What they're not telling you: Since the last FOMC meeting (on. March 18), gold has been clubbed like a baby seal ("EM piggy bank") while stocks and oil have surged (with the former ignoring the peril of the latter)... During that time, Fed rate-change expectations have swung violently from a full rate-cut to a full rate-hike and fallen back to no change at all in 2026, notably (hawkishly) rising in the last few days as oil prices surged back to war highs... On the macro front, The Fed's dual mandate is in play as (surprisingly) inflation has surprised to the downside while growth has surprised to the upside ...
# THE TAKE 's farewell circus exposed the Fed's fundamental crisis: institutional legitimacy hemorrhaging in real time. Three dissents in 34 years isn't procedural noise—it's mutiny disguised as protocol. The real story? Markets already priced in the hold. What matters is *why* dissenters broke ranks. The Fed pretends inflation's tamed while gold craters on manufactured confidence. Translation: central bankers are terrified of the inflation narrative they created, so they freeze rates and hope nobody notices the contradiction. Powell leaves behind a Fed fractured on credibility. His successor inherits not a solved problem but a deeply politicized institution playing three-dimensional chess with America's currency. The dissents signal what institutional actors won't say openly: there's no consensus on what comes next. The market's already moving. We're just watching the Fed catch up.
What the Documents Show
Notably, The Fed doesn't need to cut rates today for monetary
Follow the Money
Nevertheless, with all that behind us, the market is expecting a big fat nothingburger from Fed Chair Powell's last (maybe) FOMC meeting, but is expecting an indication of 'two-sided risks' with a single dissent (from Miran calling for a 25bps cut). Most divided (8-4) Fed in 34 years votes to hold rates unchanged as expected BUT... With 4 No Votes, Powell's Final Meeting Garners Most Dissents in 34 Years *FED: HAMMACK, KASHKARI, LOGAN VOTED AGAINST EASING BIAS, BACKED *FED SAYS GOVERNOR STEPHEN MIRAN DISSENTS IN FAVOR OF RATE CUT Fed officials also changed slightly their characterization of the uncertainty around the conflict in Iran: “Developments in the Middle East are contributing to a high level of uncertainty about the economic outlook.” Back in March they said the implications for the US economy were “uncertain.” In the spirit of Fed transparency, Powell leaves on a confusing note. So, three of the dissenters opposed “inclusion of an easing bias.” And yet the actual language of the statement arguably doesn’t specify such a bias. It says that the committee would be prepared “to adjust the stance of monetary policy as appropriate.” That doesn’t specify cutting interest rates. It’s interesting that the trio of dissenters on the bias basically labeled this language as a bias to ease.
What Else We Know
Because arguably it’s neutral : The Committee would be prepared to adjust the stance of monetary policy as appropriate if risks emerge that could impede the attainment of the Committee’s goals.
Primary Sources
- Source: ZeroHedge
- Category: Global Power
- Cross-reference independently — don't take our word for it.
Disclosure: NewsAnarchist aggregates from public records, API feeds (Federal Register, CourtListener, MuckRock, Hacker News), and independent media. AI-assisted synthesis. Always verify primary sources linked above.