与此同时，特朗普政府官员们并不认为他们正在破坏美联储独立性，不过他们确实觉得美联储是一个失 控的机构，需要加以"改革"。 本周，特朗普总统"单方面"宣布解雇美联储理事丽莎·库克（Lisa Cook），引发各界担忧。有分析指 出，这不仅仅只是解雇某人，而是一种策略。如果成功的话，将标志着一个多年来被认为凌驾于政治之 上的机构发生翻天覆地的变化。 从特朗普的角度来看，他正在寻求改革这个一直不受欢迎的机构，这个机构经常被指责为"美国通胀在 疫情后失控"的罪魁祸首。特朗普认为，降低利率是控制不断膨胀的联邦债务，同时提振住房市场的一 种途径，住房市场一直是经济增长的平衡。 然而，法律学者、金融市场专家以及现任和前任美联储官员均表示，特朗普的举动不仅有可能使美联储 变得更加政治化，而且还会破坏美国金融体系的关键支柱。 哥伦比亚大学法学院（Columbia Law School）教授Kathryn Judge表示："我们正走在一条将导致央行独 立性受到侵蚀的道路上。如果美联储失去几十年来努力建立起来的信誉，对经济的长期健康来说，代价 将是难以置信的。" 对美联储而言，"独立性"一词指的是它在决定最有利于美国经济的货币政策时 ...

Core Viewpoint - The recent political maneuver by Trump to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook under the pretext of "loan fraud" directly targets Fed Chair Powell, raising concerns about the independence of the Federal Reserve, which has been claimed to be autonomous since its establishment in 1913 [1][4]. Group 1: Political Influence on Monetary Policy - The independence of the Federal Reserve is described as "half-hearted," as it operates within the realm of U.S. electoral politics, suggesting that Trump's actions expose the underlying political manipulation of monetary policy [4][12]. - Trump's potential success in removing Cook could undermine the perceived professionalism of U.S. dollar policy, transforming the Fed into a tool for presidential agendas, thereby eroding the foundations of dollar hegemony [4][12]. Group 2: Market Reactions and Speculation - There is speculation that Trump and Powell may be collaborating to create a narrative that suggests a high likelihood of interest rate cuts, which has led to significant market reactions, including a surge in stock prices and a drop in bond yields [5][7]. - The market's enthusiastic response to vague signals from Powell indicates a disconnect between actual monetary policy intentions and market perceptions, leading to a self-deceptive cycle [5][11]. Group 3: Risks of False Certainty - The article warns that the Federal Reserve may be hesitant to implement rate cuts due to the looming fiscal deficit, projected to exceed $1.8 trillion, which could further weaken the dollar and increase capital flight risks [8][12]. - The concept of "false certainty" is highlighted, where market participants may become complacent, leading to potential financial instability as historical patterns suggest that such illusions often precede market crashes [11][14]. Group 4: Systemic Concerns - The broader concern is that U.S. politicians are treating monetary policy as a short-term political tool, which could ultimately undermine the credibility of the dollar and lead to a loss of trust among global investors [12][14]. - The article posits that the real threat to the dollar's dominance comes not from external challenges but from internal political actions that compromise its integrity [14].

Group 1: U.S. Trade and Tariff Developments - The U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that Trump's tariffs on multiple countries are illegal, with the ruling effective until October 14, allowing time for an appeal to the Supreme Court[8] - India has implemented an additional 25% tariff on exports to the U.S., raising the total tariff on Indian exports to the U.S. to 50%[8] - The U.S. has ended the $800 de minimis exemption for packages from all countries, impacting small-value imports[8] Group 2: Federal Reserve Independence Concerns - Trump announced the dismissal of Federal Reserve Board member Lisa Cook, raising concerns about the independence of the Fed and increasing market volatility[15] - Following the announcement, COMEX gold prices rose nearly 3% due to heightened risk aversion and expectations of interest rate cuts by the Fed[15] - The legal battle over Cook's dismissal may reach the Supreme Court, which has previously indicated that the President cannot arbitrarily remove Fed members[15] Group 3: Geopolitical Tensions and Future Outlook - The upcoming SCO summit on August 31 - September 1 will feature high-level discussions among leaders from China, Russia, and India[16] - Ongoing geopolitical conflicts, particularly between Russia and Ukraine, are expected to continue with a "negotiation while fighting" approach[21] - The U.S. is likely to intensify its 232 investigations into key industries such as pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and critical minerals, as part of its tariff strategy[12]

文 春公子 中国自古有句老话："事在人为"。这句话放在今天的国际局势里依旧切中要害。美国标榜的所谓"民主与自由"，其实在现实运作中往往沦为政治权力斗争的 工具，甚至可以说成了一场荒诞的笑话。 自从特朗普重返白宫以来，他的核心班底展现出了强烈的忠诚，并在政策与权力操作上竭尽全力为其服务。他们不仅帮特朗普打击政敌，还通过一系列前所 未有的举动，掀起了政坛和金融界的巨大波澜。特朗普行事风格急切而强硬，让人担忧美国制度的根基是否会被逐步动摇，也引发了对美联储主席鲍威尔未 来处境的疑问。 最引人注目的事件莫过于特朗普公开罢免美联储理事丽莎·库克。罢免理由是她在2021年贷款申请文件上涉嫌虚假陈述，把两处房产都填为"主要住所"。这 一举动打破了美联储112年来的先例，是首次有总统直接解职理事。虽然《联邦储备法》规定总统可以因"正当理由"罢免理事，但库克的问题发生在上任 前，其合法性存在极大争议，学界和法律界普遍认为此举很可能面临挑战。特朗普甚至没有走司法审查程序，仅凭一封公开信就宣布解职，这无疑触碰了美 国宪政的底线。 紧接着，特朗普又指控95岁的金融大亨索罗斯资助全美的暴力抗议，并呼吁使用《反敲诈法》起诉。这种没有确凿 ...

特朗普的全球关税政策和对库克的免职起诉正面临美国最高法院的最终裁决。 在关税政策方面，Vecchione表示，"按照本届政府的说法，（关税）将为美国人带来约4万亿美元的税 收"。他补充说，"很难想象有比这更大的经济影响了。" 此外，他认为，总统利用紧急权力单方面征 税，也侵犯了美国国会的核心权力。 在涉及解雇美联储理事库克的案件中，白宫辩称此次解雇是"有原因的"，因此是合法的，并不会损害美 联储的特殊地位。然而，这直接挑战了美联储长期以来的独立性。 尽管最高法院在近期的裁决中批准了特朗普对其他政府机构负责人的解雇，但法官们也曾明确为美联储 划出了保护区。在过往的判例中，大法官们已经承认了美联储的特殊地位，这使得此次解雇案的结果充 满了不确定性。 最新的进展是，据央视新闻，当地时间8月29日，美国上诉法院裁定美国总统特朗普实施的大部分全球 关税政策非法。法院表示，《国际紧急经济权力法》并未明确赋予美国总统加征关税的权力，特朗普援 引该法加征关税超越了其职权范围。 根据裁决书，该裁决10月14日之前不会生效，以便特朗普政府向美国最高法院提出上诉。 与此同时，针对特朗普试图解雇美联储理事库克一案的法庭听证会也在周五 ...

Key Points - The core issue revolves around President Trump's attempt to dismiss Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, citing alleged fraudulent behavior, which raises concerns about the independence of the U.S. central bank [1][4][5] - The Federal Reserve's recent actions and statements indicate a potential shift towards a more accommodative monetary policy, with market expectations for a rate cut in September exceeding 80% [3][12] - The U.S. economy shows resilience despite political tensions, with inflationary pressures from tariffs being viewed as temporary and not significantly hindering the likelihood of a rate cut [12][18] Economic Data - The U.S. July Core PCE Price Index remained stable at 0.3% month-on-month and 2.9% year-on-year, aligning with market expectations [2][7] - New home sales in the U.S. fell by 0.6% in July to an annualized rate of 652,000 units, exceeding market expectations of 630,000 units [7] - The second quarter GDP growth was revised up to an annualized rate of 3.3%, surpassing both the expected 3.1% and the initial estimate of 3% [7] Market Reactions - Following recent economic data, U.S. stock markets experienced a pullback, attributed to profit-taking after a period of gains and rising concerns over tariffs [3][12] - The dollar has weakened while gold prices have risen, indicating a shift in market sentiment as expectations for a rate cut approach [12][18] Central Bank Developments - The ongoing legal dispute initiated by Lisa Cook against President Trump highlights the contentious relationship between the administration and the Federal Reserve, potentially impacting market confidence [5][4] - The Trump administration is reportedly exploring ways to exert more influence over the Federal Reserve, including the selection process for regional bank presidents [4][5]

他进一步指出，俩人之间的敌意已经蔓延到美联储的许多方面，吸引了更多的政治参与者，破坏了公众 对美联储及其主席本已下降的信任。盖洛普（Gallup）今年4月公布的一项民意调查显示，公众对美联 储的信心已降至40%以下。 最近几个月，特朗普政府就在不断寻找解雇鲍威尔的"理由"，例如总部大楼翻修事件。与此同时，鲍威 尔的能力和政治立场也不断受到攻击，这些攻击不仅来自总统，也来自越来越多的人，包括财政部长、 其他高级政府官员和众议院议长。而本周，特朗普更是把目光投向了鲍威尔的同事。 自美国总统特朗普今年入主白宫以来，就不断施压美联储主席鲍威尔施压，甚至威胁要解雇后者，但显 然他现在还不能"只手遮天"。一计不行，特朗普似乎又找到了另外一计："单方面"宣布解雇美联储理事 丽莎·库克（Lisa Cook）。 要知道，美联储理事会目前共有7名成员，特朗普已任命其中两人。他还将提名一人接替今年夏天宣布 辞职的库格勒（Adriana Kugler），而特朗普本来选定的是其主要经济顾问之一斯蒂芬·米兰。不过本 周，他曾提出"将米兰调到库克席位上"的可能性，并再挑选一人接替库格勒。 如此一来，美联储的"独立根基"将彻底被打破，鲍威尔 ...

这两起案件的核心，都在于回答一个根本性的问题：美国总统是否拥有单方面的权力，以前所未有的方 式重塑美国商业和全球贸易的关键机制？而这个问题的答案，将由最高法院来决定。 保守派法律团体"新公民自由联盟"（New Civil Liberties Alliance）的高级诉讼顾问John Vecchione表示， 其影响无论在经济上还是宪法层面上都是"巨大的"。 特朗普的全球关税政策和对库克的免职起诉正面临美国最高法院的最终裁决。 最新的进展是，据央视新闻，当地时间8月29日，美国上诉法院裁定美国总统特朗普实施的大部分全球 关税政策非法。法院表示，《国际紧急经济权力法》并未明确赋予美国总统加征关税的权力，特朗普援 引该法加征关税超越了其职权范围。 根据裁决书，该裁决10月14日之前不会生效，以便特朗普政府向美国最高法院提出上诉。 与此同时，针对特朗普试图解雇美联储理事库克一案的法庭听证会也在周五当天结束，这场前所未有的 法律战将检验美国总统对美联储七人理事会的权力。 分析指出，鉴于此案的重要性，任何法院裁决几乎都肯定会被上诉，最终可能上达最高法院。 巨大的经济与宪法影响 最高法院今年在多起案件中基本支持了特朗普一方 ...

Core Viewpoint - The unprecedented dismissal of Federal Reserve Board member Cook by President Trump raises concerns about the independence of the Federal Reserve and the future of U.S. monetary policy [1][5][9]. Group 1: Dismissal of Cook - President Trump exercised his presidential power to dismiss Federal Reserve Board member Cook, marking a significant event in U.S. history [1]. - The reason for Cook's dismissal was related to allegations of dishonesty in his mortgage applications, which has been widely criticized as insufficient [3][4]. - Trump's actions are perceived as an attempt to influence the Federal Reserve's monetary policy, particularly to push for interest rate cuts [3][9]. Group 2: Market Reactions - Following the news of Cook's dismissal, the financial markets reacted swiftly, with the dollar index dropping by 30 basis points and gold prices rising by $20, indicating investor anxiety [3][7]. - The market's response reflects concerns over potential political interference in monetary policy, leading investors to seek safer assets [7]. Group 3: Legal and Political Implications - The legality of Trump's dismissal is under scrutiny, as the Federal Reserve Act requires "sufficient cause" for such actions, which remains vaguely defined [4][5]. - Cook has indicated plans to pursue legal action regarding his dismissal, which could lead to a significant court battle [4][12]. - The situation poses a challenge to the long-standing independence of the Federal Reserve, which is designed to prevent political influence over monetary policy [5][9]. Group 4: Future Outlook - The ongoing power struggle could have lasting implications for the Federal Reserve's independence, especially if Trump successfully appoints more aligned members to the Board [7][9]. - The timing of this conflict is critical, as the U.S. economy faces inflationary pressures and slowing growth, complicating the Federal Reserve's policy decisions [7][9]. - The outcome of this confrontation may redefine the rules governing the U.S. financial system, affecting everyday financial aspects such as mortgage rates and investment returns [11][12].

Core Viewpoint - The recent political maneuvering by Trump to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook under the pretext of "loan fraud" highlights a significant conflict between Trump and Fed Chair Powell regarding interest rate policies, potentially threatening the independence of the Federal Reserve [1][3]. Group 1: Federal Reserve Independence - The Federal Reserve is a "semi-private" institution, and direct government intervention, especially under allegations of fraud, is unprecedented and could lead to a Supreme Court case [3]. - If the court supports Trump, it could undermine the Fed's independence established since its inception in 1913, leading to the politicization of monetary policy [3][5]. Group 2: Market Reactions and Implications - Trump's actions may be a strategic play to create the illusion that the Fed will definitely lower interest rates in September, as indicated by Powell's recent comments that sparked a significant market rally [3][5]. - Following Powell's remarks, the probability of a rate cut surged from 40% to 90%, resulting in a substantial increase in stock prices and a drop in bond yields [3][5]. Group 3: Economic Consequences - A rate cut would imply an admission of failure in combating inflation, with the U.S. fiscal deficit projected to exceed $1.8 trillion this year, raising concerns about the sustainability of high-interest payments [5]. - The potential for a weakened dollar and capital flight raises questions about the Fed's willingness to take such risks, as they have not made any firm commitments regarding rate cuts [5][7]. Group 4: Long-term Risks - The creation of a "false certainty" in the market could lead to a significant financial disaster if the anticipated rate cut does not materialize, as history shows that false prosperity often precedes collapse [7]. - The real danger lies in the erosion of market trust due to misleading signals, which could ultimately threaten the dominance of the dollar [7].