Trump Is Right To Blow Up The Fed

The Federal Reserve is out of control, acting in ways and with powers that were never explicitly granted by Congress…

Last week, President Donald Trump set the economics community aflame by suggesting that he will appoint businessman and presidential aspirant Herman Cain to the Federal Reserve Board. Even more than political economist Stephen Moore, the critics maintain, Cain represents a threat to the cabal that has controlled the central bank for decades.

Why? Because Cain is a successful executive who founded a real business, took risks, and created jobs, things most academic economists will never ever do.

Media outlets and other allied constituencies have howled with rage at the prospect of President Trump “packing the Fed,” a distant reference to attempts by President Franklin D. Roosevelt to pack the Supreme Court in the 1930s. Those worried about the independence of the Federal Reserve Board should reconsider. Independence from what exactly?

While the Fed is meant to be independent from the executive branch on a day-to-day basis, it is certainly not independent of Congress or the law. Yet the Fed in recent years has shown a troubling tendency to deviate from its legal mandate and make up new authorities to fit the changing economic situation. Case in point: the dubious notion that we should seek a 2 percent rate of inflation.

Anybody who cares to read the 1978 Humphrey Hawkins law will know that the Fed is directed by Congress to seek full employment and then zero inflation. Not 2 percent, but zero. Yet going back a decade and more, the Fed, led by luminaries such as Janet Yellen and Ben Bernanke, has advanced a policy of actively embracing inflation. And neither Bernanke nor Yellen bothered to consult Congress when they decided to discard their legal responsibilities.

The biggest problem facing the financial markets today is that the folks at the Fed have no appreciation for how their policies are affecting the real economy. Ten years of inflation, open market manipulation, and other experiments have left the U.S. burdened with trillions of dollars in new public and private debt. The December market break was a direct result of the fact that Fed officials do not really understand the real-world consequences of their actions.

Take another example: U.S. financial institutions are facing years of lower profits as funding costs for banks normalize thanks to Fed manipulation. Yet asset returns for banks and investors will remain suppressed by “extraordinary” monetary policy. Are these massive distortions in the financial markets authorized by Congress? No they are not. When investors in bank stocks have to watch the net interest income for the industry contract, one wonders what our friends on the Federal Reserve Board will say.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-09/whalen-trump-right-blow-fed

Attorney General Barr defends administration's efforts to overturn ObamaCare in court

Attorney General William Barr on Tuesday defended the Justice Department’s controversial decision to support the overturning of ObamaCare in the courts.

The DOJ last month sided with a lower court ruling that ObamaCare is unconstitutional, going past its previous position that only part of the law should be struck down.

Asked by Rep. Matt Cartwright (D-Penn.) why the DOJ would take such “dramatic and drastic action,” Barr replied: “Do you think it’s likely we’re going to prevail?”

“We are in litigation and we have to take a position. If you think it’s such an outrageous position, you have nothing to worry about. Let the courts do its job.”

In December, a federal judge in Texas ruled ObamaCare unconstitutional in a lawsuit filed by Republican-led states against the Trump administration.

The judge sided with the states in ruling that ObamaCare can’t stand without the penalty for not having insurance, which Congress’ repealed in 2017.

Last month, the DOJ said in a court filing that the judge came to the correct conclusion and it would support it when the decision is appealed.

That goes past the DOJ’s previous position that only the law’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions should be thrown out.

The DOJ, which typically defends federal laws in court, broke with precedent in refusing to defend ObamaCare, a move that Democrats call politically motivated.

A coalition of Democratic states, led by California, has been defending the law and is seeking an appeal of the decision.

On Tuesday, House Democrats sent letters to the DOJ, the Department of Health and Human Services and the White House demanding access to documents and information regarding the involvement of key administration officials in the decision not to defend the law.

Specifically, House Democrats, including Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler and Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings, are asking for communications between White House officials regarding that decision and a list of officials involved in the decision.

“The House is determined to get answers on the administration's nakedly political decision to rip affordable healthcare away from millions and millions of Americans,’ Nadler said Tuesday.

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/438030-attorney-general-barr-defends-administrations-efforts-to-overturn-obamacare

Looks like AG Barr brought his jackhammer to work.

Presidential Executive Order on Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the “Waters of the United States” Rule (Issued on: February 28, 2017)

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-executive-order-restoring-rule-law-federalism-economic-growth-reviewing-waters-united-states-rule/

Step One Proposed Rule: Definition of "Waters of the United States" - Recodification of Pre-existing Rules

The agencies are proposing a rule to repeal the 2015 Rule and re-codify the regulatory text that existed prior to 2015 defining "waters of the United States" or WOTUS. On June 27, 2017, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, along with Mr. Douglas Lamont, senior official performing the duties of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, signed the proposed rule. The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on July 27, 2017.

This action would, if finalized, provide regulatory certainty while the agencies engage in a second rulemaking to revise the definition of "waters of the United States." The proposed rule would be implemented in accordance with Supreme Court decisions, agency guidance, and longstanding practice. Proposing to re-codify the regulations that existed before the 2015 Rule will provide continuity for regulated entities, the states, tribes, and the public.

Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to the Proposed Step One Repeal

On June 29, 2018, the agencies signed a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking to the proposed Step One Repeal. This notice clarifies that the agencies are proposing to permanently repeal the 2015 Rule in its entirety. As part of the initial proposal, the EPA and the Army indicated their intent to recodify the pre-2015 regulations—a longstanding regulatory framework—until the agencies finalize a new definition of WOTUS.

The agencies are issuing the supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking to give the public an opportunity to comment on additional considerations that support the agencies' proposed repeal, some of which the agencies did not discuss in detail in the initial Step One proposal. The agencies are continuing to review the comments received on the July 2017 proposal. The public comment period closed on August 13, 2018.

Public Comment Period - Step Two

Open Public Comment Period

On December 11, 2018 the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army (the agencies) proposed a revised definition of "waters of the United States" that clarifies federal authority under the Clean Water Act. The proposed rule published in the Federal Register (FR) on February 14, 2019 and will be open for a 60-day public comment period. The public comment period will close on April 15, 2019.

The public is invited to submit written comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2018-0149, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. General guidance on making effective comments is available at EPA's Commenting on EPA Dockets.

Closed Public Comment Period

The agencies established an administrative docket, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2017-0480, to solicit pre-proposal recommendations for the Step 2 rulemaking to define "waters of the United States." The docket closed on November 28, 2017. Written recommendations can be found here in the docket.

https://www.epa.gov/wotus-rule/step-one-repeal

Step Two - Proposed Revised Definition of "Waters of the United States"

On December 11, 2018, the EPA and Department of the Army signed a proposed rule revising the definition of "waters of the United States" to clarify federal authority under the Clean Water Act in a clear and understandable way. The agencies’ proposal is the second step in a two-step process to review and revise the definition of “waters of the United States” consistent with the February 2017 Presidential Executive Order entitled “Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the ‘Waters of the United States’ Rule.” The proposed definition would replace the approach in the 2015 Rule and the pre-2015 regulations.

The agencies invited written pre-proposal recommendations and received more than 6,000 recommendations that the agencies have considered in developing this proposal. This proposal balances the input the agencies received from a wide range of stakeholders. The agencies have opened a 60-day public comment period, which will close on April 15, 2019.

https://www.epa.gov/wotus-rule/step-two-revise

Not sure of all the implications… any anons have a track-ho on this?

(Sorry for the splice up)

Democratic unity breaks down over budget caps bill

House Democrats are struggling to come up with enough votes to pass a critical measure to lift federal spending caps.

Leaders hoped to bring up the measure this week and pass it ahead of a two-week recess. But now it’s not certain enough Democrats will support the measure because of mounting opposition from the progressive wing, who want more money for domestic budgets.

“The whip team is not very sure of where we are,” Budget Committee Chairman John Yarmuth, D-Ky., said after a closed-door meeting with Democratic lawmakers in the basement of the Capitol Tuesday morning.

The budget has proven to be a difficult issue for Democrats.

Yarmuth has largely abandoned an effort to pass a budget resolution that would provide a long-term spending plan for the party because members of the caucus cannot agree on spending levels.

Yarmuth’s budget panel advanced by a narrow margin last week a bill that would lift the current domestic spending limit by 5.7%, to $631 billion in fiscal 2020, and to $646 billion in fiscal 2021. The measure would raise defense spending by 2.6% over the current cap — to $664 billion, in 2020. Defense spending would be capped at $680 billion in fiscal 2021.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/democratic-unity-breaks-down-over-budget-caps-bill

US military in Afghanistan: 'The contractor who was reported as killed, is alive'

The U.S. military has corrected a report that an American contractor was killed in Afghanistan - stating that he was alive and was not an American.

"Three US. service members and one contractor were killed, and three U.S. service members were wounded by an improvised explosive device April 8 near Bagram Air Base," a news release from U.S. Central Command in Kabul stated on Monday, the same day as the attack.

It was initially reported Monday that three U.S. troops and an American contractor had been killed and three U.S troops wounded when a Taliban bomb hit a convoy near Bagram air base, north of Kabul. Navy Secretary Richard Spencer confirmed that the three killed by the apparent suicide bomb were U.S. Marines.

On Tuesday, the report was "clarified" in another news release, which stated: "The contractor who was reported as killed, is alive. The contractor, an Afghan citizen, was initially treated along with other injured civilians, later identified as a contractor and treated at Bagram Airfield."

Among the Marines killed were Staff Sgt. Christopher Slutman, a father of three and a 15-year veteran of the Fire Department of New York and a 19-year veteran of Kentland Volunteer Fire Department in Landover, Md. It was trhe deadliest attack in Afghanistan this year.

Afghan security forces are battling the Taliban for the fifth day after Taliban fighters launched a wide-scale attack in the western Badghis Province. The Taliban effectively control nearly half the country and have continued to carry out daily attacks on Afghan security forces despite holding several rounds of peace talks with the United States in recent months.

Seven U.S. troops have been now killed in combat in Afghanistan this year.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/us-military-in-afghanistan-the-contractor-who-was-reported-as-killed-is-alive

Barr suspects Mueller team 'wanted more put out' in summary

Attorney General William Barr said Tuesday he suspects special counsel Robert Mueller's team "wanted more" out of his summary of the final report for the Russia investigation.

"I suspect that they probably wanted more put out," Barr testified during a House Appropriations panel hearing. "But, in my view I was not interested in putting out summaries or trying to summarize because I think any summary, regardless of who prepares it, not only runs the risk of being under inclusive or over inclusive but also would trigger a lot of discussion and analysis that really should wait everything coming out at once."

Days after Mueller submitted his roughly 400-page-long final report to the Justice Department last month, Barr provided a four-page summary to Congress.

This summary said Mueller did not establish the Trump campaign colluded with Russia and did not find President Trump committed obstruction of justice. Although Mueller also did not exonerate the president, Barr said he concluded there was insufficient evidence to establish a crime.

Further adding fuel to their ire were reports last week from the New York Times and Washington Post in which anonymous sources said members of Mueller's team were frustrated with the way Barr portrayed the findings of their years-long investigation in a four-page summary.

Reacting to those reports, Trump tore into Mueller's team on Sunday, accusing the "angry Democrats" of "illegally leaking" information to the media.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/barr-suspects-mueller-team-wanted-more-put-out-in-summary

Top general: Marines' cost for border deployment is $6.2M

The Marine Corps’s cost to deploy to the southern border has so far been about $6.2 million, the service’s top general said Tuesday.

Marines Commandant Gen. Robert Neller made waves last month when two memos leaked in which he warned the border deployment was one of several “unplanned/unbudgeted” events posing an “unacceptable risk” to the service’s combat readiness.

But during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday, Neller downplayed the importance of the border deployment to Marines’ financial issues, stressing it was just one of eight areas contributing to a shortfall.

“I’ve personally checked the readiness of every unit down there, and with only one exception there was no impact to their actual readiness,” Neller told senators. “In fact a couple of units improved their readiness. So to say that going to the border was degrading our readiness is not an accurate statement.”

There are now roughly 6,000 military personnel currently at the border, which include 2,100 National Guard and 3,900 active duty forces. The Pentagon's last official cost estimate for the active-duty troops was $132 million by the end of January.

Neller’s memos listed the border deployment alongside funding challenges from recovery after bases were hit in Hurricane Michael and Hurricane Florence, among others.

Funding transfers needed for the deployment has been a constraint on the Marines’ ability to transfer money for the other issues, the memos added.

The total shortfall from costs of the issues listed in the memo is about $300 million, Neller said Tuesday. That means the $6.2 million for the deployment is about 2 percent of the overall issue, he added.

Neller said he wrote the memos to Navy Secretary Richard Spencer and acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan in order to get help reprogramming money.

“What I was looking for was for some assistance in trying to get money to reprogram because we have to pay our bills,” he said.

The memos also said the Marines will not be able to participate in planned training exercises in Indonesia, Scotland and Mongolia, and will reduce participation in joint Australian and South Korean exercises.

On Tuesday, Neller said no exercises were canceled because of the border deployment, but that fewer Marines were sent to one exercise.

Some units were sent to the border instead of doing scheduled training exercises, he added. But he argued that in some cases the deployment itself provided training.

“Some of the units have gone down there, and they’ve done tasks that are more in line with their core mission, like engineering units or [military police] units,” Neller said. “Aviation units that were assigned to that early on have actually improved their readiness because they were able to fly certain profiles.”

But at least one unit is not doing work that is part of its core mission, he added.

“For 60 days, they can handle that,” Neller said of that unit. “But it will affect their readiness.”

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/438035-top-marine-services-cost-for-border-deployment-is-62m

Wasn't it around $200 Billion that illegals were costing taxpayers a year??

Trump tweets quote condemning Omar calling Miller a 'white nationalist'

President Trump on Tuesday hit back at Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) after the congresswoman called his senior adviser Stephen Miller a "white nationalist," sharing a quote from a Fox Business Network guest who condemned Omar’s comments.

"What's completely unacceptable is for Congresswoman Omar to target Jews, in this case Stephen Miller," Jeff Ballabon, who advises the president's campaign, said on "Varney & Co."

Omar tweeted Monday that it was an "outrage" that Miller has influence on the Trump administration's policies, and called the senior adviser a "white nationalist."

Miller, who supports hard-line immigration policies, has re-emerged as a prominent figure in the White House in the wake of the leadership shake-up at the Department of Homeland Security, for which he reportedly advocated.

A number of conservatives slammed Omar over her comments, noting that Miller is Jewish.

The freshman Democrat has come under scrutiny in recent months for comments about Israel that prompted allegations of anti-Semitism. Trump has targeted her repeatedly, suggesting she resign and saying as recently as Saturday that she "doesn't like Israel."

The president's weekend comments came one day after the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of New York released a statement saying that a man, Patrick W. Carlineo Jr., had been arrested and charged with threatening to assault and murder Omar.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/438037-trump-tweets-quote-condemning-omar-calling-miller-a-white-nationalist

Looks like Miller is over a target… bwhaha

Keep up the great work Stephen Miller!!