NPR⁠84%

Judge blocks DOJ's criminal probe of Federal Reserve, blasting it as political⁠92%

By Scott Horsley⁠0%

3/13/2026, 2:07:53 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Appeal to Emotion, and Confirmation Bias, with Framing Effect as the most egregious example at 91.8% saturation with 337 hits. Analysis detected 912 faulty-reasoning hits from 367 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 86.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠92% (1,845 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 91.60% of the article peer group.

A federal judge put the brakes on the Justice Department's criminal probe of the Federal Reserve, saying it was part of an improper campaign by the Trump administration to pressure the central bank into cutting interest rates more aggressively. 
Judge James Boasberg quashed subpoenas that had been issued to the Fed in January, ostensibly seeking information about cost overruns on the renovation of the Fed's headquarters. 
At the time, Fed chairman Jerome Powell had called that a pretext. 
And Judge Boasberg agreed. 
"The Government has offered no evidence whatsoever that Powell committed any crime other than displeasing the President," Boasberg writes in a newly-unsealed opinion. 
"There is abundant evidence that the subpoenas' dominant (if not sole) purpose is to harass and pressure Powell either to yield to the President or to resign and make way for a Fed Chair who will." 
The judge quoted from some of the dozens of attacks President Trump and his aides have leveled at Powell for failing to make deeper cuts in interest rates. 
The case has become a test of the Fed's ability to set monetary policy without political interference from the White House. 
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., praised the decision. 
"This ruling confirms just how weak and frivolous the criminal investigation of Chairman Powell is and it is nothing more than a failed attack on Fed independence," Tillis wrote in a social media post. 
"We all know how this is going to end and the D.C. U.S. Attorney's Office should save itself further embarrassment and move on." 
DOJ says it will appeal Boasberg's ruling 
U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro showed no sign of backing down, however, promising an appeal and labeling Boasberg an "activist judge." 
"He has neutered the grand jury's ability to investigate crime," Pirro said in a news conference after the decision was unsealed. 
"As a result, Jerome Powell today is now bathed in immunity." 
Powell's term as Fed chairman expires in May, but Tillis, who sits on the Senate Banking Committee, has threatened to block any vote on Trump's nominee to succeed him until the Justice Department probe is dismissed. 
"Appealing the ruling will only delay the confirmation of Kevin Warsh as the next Fed Chair," Tillis wrote. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 20.2%Scott Horsley: 3.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.4%Confirmation Bias20.2%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 2.8%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 3.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.8%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 1.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 1.7%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 6.3%Scott Horsley: 1.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.4%Overconfidence Bias6.3%This article: 91.8%Scott Horsley: 13.6%Goats and Soda (NPR): 11.1%Framing Effect91.8%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 1.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.8%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 3.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.4%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 8.7%Scott Horsley: 2.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.3%Pessimism Bias8.7%This article: 7.6%Scott Horsley: 7.6%Goats and Soda (NPR): 11.3%Negativity Bias7.6%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.7%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 1.4%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 2.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 5.4%Scott Horsley: 0.3%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Horn Effect5.4%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 1.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.7%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 24.5%Scott Horsley: 1.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.2%Ad Hominem24.5%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.4%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 1.1%Scott Horsley: 6.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 6.1%Appeal to Authority1.1%This article: 4.9%Scott Horsley: 1.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.5%False Dilemma4.9%This article: 13.6%Scott Horsley: 0.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.3%Slippery Slope13.6%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.0%Scott Horsley: 3.6%Goats and Soda (NPR): 4.4%Hasty Generalization3.0%This article: 14.7%Scott Horsley: 0.4%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Red Herring14.7%This article: 6.3%Scott Horsley: 0.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.7%Bandwagon6.3%This article: 21.8%Scott Horsley: 3.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 6.6%Appeal to Emotion21.8%This article: 9.3%Scott Horsley: 0.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.9%Begging the Question9.3%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 8.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 6.3%Scott Horsley: 0.7%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.4%Burden of Proof6.3%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 3.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 2.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.0%Scott Horsley: 2.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.0%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.1%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.5%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.3%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 4.9%Goats and Soda (NPR): 3.1%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 2.5%Goats and Soda (NPR): 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.7%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott Horsley: 0.2%Goats and Soda (NPR): 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

367 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.