The post Lisa Cook’s lawsuit against Trump skirts mortgage fraud allegation appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Lisa Cook, governor of the US Federal Reserve, speaks at the Peterson Institute For International Economics in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, Oct. 6, 2022. Ting Shen | Bloomberg | Getty Images Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook’s lawsuit against Donald Trump challenges his ability to remove her from office, but only briefly addresses the central accusations that she committed mortgage fraud. The complaint mostly focuses on rules outlined in the Federal Reserve Act that state Fed officials can only be removed for “cause,” a legally nebulous condition that may have to be determined by the Supreme Court. Cook maintains that the fraud allegations do not meet the standard and instead are subterfuge for Trump’s efforts to stack the Fed Board of Governors in his favor so that he can get the interest rate cuts he has been demanding. “It is clear from the circumstances surrounding Governor Cook’s purported removal from the Federal Reserve Board that the mortgage allegations against her are pretextual,” the suit states. “This allegation about conduct that predates Governor Cook’s Senate confirmation has never been investigated, much less proven. This allegation is not grounds for removal under the” act. The document calls the fraud allegation “unsubstantiated and unproven” but does not go into detail about why that is the case. Whether Cook did in fact lie on the applications will be the focus of establishing the legal standard for cause to remove her. Trump and other officials, most notably Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, have alleged that Cook provided false information about her primary residence when obtaining federally backed mortgages. The complaint said that even if Cook did make a mistake on the applications, it still wouldn’t rise to cause. “Even if the President had been more careful in obscuring his real… The post Lisa Cook’s lawsuit against Trump skirts mortgage fraud allegation appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Lisa Cook, governor of the US Federal Reserve, speaks at the Peterson Institute For International Economics in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, Oct. 6, 2022. Ting Shen | Bloomberg | Getty Images Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook’s lawsuit against Donald Trump challenges his ability to remove her from office, but only briefly addresses the central accusations that she committed mortgage fraud. The complaint mostly focuses on rules outlined in the Federal Reserve Act that state Fed officials can only be removed for “cause,” a legally nebulous condition that may have to be determined by the Supreme Court. Cook maintains that the fraud allegations do not meet the standard and instead are subterfuge for Trump’s efforts to stack the Fed Board of Governors in his favor so that he can get the interest rate cuts he has been demanding. “It is clear from the circumstances surrounding Governor Cook’s purported removal from the Federal Reserve Board that the mortgage allegations against her are pretextual,” the suit states. “This allegation about conduct that predates Governor Cook’s Senate confirmation has never been investigated, much less proven. This allegation is not grounds for removal under the” act. The document calls the fraud allegation “unsubstantiated and unproven” but does not go into detail about why that is the case. Whether Cook did in fact lie on the applications will be the focus of establishing the legal standard for cause to remove her. Trump and other officials, most notably Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, have alleged that Cook provided false information about her primary residence when obtaining federally backed mortgages. The complaint said that even if Cook did make a mistake on the applications, it still wouldn’t rise to cause. “Even if the President had been more careful in obscuring his real…

Lisa Cook’s lawsuit against Trump skirts mortgage fraud allegation

Lisa Cook, governor of the US Federal Reserve, speaks at the Peterson Institute For International Economics in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, Oct. 6, 2022.

Ting Shen | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook’s lawsuit against Donald Trump challenges his ability to remove her from office, but only briefly addresses the central accusations that she committed mortgage fraud.

The complaint mostly focuses on rules outlined in the Federal Reserve Act that state Fed officials can only be removed for “cause,” a legally nebulous condition that may have to be determined by the Supreme Court.

Cook maintains that the fraud allegations do not meet the standard and instead are subterfuge for Trump’s efforts to stack the Fed Board of Governors in his favor so that he can get the interest rate cuts he has been demanding.

“It is clear from the circumstances surrounding Governor Cook’s purported removal from the Federal Reserve Board that the mortgage allegations against her are pretextual,” the suit states. “This allegation about conduct that predates Governor Cook’s Senate confirmation has never been investigated, much less proven. This allegation is not grounds for removal under the” act.

The document calls the fraud allegation “unsubstantiated and unproven” but does not go into detail about why that is the case.

Whether Cook did in fact lie on the applications will be the focus of establishing the legal standard for cause to remove her.

Trump and other officials, most notably Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, have alleged that Cook provided false information about her primary residence when obtaining federally backed mortgages.

The complaint said that even if Cook did make a mistake on the applications, it still wouldn’t rise to cause.

“Even if the President had been more careful in obscuring his real justification for targeting Governor Cook, the President’s concocted basis for removal — the unsubstantiated and unproven allegation that Governor Cook ‘potentially’ erred in filling out a mortgage form prior to her Senate confirmation — does not amount to ’cause’ within the meaning of the FRA and is unsupported by caselaw,” stated the complaint from Cook’s attorney, Abbe Lowell.

In a statement to CNBC, Pulte noted that Cook did not attempt to refute the claims against her.

“In her filing, Ms. Cook does not deny that these are her mortgage documents, so one has to wonder why she, or [Fed Chair] Jerome Powell, would want this to be a part of the Federal Reserve, which is supposed to have preeminent integrity and which is critical to the safety and soundness of the U.S. Mortgage Market,” Pulte said in a statement to CNBC’s Scott Wapner.

However, avoiding the specifics in this type of case is far from unusual as doing so would give credence to the allegation, said Robert Hockett, a professor of law and public finance at Cornell Law School.

“You don’t want to play his game, or legitimize his game by playing it,” Hockett said. “‘I’m not surprised at all that the lawsuit wouldn’t include paragraph after paragraph providing the details of her mortgage applications. Because, that would, in effect, be conceding that there’s something legitimate about what Trump is doing.”

Markets have been relatively unbothered by the battle between Cook and Trump, though that could change as the case escalates.

Krishna Guha, head of global policy and central bank strategy at Evercore ISI, said markets are too focused on the conflict between the two and not enough on the bigger picture of what he calls the “Trumpification” of the Fed.

“We have no privileged knowledge of the legal facts, but believe if it were established Cook committed even accidental mortgage misrepresentation, she would have to go,” Guha said in a note earlier this week.

If Trump is successful in removing Cook, it would give him a 4-3 edge on the board in terms of appointees should Stephen Miran get through Senate confirmation to fill an empty seat. That could be extended to 5-2 if Powell chooses not to fill out his term as governor after his run as head of the central bank expires in May 2026.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/28/lisa-cooks-lawsuit-against-trump-skirts-mortgage-fraud-allegation.html

Market Opportunity
Threshold Logo
Threshold Price(T)
$0,006537
$0,006537$0,006537
-1,02%
USD
Threshold (T) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact crypto.news@mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

XRP Volume Rises 212%, Bitcoin ETFs Back in Demand With $506 Million, Dogecoin Price Reclaims $0.10 — U.Today Crypto Digest

XRP Volume Rises 212%, Bitcoin ETFs Back in Demand With $506 Million, Dogecoin Price Reclaims $0.10 — U.Today Crypto Digest

Crypto news digest: 212% increase was seen in XRP volume; BTC ETFs have recovered from the low capital; DOGE price jumps 8%.
Share
Coinstats2026/02/28 05:27
Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Prominent analyst Cheeky Crypto (203,000 followers on YouTube) set out to verify a fast-spreading claim that XRP’s circulating supply could “vanish overnight,” and his conclusion is more nuanced than the headline suggests: nothing in the ledger disappears, but the amount of XRP that is truly liquid could be far smaller than most dashboards imply—small enough, in his view, to set the stage for an abrupt liquidity squeeze if demand spikes. XRP Supply Shock? The video opens with the host acknowledging his own skepticism—“I woke up to a rumor that XRP supply could vanish overnight. Sounds crazy, right?”—before committing to test the thesis rather than dismiss it. He frames the exercise as an attempt to reconcile a long-standing critique (“XRP’s supply is too large for high prices”) with a rival view taking hold among prominent community voices: that much of the supply counted as “circulating” is effectively unavailable to trade. His first step is a straightforward data check. Pulling public figures, he finds CoinMarketCap showing roughly 59.6 billion XRP as circulating, while XRPScan reports about 64.7 billion. The divergence prompts what becomes the video’s key methodological point: different sources count “circulating” differently. Related Reading: Analyst Sounds Major XRP Warning: Last Chance To Get In As Accumulation Balloons As he explains it, the higher on-ledger number likely includes balances that aggregators exclude or treat as restricted, most notably Ripple’s programmatic escrow. He highlights that Ripple still “holds a chunk of XRP in escrow, about 35.3 billion XRP locked up across multiple wallets, with a nominal schedule of up to 1 billion released per month and unused portions commonly re-escrowed. Those coins exist and are accounted for on-ledger, but “they aren’t actually sitting on exchanges” and are not immediately available to buyers. In his words, “for all intents and purposes, that escrow stash is effectively off of the market.” From there, the analysis moves from headline “circulating supply” to the subtler concept of effective float. Beyond escrow, he argues that large strategic holders—banks, fintechs, or other whales—may sit on material balances without supplying order books. When you strip out escrow and these non-selling stashes, he says, “the effective circulating supply… is actually way smaller than the 59 or even 64 billion figure.” He cites community estimates in the “20 or 30 billion” range for what might be truly liquid at any given moment, while emphasizing that nobody has a precise number. That effective-float framing underpins the crux of his thesis: a potential supply shock if demand accelerates faster than fresh sell-side supply appears. “Price is a dance between supply and demand,” he says; if institutional or sovereign-scale users suddenly need XRP and “the market finds that there isn’t enough XRP readily available,” order books could thin out and prices could “shoot on up, sometimes violently.” His phrase “circulating supply could collapse overnight” is presented not as a claim that tokens are destroyed or removed from the ledger, but as a market-structure scenario in which available inventory to sell dries up quickly because holders won’t part with it. How Could The XRP Supply Shock Happen? On the demand side, he anchors the hypothetical to tokenization. He points to the “very early stages of something huge in finance”—on-chain tokenization of debt, stablecoins, CBDCs and even gold—and argues the XRP Ledger aims to be “the settlement layer” for those assets.He references Ripple CTO David Schwartz’s earlier comments about an XRPL pivot toward tokenized assets and notes that an institutional research shop (Bitwise) has framed XRP as a way to play the tokenization theme. In his construction, if “trillions of dollars in value” begin settling across XRPL rails, working inventories of XRP for bridging, liquidity and settlement could rise sharply, tightening effective float. Related Reading: XRP Bearish Signal: Whales Offload $486 Million In Asset To illustrate, he offers two analogies. First, the “concert tickets” model: you think there are 100,000 tickets (100B supply), but 50,000 are held by the promoter (escrow) and 30,000 by corporate buyers (whales), leaving only 20,000 for the public; if a million people want in, prices explode. Second, a comparison to Bitcoin’s halving: while XRP has no programmatic halving, he proposes that a sudden adoption wave could function like a de facto halving of available supply—“XRP’s version of a halving could actually be the adoption event.” He also updates the narrative context that long dogged XRP. Once derided for “too much supply,” he argues the script has “totally flipped.” He cites the current cycle’s optics—“XRP is sitting above $3 with a market cap north of around $180 billion”—as evidence that raw supply counts did not cap price as tightly as critics claimed, and as a backdrop for why a scarcity narrative is gaining traction. Still, he declines to publish targets or timelines, repeatedly stressing uncertainty and risk. “I’m not a financial adviser… cryptocurrencies are highly volatile,” he reminds viewers, adding that tokenization could take off “on some other platform,” unfold more slowly than enthusiasts expect, or fail to get to “sudden shock” scale. The verdict he offers is deliberately bound. The theory that “XRP supply could vanish overnight” is imprecise on its face; the ledger will not erase coins. But after examining dashboard methodologies, escrow mechanics and the behavior of large holders, he concludes that the effective float could be meaningfully smaller than headline supply figures, and that a fast-developing tokenization use case could, under the right conditions, stress that float. “Overnight is a dramatic way to put it,” he concedes. “The change could actually be very sudden when it comes.” At press time, XRP traded at $3.0198. Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Share
NewsBTC2025/09/18 11:00
Pi Network Fast-Track KYC Lets New Users Unlock Mainnet Wallets Early

Pi Network Fast-Track KYC Lets New Users Unlock Mainnet Wallets Early

TLDR: Pi Network introduces AI-powered Fast Track KYC to speed wallet activation for new users and non-users Users can activate Mainnet wallets before 30 mining sessions but cannot migrate mined balances yet Fast Track KYC maintains strict verification standards and may be more conservative than standard KYC Pi Network reports over 14.82M users fully KYC-verified [...] The post Pi Network Fast-Track KYC Lets New Users Unlock Mainnet Wallets Early appeared first on Blockonomi.
Share
Blockonomi2025/09/19 15:48