BREAKING: Federal Judge TORCHES Jeanine Pirro’s Case Against Fed Chair Powell — “Zero Evidence”

A federal judge recently dealt a major setback to the Trump administration and its chosen Washington, D.C. prosecutor, Jeanine Pirro. In a strong ruling, Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg refused to allow subpoenas that Pirro’s office had sent to Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. He said the government had almost no proof to back up its case against Powell.

But the real shock wasn’t just the ruling.
It was the judge’s explanation. Boasberg stated that there was a lot of evidence showing the subpoenas were never really about finding any wrongdoing by the Federal Reserve. Instead, he believed they were used as a way to pressure Powell into lowering interest rates or resigning from his position.

This means a federal judge is basically saying the Justice Department tried to use criminal subpoenas to intimidate the head of the nation’s central bank.
According to the court order, the government provided “almost no evidence” that Powell had done anything illegal. The judge said the reason for the probe was so weak it could be considered a cover-up. To Judge Boasberg, the investigation looked more like political pressure rather than a real law enforcement effort.

This conflict came after Donald Trump constantly asked the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates and publicly criticized Powell when the Fed didn’t comply with the White House’s demands.
Powell himself had warned earlier this year that the investigation seemed like a form of retaliation for the Fed acting independently. He said the threat of criminal charges was connected to the Fed making decisions based on economic data, not presidential orders.

Now, the courts are taking action.
The ruling is also causing anger in Congress, where even some Republicans are opposing the campaign against the Fed. The independence of the Federal Reserve isn’t just a part of economic policy. It’s a protection against politicians using the economy for short-term political benefit.

According to this federal judge, the line between politics and prosecution may have just been crossed.