The DOJ investigates Jerome Powell.

I'm Isaac Saul, and this is Tangle: an independent, nonpartisan, subscriber-supported politics newsletter that summarizes the best arguments from across the political spectrum on the news of the day — then “my take.”

Are you new here? Get free emails to your inbox daily. Would you rather listen? You can find our podcast here.

Today’s read: 15 minutes.

Press Pass.

Four months ago, we launched a new monthly newsletter called Press Pass. It’s our latest subscriber perk, and it includes direct, behind-the-scenes updates on how we are building our business, the challenges we are facing, the internal debates we’re having, and potential changes coming to our product. It has quickly become a subscriber favorite.

Quick hits.

1. The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in challenges to Idaho and West Virginia laws that ban transgender athletes from participating in sports that align with their gender identity. (The arguments)
2. The consumer price index rose 2.7% in December from the year prior, the same rate as in November and in line with economists’ estimates. Prices rose 0.3% month-over-month, also in line with expectations. (The numbers)
3. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) filed a lawsuit to stop Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth from censuring him and demoting his Navy rank over Kelly’s appearance in a video advising U.S. service members they can disobey unlawful orders. (The lawsuit)
4. The FBI arrested a suspect in a fire that caused significant damage to a prominent synagogue in Jackson, Mississippi, on Saturday. The agency alleged that the suspect admitted to starting the fire and said he did so because of the building’s “Jewish ties.” (The arrest)
5. The Justice Department charged a Venezuelan national — alleged to be associated with the Tren de Aragua gang — with assaulting federal officers. The man was shot by a border patrol agent in Portland, Oregon, last week after officers said he rammed a vacant border patrol vehicle with his car. (The charges) Separately, officials in Minnesota and Illinois sued the Trump administration over its deployment of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to Minneapolis and Chicago. (The suits)

Today’s topic.

The investigation into Jerome Powell. On Sunday, The New York Times reported that the U.S. attorney’s office in the District of Columbia has launched a criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. The investigation reportedly focuses on Powell’s June 2025 congressional testimony about the central bank’s renovation of its Washington headquarters. Shortly after the first reports surfaced, Powell confirmed that he had received grand jury subpoenas from the Justice Department threatening a criminal indictment. The chairman called the investigation “unprecedented” and said the administration is threatening legal action to pressure the Fed to lower interest rates.

Back up: President Trump's calls for the Federal Reserve Board of Governors to lower interest rates date back to his 2024 presidential campaign. Since taking office, he has publicly criticized — and threatened to fire — Powell for lowering rates too slowly (the central bank cut rates three times in both 2024 and 2025). The Fed chair has also come under scrutiny for testimony in June about the headquarters renovation, and some lawmakers have accused him of deceiving Congress about the cost of the project. Separately, in August, Trump attempted to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook for alleged mortgage fraud, which some critics viewed as an effort to replace her with a more amenable governor. Cook has challenged the dismissal, and her case is currently before the Supreme Court.

In his statement on Sunday, Powell called the Justice Department’s allegations “pretexts,” adding, “This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions — or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.”

A spokesperson for Attorney General Pam Bondi did not comment directly on the probe but said Bondi “has instructed her U.S. attorneys to prioritize investigating any abuses of taxpayer dollars.” Separately, President Trump said, “I don’t know anything about [the investigation into Powell], but he’s certainly not very good at the Fed, and he’s not very good at building buildings.”

The news of the investigation drew criticism of the Trump administration from Democrats and some Republican lawmakers. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), a member of the Senate Banking Committee, suggested “advisers within the Trump Administration are actively pushing to end the independence of the Federal Reserve” and said he will oppose the confirmation of any nominee for the Federal Reserve until Powell’s case is resolved. Separately, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) said he would “reserve judgment” during the investigation. “There’s concerns about cost overruns, and whatever the allegations are, I don’t know,” Johnson said. 

Powell’s term as chairman ends in May, though his term as a Fed governor runs until 2028. President Trump said recently that he plans to announce his pick to replace Powell soon, and National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett is considered a frontrunner for the nomination. On Monday, Hassett said he would support the Justice Department’s investigation if he were running the central bank. 

Today, we’ll share arguments from the left and right about the investigation into Powell and the Federal Reserve. Then, Executive Editor Isaac Saul shares his take.

What the left is saying.

• The left sharply criticizes the investigation and applauds Powell for resisting Trump’s intimidation tactics. 
• Some say the investigation will backfire on Trump. 
• Others suggest the controversy will test Republican lawmakers’ loyalty. 

In Bloomberg, Jonathan Levin said “Powell needs to stay at the Fed now more than ever.”

“These are officially the darkest days for Federal Reserve independence since at least the Nixon administration. After attacking Fed Governor Lisa Cook last year, President Donald Trump is now weaponizing the Justice Department against Chair Jerome Powell in a thinly veiled effort to intimidate him into lowering interest rates against the best interests of the American people. It’s the sort of treatment that you’d expect in a tin-pot banana republic, and it will be a stain on America’s reputation for years to come,” Levin wrote. “The attack is a sign of why America needs principled leaders at its central bank — and why Powell himself should opt to stay on as a governor after his chairmanship ends in May.”

“For Congress, Trump’s attacks are a reminder of why lawmakers must demand absolute independence from any future chair. That could create additional doubts about candidate Kevin Hassett, Trump’s National Economic Council director,” Levin said. “In a demonstration of how foolish and self-destructive the Justice Department maneuver is, the Fed news initially prompted the S&P 500 Index to retreat and yields on the 10-year Treasury note to rise. While the Fed sets short-term policy rates, mortgage rates and other long-term borrowing costs are set by the market. Ill-advised rate cuts can actually lead to greater interest expenses for consumers.”

In The American Prospect, Robert Kuttner suggested “Trump’s attack on Powell backfires.”

“Powell, ordinarily circumspect and technocratic, is fighting back… [he has] taken the step of hiring the blue-chip law firm Williams & Connolly as outside counsel. The Supreme Court blocked Trump’s earlier effort to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook on bogus charges. It is hard to imagine any court convicting Powell,” Kuttner wrote. “The attack on Powell and the Fed’s independence was quickly denounced by people from both parties. Former Federal Reserve chairs Janet Yellen, Ben Bernanke, and Alan Greenspan, the latter two Republicans, as well as four former Treasury secretaries representing both parties issued a statement supporting Powell.”

“Republicans in Congress, who have been reluctant to criticize Trump on other issues, joined in… Trump’s move could also slow down his effort to appoint a successor to Powell, whose term expires in May. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) said he would block any Fed nominee for either chair or another post until the investigation is resolved,” Kuttner said. “If anything, Trump’s clumsy efforts will reinforce the Fed’s independence. It is rare for a Trump vengeance gambit to backfire so quickly and so totally — a sign of both Trump’s impaired judgment and growing isolation.”

In The Atlantic, Jonathan Chait wrote that the investigation into Powell will test “Republican loyalty to the president.”

“When a respected public servant is being accused of wasting taxpayer dollars and lying to Congress by a president whose extravagant White House renovation has already doubled in cost in just three months, and whose inexhaustible capacity for lies has essentially broken every fact-checking medium, one almost wonders if the criminal allegation was chosen for its absurdity, to demonstrate that Donald Trump can make the law mean whatever he wants it to,” Chait said. “Even if Trump were to manage to install sufficiently pliant figureheads at the agency, the Fed’s demonstrable lack of independence would be apt to weaken its influence over monetary policy and make the economy worse, not better.”

“Every affluent Republican, from the tech right to fossil-fuel owners to heirs managing their inherited portfolios, has a direct and visible interest in stable and competent monetary policy. The Republican Party’s respect for the Fed’s independence is already evident in a recent Supreme Court ruling, in which the conservative majority appears to be seeking to create a special exemption for the Federal Reserve from the Court’s general doctrine that presidents are entitled to fire the heads of independent agencies,” Chait wrote. Trump is “defecating where his wealthy donors eat. Perhaps they will go along with this, too, but he is testing the limits of their acquiescence.”

What the right is saying.

• The right is mixed on the case, but some advocate for withholding judgment until the investigation is complete. 
• Others view the investigation as overtly political and call on Congress to restrain Trump.
• Others suggest Trump is sending a message to the next Fed chair.

In The Washington Examiner, Guy Benson wrote “let’s wait and see the evidence against Jerome Powell.”

“I’ve lived through enough President Donald Trump-related freakouts over the years to have learned an important lesson: It’s usually wise to wait for the facts before rushing out definitive declarations,” Benson said. “For example, when an indictment came down against John Bolton — a former Trump official turned Trump critic — accusations of retaliatory government thuggery came raining down. But it turned out that the investigation into Bolton was initiated during the Biden administration, and that the government’s evidence appears to be strong. The initial conclusion that Trump was ticking down an enemies list in an effort to imprison his foes didn’t quite match the facts of the case.”

“The Justice Department had better bring powerful and irrefutable evidence of clear-cut law-breaking. If such evidence is offered, the usual chorus of critics will once again look like they’ve pounced prematurely, having never learned the lesson mentioned above. If, however, the case looks thin, the decision to move forward with an investigation will smack of politically-motivated targeting,” Benson wrote. “Conservatives who rightly fulminated against any number of lawfare/weaponization excesses deployed against Trump and his allies should not make a heel turn into supporting or excusing naked reprisals along the same lines that happen to flow in the opposite direction.”

In National Review, Andrew C. McCarthy offered “practical responses” to the investigation.

“The politicized Powell probe is not a one-off. The Justice Department has a now extensive pattern of pursuing Trump’s political enemies and officials he seeks to scapegoat. The suggestion that these lawfare gambits are the idea of Pam Bondi or Jeanine Pirro, with no direction from Trump, would insult the intelligence even if we did not have Trump’s diatribe against Bondi for foot-dragging on charges against James Comey, Letitia James, and Adam Schiff,” McCarthy said. “The Senate should stop further consideration of Trump nominees. Republicans should be doing this anyway to vindicate Congress’s constitutional prerogatives.”

“Congress should amend the obstruction and false-statement statutes in the penal law to require a referral from Congress before the Justice Department may investigate or charge someone for providing false statements to, or otherwise obstructing, a congressional investigation,” McCarthy wrote. “I imagine that if a vote were taken, Congress would overwhelmingly reject a Justice Department inquiry into Powell for allegedly misleading Congress regarding the renovations of the Fed’s office buildings — something Congress itself has not accused Powell of doing.”

In The Wall Street Journal, Greg Ip suggested the investigation “is also a warning to the next Fed chair.”

“The criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell isn’t ultimately about the Fed’s headquarters, or Powell, or even interest rates. It’s about power,” Ip wrote. “In that sense, the investigation is also a message to whoever succeeds Powell, likely either Trump adviser Kevin Hassett or former Fed governor Kevin Warsh. Both claim they will be independent. But if either sets interest rates contrary to Trump’s desires, they can expect the same treatment as Powell. That’s a powerful incentive to stay in line.”

“That Trump officials are going after Powell without awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision on Cook’s removal reflects their determination to break the Fed’s independence. They might succeed, even if they fail in court,” Ip said. “The message to all Fed officials is that defying Trump is an invitation to have their backgrounds and public statements investigated for a pretext for removal. Given that, who would wish to serve? Presumably, only someone ready to deliver what Trump wants.”

My take.

Reminder: “My take” is a section where we give ourselves space to share a personal opinion. If you have feedback, criticism or compliments, don't unsubscribe. Write in by replying to this email, or leave a comment.

• Powell gave as good a statement as I’ve ever heard from a public official.
• Trump is exerting political pressure on the Fed; we should say so clearly, and should all be concerned about it.
• I hope that enough Republican senators find their backbone before our economy suffers dire consequences.

Executive Editor Isaac Saul: I thought for a little while about how to address this latest development, and I’ve decided to start “My take” today with something a little different — but, I hope, also pretty direct. I’d like to share the full statement from Fed Chair Jerome Powell:

On Friday, the Department of Justice served the Federal Reserve with grand jury subpoenas, threatening a criminal indictment related to my testimony before the Senate Banking Committee last June. That testimony concerned in part a multi-year project to renovate historic Federal Reserve office buildings.

I have deep respect for the rule of law and for accountability in our democracy. No one — certainly not the chair of the Federal Reserve — is above the law. But this unprecedented action should be seen in the broader context of the administration's threats and ongoing pressure.

This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. It is not about Congress's oversight role; the Fed through testimony and other public disclosures made every effort to keep Congress informed about the renovation project. Those are pretexts. The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the President.

This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions — or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.

I have served at the Federal Reserve under four administrations, Republicans and Democrats alike. In every case, I have carried out my duties without political fear or favor, focused solely on our mandate of price stability and maximum employment. Public service sometimes requires standing firm in the face of threats. I will continue to do the job the Senate confirmed me to do, with integrity and a commitment to serving the American people.

This is a rare statement from a government official, because every word of it is true. That was my first thought after I watched Powell address the country on video: Everything here is accurate. It’s boringly accurate. It’s so obvious it’s almost uninteresting: The administration is threatening and politically pressuring the Fed. This investigation is not about Congress’s oversight, it’s not about the renovation of a building, and it’s not about whether Powell committed some kind of crime. It’s about the administration not getting the interest rates they want and using a criminal probe to pressure Powell into doing their bidding.

I have plenty of criticisms of Powell, and on a normal day I might list them all here to demonstrate my independence, moderation, and nonpartisan bona fides. But that would be an empty and performative exercise, because none of them are even remotely relevant to the question at hand. 

Whatever you think about Powell’s decisions as Fed Chair, his share of responsibility for inflation, how he timed his decisions during the pandemic or even this renovation project’s budget, he is a professional. He does his job like a professional. As political commentator Jay Nordlinger put it, “Powell is like a ghost from our pre-2016 past. A sober, responsible, patriotic public official.” He has stoically borne every conceivable form of pressure from Trump, who has broken every presidential norm and pulled every lever he could to pressure Powell into doing something he didn’t think the economic data supported.

Trump’s legal threat finally broke Powell’s placid neutrality and forced an actual statement. And how couldn’t it? Powell’s record is squeaky clean. The closest thing he’s had to a controversy was when two Fed presidents were accused of trading real estate securities on his watch, back in 2021, which Powell responded to by opening a multi-year Inspector General investigation. Outside of that, Powell hasn’t been accused of any impropriety, let alone criminality. 

These threats are so plainly politically motivated that liberal and conservative commentators alike have condemned them. Editorial boards at The New York Post, Washington Examiner, National Review, and The Wall Street Journal have all sharply criticized the investigation. And this part is especially telling: More staunchly pro-Trump publications like The Federalist, Hot Air, and PJ Media have just ignored it. The only real, unequivocal defense we could find was from Kurt Schlichter at Town Hall, whose headline says it all: So What If Targeting Jerome Powell is Politically Motivated? 

The potential consequences here are grave. Monetary policy is more science than art, and the markets and global investors trust the Fed to be focused exclusively on the data. Politics will always marginally affect the way any group of people reviews any topic, including the Fed board’s analysis of economic data, but Trump is injecting politics into those deliberations in a way that we’ve never seen — and you can bet the house that he’s preparing to replace Powell with another yes man who will simply do the White House’s bidding (which means more interest rate cuts, no matter what). 

Some Republicans are clearly shaken up by all this. Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) told The Wall Street Journal, “We need this like we need a hole in the head.” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), whose upcoming retirement has induced a surge of “courage” that many of his colleagues are sorely lacking, promised to block any Fed nominee until the investigation is resolved. One less courageous senator, Roger Marshall (R-KS), degraded himself on Fox News by describing an open Department of Justice investigation as just the president “trolling.” It’s all a big joke — get it? Other White House officials are going off the record to Politico to describe their shock and frustration, and to share theories about who may be behind the whole thing (one popular theory is Bill Pulte, a close ally of Trump’s and the Federal Housing Finance Agency Director). 

Of course, the White House denies that Trump directed the DOJ investigation. I appreciate Guy Benson’s call for patience (under “What the right is saying”) and calls to “see the evidence” in a sort of Powell-esque appeal to moderation; but let’s not kid ourselves. That may have been a reasonable position a month or two into Trump’s presidency (it sounds like something I would have said in February or March). But now? After a year of watching this president operate? C’mon. Pretending Trump isn’t behind this, that this DOJ probe isn’t political, that the goal here isn’t overt — it’s an insult to the entire nation’s intelligence.  

As the president takes aim at the independence of one federal body, he’s diminishing another’s to a vanishing point. Attorney General Pam Bondi is crassly and transparently doing Trump’s bidding, completely shredding even the pretense of independence at the DOJ (she’s also, apparently, on thin ice with Trump and probably seeking his approval). Trump is literally on record demanding Bondi stop dragging her feet and go after James Comey, Letitia James, and Adam Schiff. This is smoking-gun evidence of collusion between the White House and the DOJ; and yes, that word is actually appropriate here. Say what you want about Biden’s DOJ investigating Trump, but at least Merrick Garland was given autonomy throughout his term. Even when the DOJ went after Trump, it also conducted a thorough investigation into Biden’s own son. Can you imagine today’s DOJ ever investigating Donald Trump Jr.? Or Eric Trump? Or Ivanka Trump? If not, what does that tell you?

On its own, the investigation into Powell won’t rattle the markets to the point of economic disruption — if we’re lucky. But it may rattle Trump’s iron grip on Republicans; I have not seen a truer test of loyalty to the president. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has already gone mealy mouthed about the investigation, suggesting it could be justified when he clearly knows better. 

Are Republicans in Congress willing to risk the health of the U.S. economy, the single most important strength of our country (and the most salient issue to voters), to appease Trump? If that’s where we are, the future is darker and more dangerous than I imagined. Hopefully, the uncomfortable sounds coming from Washington, D.C. turn to outright defiance and criticism soon — the kind that can stop this charade in its tracks. Because if not, we’re in for a rocky road ahead. 

Take the survey: What do you think of the DOJ subpoenaing Powell? Let us know.

Disagree? That's okay. Our opinion is just one of many. Write in and let us know why, and we'll consider publishing your feedback.

Your questions, answered.

Q: Does new video evidence (looked like body cam footage?) change how you feel about the MN ICE Shooting?

— Ty, submitted through Subtext

Executive Editor Isaac Saul: It does not. In fact, when our team first watched the footage the officer took with his phone, our general reaction was, “This will not change anybody’s minds.” The impression I had last week was that this shooting was sadly predictable and entirely preventable; the officer (Jonathan Ross) broke guidelines by walking in front of Renee Good’s vehicle, he broke guidelines when he fired at her vehicle, and (depending on how the case is argued in court) likely broke the law as well. The only dissent we had within our staff was over the likelihood of whether Ross would be convicted.

From the newest video, I think I learned two new things. First, Ross seemed to have a relatively civil exchange with Good before he shot her. This, to me, provided more evidence she was never a threat and didn’t want to hurt them — she literally says “I’m not mad at you” (not exactly a threatening demeanor). However, Ross also seemed to be in the midst of a verbal confrontation with Good’s partner when he began recording. I’m not sure how that will impact a jury’s view of the shooting, but he was clearly engaged in some exchange that had grabbed his attention. 

Second, the officer who got out of the ICE vehicle that arrived on the scene looks to be more responsible for setting the deadly events into motion than I previously thought. He left his truck, shouted “get out of the fucking car” loudly enough to drown out Ross’s audio, and seemed to startle Good into attempting to drive away as he pulled on her door handle. If he had not escalated the situation — and Good had not made a panicky choice to flee without looking in front of her, and Ross had not been distracted when she put her vehicle into drive — then everything could have turned out differently.

Ultimately, the new video only reinforced my view that the ICE agents escalated the situation, broke several protocols, and were not confronting someone who presented a reasonable threat to their safety.

Want to have a question answered in the newsletter? You can reply to this email (it goes straight to our inbox) or fill out this form.

Under the radar.

On Friday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that illnesses linked to this year’s flu season have totaled approximately 15 million, leading to an estimated 180,000 hospitalizations and 7,400 deaths. Most cases are linked to subclade K, a new flu strain that circulated outside the U.S. over the summer and drove a spike in cases in Canada, Japan, and the United Kingdom. 42 U.S. states are currently experiencing elevated levels of flu-like illnesses, and medical professionals expect the spread to continue. “There’s a lot of influenza out there right now,” Dr. Carrie Reed, chief of the CDC influenza division’s epidemiology and prevention branch, said. “We often see activity continue into the spring… I think the reality is that it’s going to continue to be elevated for a little bit longer.” ABC News has the story.

Numbers.

• 122. The number of days remaining in Jerome Powell’s term as Federal Reserve chair. 
• 748. The number of days remaining in Powell’s term as a member of the Federal Reserve Board. 
• 14. The number of days until the next Federal Open Market Committee meeting. 
• $1.9 billion. The Fed’s estimated cost to renovate its Washington, D.C. headquarters in 2023. 
• $2.5 billion. The revised cost estimate in 2025. 
• 44%. The percentage of U.S. adults who approve of Powell’s job performance, the highest approval of any public figure surveyed, according to a December 2025 Gallup poll.
• 34% and 46%. The percentage of Republicans and Democrats, respectively, who approve of Powell’s job performance. 

The extras.

• One year ago today we covered the Los Angeles wildfires.
• The most clicked link in yesterday’s newsletter was once again Isaac’s tweet about masked ICE agents.
• Nothing to do with politics: 52 food trends to look for in 2026.
• Yesterday’s survey: 2,428 readers responded to our survey on the “Donroe Doctrine” with 65% opposing the doctrine as Trump has articulated and enforced it. “It is a sign of weakness when force is used before actual influence is attempted,” one respondent said. “It may not be perfect or consistent but I support it and think we are going in the right direction,” said another.

Have a nice day.

The habitats for flat-headed cats in Southeast Asia are rapidly disappearing, putting them among the world’s rarest and most threatened wildcat species. The cat has not been sighted in Thailand since 1995, as its peat swamp habitats have become increasingly fragmented. But in a recent ecological survey, Thai researchers recorded 29 possible detections of the species — including confirmed footage of one mother cat with her cub. The rediscovery marks a first step in efforts to revive the flat-headed cat population and ensure the species’s survival alongside humans. ScienceAlert has the story (and pictures).