Pirro to appeal Boasberg ruling on Federal Reserve subpoenas0%
By Chloe Hauxwell0%
3/13/2026, 12:08:33 PM
Topics: Federal Reserve, Subpoenas, Legal Ruling, Jeanine Pirro, Jerome Powell, Criminal Investigation
Keywords: Chloe Hauxwell, Hegseth, Iran Leadership, Iran Politics, Iran Regime, Iran Supreme Leader, Iranian Leadership Change, Middle East Conflict, Mojtaba Khamenei, New Iranian Supreme Leader, Operation Epic Fury, Pentagon Press Conference, Pete Hegseth, Tehran Leadership, U S Defense Secretary, U S Iran Tensions 2, Wounded And Disfigured
BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Ad Hominem, Fundamental Attribution Error, and Genetic Fallacy, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 27.5% saturation with 74 hits. Analysis detected 386 faulty-reasoning hits from 269 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 0% (0 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 100.00% of the article peer group.
U.S. Attorney for Washington, DC Jeanine Pirro delivers remarks on an arrest connected to the 2012 U.S. Embassy attack in Benghazi, at the Department of Justice on February 6, 2026 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro has reacted to a ruling from U.S. District Judge James Boasberg blocking a pair of grand jury subpoenas targeting the Federal Reserve.
On Friday, Pirro gave the update on her criminal investigation into chairman Jerome Powell, calling the ruling “outrageous.”
“Jerome Powell is now bathed in immunity,” she fumed.
“This is wrong, and it is without legal authority.”
She revealed that she will be appealing the ruling and also making a motion to reconsider.
Powell is accused of making false testimony to Congress about renovations to the Federal Reserve headquarters in Washington D.C.
Judge Boasberg claimed there was not probable cause to issue the subpoenas and that they were merely meant to pressure Powell into voting for lower interest rates or resigning.
“Did prosecutors issue those subpoenas for a proper purpose?
The Court finds that they did not,” Boasberg wrote in the decision in U.S. District Court in Washington, which was dated Wednesday, but unsealed on Friday.
“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 wrote.
“On the other side of the scale, the Government has offered no evidence whatsoever that Powell committed any crime other than displeasing the President,” Boasberg wrote.
Speakers
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.