've talked about this. Maybe you all heard this at various points, but forever, in my mind and and many others.

To get hired at the Justice Department was the pinnacle. It was the ultimate goal. It was something you dreamed about. It was a dream job. It was insanely difficult. It was ridiculously competitive to get in for every opening you had. a hundred vastly qualified people who had been practicing for way more than one year. I don't mind telling you all I've written about this and spoken about it. I got rejected the first two times, three times if you count during law school.

I applied to the Justice Department. And finally, after three and a half years of practice at a big firm, I finally got in. I got an offer at the SDNY where I was lucky to spend the next eight and a half years before going over to the New Jersey Attorney General. And now they're saying, well, no, you can we're gonna lower the bar. We're gonna make it easier to get hired here. Why is

First of all, they're they're bleeding out people. They're firing lots of good people for stupid reasons because they worked on a January sixth case, because they worked on Jack Smith's team. They're also having massive attrition, people who do not agree with what's happening, people who do not believe in this Justice Department. And apparently they're not able to hire ample replacements. So

It's a sad statement about where DOJ is right now. That said, I actually just spoke with somebody. I'll obviously keep this person's identity confidential who had a chance to go in there now. And I said, do it, do it. Because This person will be on a low level, just a beginner. The politics of the place. won't impact what a first year person is doing, get in the door and then help make the place better. You'll be there for many years, well beyond the end of this administration.

Anyway, wanted to float that one out there for you and let you know what I thought of it. Okay, on to this week's piece. As always, love to hear from you. We've gotten some good letters and emails lately. Keep them coming though. I want to do a mailbag kind of thing. I need a few more though. So Send them in to letters atcafe.com and I promise we'll do our best to answer them in a separate podcast.

Even as the Supreme Court has granted Donald Trump expanded presidential powers, it has tried to warn him: don't mess with the Fed. But the president has forged ahead with his effort to strong arm the government's independent rate-setting agency, the Federal Reserve Board, as he doggedly pursues the fleeting economic sugar high that accompanies interest rate cuts.

Trump has endured a series of legal losses that promises to continue until he gets the point and gives up the senseless brow beating. And while he flails, he'll undermine his own ability to install his preferred rate makers at the agency. Last year, the Supreme Court granted the president unprecedented unilateral power to fire, for any reason, or none at all, the heads of obscure executive branch agencies like the Merit Systems Protection Board and the National Labor Relations Board.

But the justices cautioned against presidential encroachment on the Fed. The fired agency heads argued that if the court allowed the president to remove them, then the Fed could be next. Quote, we disagree the six justice conservative majority wrote. The Federal Reserve is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows in the distinct historical tradition of the first and second banks of the United States. End quote.

Now the court usually refuses to offer gratuitous guidance about how it might rule in future cases. But here, the conservative justices left little doubt that while they would allow the president to run roughshod over most regulatory agencies, they would draw a protective line around the Fed. Trump didn't notice or didn't care, or perhaps both.

First, he went after Fed Governor Lisa Cook. Bill Poulty, an unapologetic sycophant who runs the Federal Housing Finance Agency, sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department, alleging that Cook had committed mortgage fraud. Pulte's record is not great. He had previously prodded DOJ to bring mortgage fraud charges against New York Attorney General Letitia James, a case that has now been rejected by a federal judge and somehow two grand juries.

Undaunted and without waiting to see whether the Justice Department would actually seek to indict Cook, Trump fired her by Truth Social Post in august twenty twenty five. Trump made no effort to disguise his motivations. Just hours after he purported to dispatch Cook, he boasted of the Fed, quote, We'll have a majority very shortly, so that'll be great. We have to get the rates down a little bit, meaning interest rates.

But Cook challenged her termination. The case made its way to the Supreme Court, which heard arguments back in January of this year and seemed distinctly disinclined towards the president. Chief Justice John Roberts noted that some allegations against Cook were quote contradicted by other documents in the record. And fellow conservatives, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, voice concern over the lack of process afforded to Cook. Apparently firing by social media posts doesn't do the trick.

We await a decision, but it's clear Cook isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration's attention wandered over to Fed Chair Jerome Powell. Now, Trump himself appointed Powell as Fed Chair back in 2017. But they've distinctly grown apart. Recall the recent Kerbier enthusiasm-esque public exchange where the two men both wearing goofy hard hats in front of a bank of television cameras. Bickered over the details of cost overruns. As Trump cited phony figures, Powell shook his head vigorously and replied, I'm not aware of that.

Last week, Federal District Court Judge James Bosberg took the dramatic step of blocking two subpoenas that Trump's acting U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C., the former Fox News blunderbuss Janine Pirot, had served on the Fed. Pierrot's office is investigating whether Powell gave false congressional testimony about the same cost overruns that Powell and Trump sparred about in the awkward hard hat exchange.

Not coincidentally, Trump also has posted on social media over 100 times berating Powell for declining to cut interest rates. The president has mused aloud that, quote, I want to get him out, and quote, I may have to force something, end quote. Pierrot stood ready to oblige.

After Judge Bosberg rejected her subpoenas, Pierrot, evoking Cecily Strong's brilliant wine spitting Saturday night live impression, called a press conference and podium pounded her way through a bizarre half hour of unhinged nonsense. Pierrot called Bosberg an activist judge. Never mind that he was first nominated to the bench by George W. Bush and was later elevated by Barack Obama. And in twenty seventeen, Bosberg sided with Trump and rejected an effort to force disclosure of his tax returns.

Pierot claimed that the ruling marked, quote, the first time a judge had quashed a grand jury subpoena and was, quote, untethered to the law. Judges rarely block grand jury subpoenas, but this was hardly a first. In fact, Judge Bosberg cited a dozen semi-recent examples from across the country, and Trump himself has asked courts to exercise their power to quash subpoenas in prior investigations pointed at him.

Pyrrho wailed that Judge Bosberg had quote neutered her investigation of Powell. But it's not that the judge cut off the case's balls, sorry, I'm just picking up Pyrrho's analogy here. He simply noted that it had none to begin with. Trump usually has a knack for choosing politically useful foils, but his beef with the Fed and Powell is backfiring.

Congressional Republicans have cautioned him to back off. Senator Lisa Murkowski criticized the Powell investigation and added, quote, if the Federal Reserve loses its independence, the stability of our markets and the broader economy will suffer. Senator Tom Tillis concurred, quote, it is now the independence and credibility of the Department of Justice that are in question.

Representative French Hill, chair of the House Financial Services Committee, called the Powell investigation, quote, an unnecessary distraction that could undermine this and future administration's ability to make sound monetary policy decisions. End quote. Senator John Kennedy said bluntly of the Powell criminal inquiry, quote, We don't need it. Remember, these are Republicans. Democrats, of course, are uniformly apoplectic.

Trump's efforts to depose Powell aren't playing any better with the American public. A paltry 32% of all respondents to a January 2026 economist UGOV poll approved of DOJ's investigation of Powell, including only 57% of Republicans, when just over half of your own people approved. That's a sign. And the thing is.

Trump likely could have gotten his way with the Fed if he had just waited a bit. He could have let DOJ's investigation of Lisa Cook play out. Had prosecutors obtained an indictment, he likely would have had ample cause to fire her. Instead, he jumped the gun with the investigation still pending and now has run into a blockade in the court.

And Jerome Powell's tenure as chair ends in two months in May of 2026. But the criminal investigation of Powell could delay the confirmation of Trump's chosen successor, Kevin Walsh. After Janine Pirot vowed to appeal Judge Bosberg's ruling, Senator Tillis vented about the quote weak and frivolous. That's a Republican senator's words weak and frivolous.

criminal probe of Jerome Powell, and vowed to block Walsh's confirmation until the conclusion of Pyrrho's quote, embarrassment. Again, that's Senator Tillis' embarrassment of an inquiry and appeal. A federal appeal could easily take six months or more to play out. If Piero insists on forging ahead and Tillis holds his ground, then this whole spat will prevent Trump from installing his chosen Fed chair for many months beyond the natural end of Powell's term.

We've grown used to Trump defying Democrats and his other natural political opponents, often purely for the sake of the defiance itself. But his effort to overrun the Fed has rankled his own political allies and has gone exceptionally poorly in the courts. The president has chosen the wrong battle. Thanks for listening everyone. Stay safe and stay informed.