Some clear thinking on why Lisa Cook should be immediately sidelined

I’m sure we all remember the 2020 “Summer of Love.”

After months of lockdowns, “mostly peaceful” protesters were in the streets screaming to defund the police. And no one was allowed to have a contrary opinion.

Of course, you could support the #DefundPolice movement all you wanted— on Twitter, with Facebook profile pictures, or even raging in the streets.

(Hilariously, the same public health officials who told us to isolate and avoid any public contact simultaneously supported the protests and said that systemic racism was a greater public health threat than Covid-19…)

But when University of Chicago economist Harald Uhlig criticized the Black Lives Matter movement on Twitter, the woke mob sprang into action.

Uhlig wrote that BLM had “just torpedoed itself, with its full-fledged support of #defundthepolice,” adding, “Time for sensible adults to enter back into the room and have serious, earnest, respectful conversations about it all.”

Professor Uhlig offered his opinion that America needs more police, and they need to be paid better, and he compared the BLM leaders to “flat-earthers,” for being totally unrealistic about what de-funding or abolishing the police would actually mean.

He was promptly denounced by the likes of Paul Krugman, the Nobel-winning economist whose brilliant ideas include faking an invasion from space aliens to fix the economy.

Then the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago ended its consulting relationship with Uhlig.

Then the University of Chicago placed Uhlig on temporary leave from his role as editor of the Journal of Political Economy.

… all because he thought that there should be public discourse over the #defund movement.

But according to at least one fellow university professor, those consequences against Uhlig didn’t go far enough.

Besmirching his character and threatening his livelihood were woefully insufficient penalties for such heresy.

Rather, this other professor argued, Uhlig’s comments amounted to “racial harassment,” and that he should not only be removed from the editorial board of the Journal of Political Economy, but also that he should no longer be allowed to interact with students.

After all, we can’t have someone exposing young people to ideas that don’t conform to the woke narrative.

This other professor also Tweeted that “free speech has its limits” in reference to Uhlig’s comments.

Bear in mind that all Uhlig said was that there should be “respectful conversations” about defunding the police. Yet this other professor howled that Uhlig “used your words and your power to spread hate” and “violate the dignity of other people”.

Who exactly was this other university colleague who was out for blood?

None other than Lisa Cook— a fellow economics professor who was later nominated by Joe Biden to join the Federal Reserve.

It’s worth pointing out that Cook had ZERO experience in monetary policy when nominated.

Her academic career focused on racial and gender issues… NOT interest rates, or the bond market, or economic growth, or banking supervision, or any of the other areas that the Fed manages.

Look, I have no problem if someone wants to spend her career writing about “The Mortality Consequences of Distinctively Black Names,” as Lisa Cook has.

But we should be intellectually honest that such topics have nothing to do with stagflation risks in the US economy.

Elevating an unqualified activist to one of the most powerful central banks on the planet carries serious risk.

A more competent Fed appointee, for example, might have sounded the alarm about Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse in 2023. Or called out the risks of signaling rate cuts too early. Or noticed the Fed’s diminishing influence in the bond market.

Yet Cook possessed the only qualification that mattered to Joe Biden— a female person of color. So Dementia-in-Chief nominated her in 2022.

Conservative Senators took issue with Cook’s lack of professional experience in monetary policy and banking supervision… not to mention her views on free speech.

They also pushed back against another unqualified diversity hire in government. So the Senate split 50-50 on Cook’s confirmation.

Unsurprisingly, Vice President Kamala Harris— the ultimate unqualified diversity hire— cast the tie-breaking vote in favor of Cook.

Lisa Cook is now accused of mortgage fraud three years into her Fed tenure, and President Trump wants to fire her. They’re not making it up— the evidence is pretty strong.

In response, Cook has sued the President, saying he lacks the authority to fire her.

This is quite interesting given that Cook thought Harald Uhlig’s “free speech” was a fireable offense. Not only did she call for him to be terminated for cause, but she also wanted to restrict his access to students.

Yet strong evidence of an actual crime is apparently NOT a fireable offense.

On cue, the Left has assembled its ‘experts’ to defend Lisa Cook. This includes old faithful Paul Krugman, who claimed on live TV that for cause termination would require Cook to be “drinking on the job”.

I find this completely absurd.

Mortgage fraud is potentially a felony— and one that people commit for their own personal financial gain.

In other words, there are credible allegations that a key member of the most important central bank on the planet (who is already unqualified for the job) told a bold-faced lie— to the very same banks that she is supposed to supervise— for her own financial benefit.

This absolutely matters for a Fed official who makes policy decisions that affect literally billions of people; a central banker’s integrity should be pristine and unassailable— especially when it comes to financial matters.

Voters are generally afforded the opportunity to assess allegations against elected politicians, and to determine for themselves whether potential misconduct is a disqualifier for office.

In electing Donald Trump last November, for example, voters clearly expressed indifference over his felony convictions.

But voters have no such input when it comes to Fed officials… because Fed officials are not elected.

A few years ago, two key Fed officials were found to have been trading the stock market while on the job. After the impropriety was discovered, they resigned immediately… because the public needed to have confidence in the integrity of the institution.

Cook’s alleged misconduct similarly maligns the Fed’s integrity. And at a minimum, she ought to acknowledge the seriousness of the allegations and voluntarily step aside, at least temporarily, while the truth comes out. Plenty of institutions have this standard, including the police.

Yet she refuses to step aside and acts like she is entitled to her position. Shocker.

To be clear, I am not some hardcore MAGA guy. The President is doing plenty of things with which I wholeheartedly agree, and others with which I disagree.

More specifically, I don’t think the White House or Treasury should have control over the Fed.

But there’s no sugarcoating this issue: it’s another scandal involving a key Fed official. And if Chairman Jerome Powell wants to maintain Fed independence, then he should restore confidence in the integrity of his institution and sideline Lisa Cook immediately.

The dollar already has enough challenges without serious ethical concerns at the Federal Reserve.

Source

Simon Black is an international investor, entrepreneur and permanent traveler. His daily letter is both educational and entertaining, and we suggest that those who want unbiased, actionable information about global opportunities sign up for Sovereign Man’s free, actionable newsletter at http://www.SovereignMan.com.

From Simon Black of SovereignMan.com

Source: https://www.schiffsovereign.com/trends/some-clear-thinking-on-why-lisa-cook-should-be-immediately-sidelined-153431/