SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"Dodd-Frank is quite specific: It provides its own succession planning. There is no vacancy for President Trump to fill," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren in an interview. (Photo: The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights/Twitter)
Already facing a lawsuit charging that his appointment to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is "unlawful," White House budget director Mick Mulvaney was confronted with outraged protests on Monday as he arrived at CFPB headquarters for his first day as "acting director" of the agency--a title also claimed by Leandra English, the CFPB's deputy director.
"This is about whose side President Trump is on--big banks, or working families. So far in his administration, he has chosen the big banks time after time."
--Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)Mulvaney and English began jostling for position almost immediately after the workday began Monday morning, with both insisting that the law is on their side.
In an email to CFPB staffers, English wrote "[i]t is an honor to work with all of you," signing the note "acting director." Around two hours later, Mulvaney sent his own message to the agency's 1,600 employees, imploring them to "disregard any instructions you receive from Ms. English in her presumed capacity as acting director."
Weighing in on who has the proper authority to run the agency, former Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.)--co-author of the 2010 legislation that brought the CFPB into existence--concluded that it is "clearly" English.
"When we wrote the law creating the CFPB, we deliberately tried to give it some protection from the normal political process," Frank noted, arguing that such protections are necessary for an agency tasked with battling powerful Wall Street firms.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)--an original architect of the CFPB--echoed Frank's conclusion in an interview with the Washington Post on Monday. "Dodd-Frank is quite specific: It provides its own succession planning," Warren observed. "There is no vacancy for President Trump to fill."
The demonstrators who gathered outside CFPB headquarters early Monday morning also expressed their agreement with Frank's assessment.
Led by a coalition of consumer advocacy groups including Public Citizen and Americans for Financial Reform, protesters denounced the White House's attempt to appoint Mulvaney and hoisted signs highlighting the CFPB's role in combating "the abuses of triple-digit interest payday and car-title lenders," going "to bat for victims of sham for-profit colleges," and "standing up to Wall Street banksters and fraudsters."
In a speech during Monday's gathering, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued that the Trump administration's effort to place Mulvaney at the helm of the CFPB represents an explicit move to "thwart the independence" of the agency and "vaporize" its power to protect consumers from predatory financial institutions.
Watch:
As Common Dreams has reported, the legal stand-off between Mulvaney and English was sparked by CFPB director Richard Cordray's departure on Friday--a week sooner than anticipated.
Shortly after announcing his resignation, Cordray named English deputy director of the agency, placing her in line to become acting director according to Dodd-Frank. The Trump administration quickly countered by naming Mulvaney as interim CFPB chief, a move the White House has since justified by citing a Justice Department memo penned by Steven Engel--a DOJ attorney who has represented payday lenders before the CFPB, as David Dayen reported for The Intercept on Monday.
"Having a former adversary to CFPB weigh in on who is the legal acting director of the agency raises questions over Engel's independence and potential conflict of interest," Dayen wrote.
Sen. Warren concluded on Monday that the Trump administration's maneuvering also raises questions about the president's expressed commitment to being the "voice" of the working class.
"This is about whose side President Trump is on--big banks, or working families," Warren said. "So far in his administration, he has chosen the big banks time after time."
As the showdown at the agency continues, a ruling on the lawsuit filed by English from a federal district court is expected as the next legal development.
In what was characterized as "terrible luck" for the CFPB, English v. Trump was assigned to Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee.
Trump and Musk are on an unconstitutional rampage, aiming for virtually every corner of the federal government. These two right-wing billionaires are targeting nurses, scientists, teachers, daycare providers, judges, veterans, air traffic controllers, and nuclear safety inspectors. No one is safe. The food stamps program, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are next. It’s an unprecedented disaster and a five-alarm fire, but there will be a reckoning. The people did not vote for this. The American people do not want this dystopian hellscape that hides behind claims of “efficiency.” Still, in reality, it is all a giveaway to corporate interests and the libertarian dreams of far-right oligarchs like Musk. Common Dreams is playing a vital role by reporting day and night on this orgy of corruption and greed, as well as what everyday people can do to organize and fight back. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover issues the corporate media never will, but we can only continue with our readers’ support. |
Already facing a lawsuit charging that his appointment to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is "unlawful," White House budget director Mick Mulvaney was confronted with outraged protests on Monday as he arrived at CFPB headquarters for his first day as "acting director" of the agency--a title also claimed by Leandra English, the CFPB's deputy director.
"This is about whose side President Trump is on--big banks, or working families. So far in his administration, he has chosen the big banks time after time."
--Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)Mulvaney and English began jostling for position almost immediately after the workday began Monday morning, with both insisting that the law is on their side.
In an email to CFPB staffers, English wrote "[i]t is an honor to work with all of you," signing the note "acting director." Around two hours later, Mulvaney sent his own message to the agency's 1,600 employees, imploring them to "disregard any instructions you receive from Ms. English in her presumed capacity as acting director."
Weighing in on who has the proper authority to run the agency, former Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.)--co-author of the 2010 legislation that brought the CFPB into existence--concluded that it is "clearly" English.
"When we wrote the law creating the CFPB, we deliberately tried to give it some protection from the normal political process," Frank noted, arguing that such protections are necessary for an agency tasked with battling powerful Wall Street firms.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)--an original architect of the CFPB--echoed Frank's conclusion in an interview with the Washington Post on Monday. "Dodd-Frank is quite specific: It provides its own succession planning," Warren observed. "There is no vacancy for President Trump to fill."
The demonstrators who gathered outside CFPB headquarters early Monday morning also expressed their agreement with Frank's assessment.
Led by a coalition of consumer advocacy groups including Public Citizen and Americans for Financial Reform, protesters denounced the White House's attempt to appoint Mulvaney and hoisted signs highlighting the CFPB's role in combating "the abuses of triple-digit interest payday and car-title lenders," going "to bat for victims of sham for-profit colleges," and "standing up to Wall Street banksters and fraudsters."
In a speech during Monday's gathering, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued that the Trump administration's effort to place Mulvaney at the helm of the CFPB represents an explicit move to "thwart the independence" of the agency and "vaporize" its power to protect consumers from predatory financial institutions.
Watch:
As Common Dreams has reported, the legal stand-off between Mulvaney and English was sparked by CFPB director Richard Cordray's departure on Friday--a week sooner than anticipated.
Shortly after announcing his resignation, Cordray named English deputy director of the agency, placing her in line to become acting director according to Dodd-Frank. The Trump administration quickly countered by naming Mulvaney as interim CFPB chief, a move the White House has since justified by citing a Justice Department memo penned by Steven Engel--a DOJ attorney who has represented payday lenders before the CFPB, as David Dayen reported for The Intercept on Monday.
"Having a former adversary to CFPB weigh in on who is the legal acting director of the agency raises questions over Engel's independence and potential conflict of interest," Dayen wrote.
Sen. Warren concluded on Monday that the Trump administration's maneuvering also raises questions about the president's expressed commitment to being the "voice" of the working class.
"This is about whose side President Trump is on--big banks, or working families," Warren said. "So far in his administration, he has chosen the big banks time after time."
As the showdown at the agency continues, a ruling on the lawsuit filed by English from a federal district court is expected as the next legal development.
In what was characterized as "terrible luck" for the CFPB, English v. Trump was assigned to Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee.
Already facing a lawsuit charging that his appointment to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is "unlawful," White House budget director Mick Mulvaney was confronted with outraged protests on Monday as he arrived at CFPB headquarters for his first day as "acting director" of the agency--a title also claimed by Leandra English, the CFPB's deputy director.
"This is about whose side President Trump is on--big banks, or working families. So far in his administration, he has chosen the big banks time after time."
--Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)Mulvaney and English began jostling for position almost immediately after the workday began Monday morning, with both insisting that the law is on their side.
In an email to CFPB staffers, English wrote "[i]t is an honor to work with all of you," signing the note "acting director." Around two hours later, Mulvaney sent his own message to the agency's 1,600 employees, imploring them to "disregard any instructions you receive from Ms. English in her presumed capacity as acting director."
Weighing in on who has the proper authority to run the agency, former Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.)--co-author of the 2010 legislation that brought the CFPB into existence--concluded that it is "clearly" English.
"When we wrote the law creating the CFPB, we deliberately tried to give it some protection from the normal political process," Frank noted, arguing that such protections are necessary for an agency tasked with battling powerful Wall Street firms.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)--an original architect of the CFPB--echoed Frank's conclusion in an interview with the Washington Post on Monday. "Dodd-Frank is quite specific: It provides its own succession planning," Warren observed. "There is no vacancy for President Trump to fill."
The demonstrators who gathered outside CFPB headquarters early Monday morning also expressed their agreement with Frank's assessment.
Led by a coalition of consumer advocacy groups including Public Citizen and Americans for Financial Reform, protesters denounced the White House's attempt to appoint Mulvaney and hoisted signs highlighting the CFPB's role in combating "the abuses of triple-digit interest payday and car-title lenders," going "to bat for victims of sham for-profit colleges," and "standing up to Wall Street banksters and fraudsters."
In a speech during Monday's gathering, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued that the Trump administration's effort to place Mulvaney at the helm of the CFPB represents an explicit move to "thwart the independence" of the agency and "vaporize" its power to protect consumers from predatory financial institutions.
Watch:
As Common Dreams has reported, the legal stand-off between Mulvaney and English was sparked by CFPB director Richard Cordray's departure on Friday--a week sooner than anticipated.
Shortly after announcing his resignation, Cordray named English deputy director of the agency, placing her in line to become acting director according to Dodd-Frank. The Trump administration quickly countered by naming Mulvaney as interim CFPB chief, a move the White House has since justified by citing a Justice Department memo penned by Steven Engel--a DOJ attorney who has represented payday lenders before the CFPB, as David Dayen reported for The Intercept on Monday.
"Having a former adversary to CFPB weigh in on who is the legal acting director of the agency raises questions over Engel's independence and potential conflict of interest," Dayen wrote.
Sen. Warren concluded on Monday that the Trump administration's maneuvering also raises questions about the president's expressed commitment to being the "voice" of the working class.
"This is about whose side President Trump is on--big banks, or working families," Warren said. "So far in his administration, he has chosen the big banks time after time."
As the showdown at the agency continues, a ruling on the lawsuit filed by English from a federal district court is expected as the next legal development.
In what was characterized as "terrible luck" for the CFPB, English v. Trump was assigned to Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee.
"Who close to Trump knew that he was going to suspend the tariffs?" asked Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy. "Which of his Mar-a-Lago friends or his billionaire advisers were able to capitalize on that inside information?"
The timing of U.S. President Donald Trump's Wednesday social media post declaring that "this is a great time to buy" stocks and subsequent announcement of a three-month tariff pause quickly raised suspicions of possible insider trading and market manipulation by the highest levels of the American government.
The S&P 500, which tracks the performance of the nation's top publicly traded companies, posted its largest single-day gain since 2008 after Trump pumped the brakes on part of his tariff scheme, which had sent global markets into a tailspin in recent days.
Trump announced his decision hours after effectively urging Americans to buy stocks in a morning post on Truth Social—though at the time there was no public information indicating that any kind of tariff announcement was imminent.
"How is this not market manipulation?" asked Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.). "If you're a Trump supporter and you did what he said and you bought, then you did great. On the other hand, if you're a retiree or a senior or somebody in the middle class over the last few days that didn't have the tolerance for risk and you decided to sell, you got screwed."
When Trump's pause announcement came hours later, U.S. equities skyrocketed, adding over $5 trillion in value to the market in a matter of hours. Elon Musk, a top Trump lieutenant and the world's richest man, saw his wealth—which is largely tied up in Tesla stock—soar by nearly $30 billion on Wednesday, according to Forbes' real-time billionaire tracker.
"Who benefited? And who made money?" Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) asked in a video posted to social media Wednesday evening. "This should matter to you, too, because this could be an enormous scam."
"The question is, who close to Trump knew that he was going to suspend the tariffs?" said Murphy. "Which of his Mar-a-Lago friends or his billionaire advisers were able to capitalize on that inside information?"
An insider trading scandal is brewing.
Trump's 9:30am tweet makes it clear he was eager for his people to make money off the private info only he knew. So who knew ahead of time and how much money did they make? pic.twitter.com/AJbtEq372n
— Chris Murphy 🟧 (@ChrisMurphyCT) April 10, 2025
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.)
recommended late Wednesday that "any member of Congress who purchased stocks in the last 48 hours should probably disclose that now."
"I've been hearing some interesting chatter on the floor. Disclosure deadline is May 15th," she wrote. "We're about to learn a few things. It's time to ban insider trading in Congress."
During a House Ways and Means Committee hearing on Wednesday, Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.) grilled Trump trade representative Jamieson Greer on the tariff pause, saying, "It looks like your boss just pulled the rug out from under you and paused the tariffs—the taxes—on the American people."
"Is this market manipulation?" Horsford asked. "If it's not market manipulation, what is it? Who's benefiting? What billionaire just got richer?"
JUST NOW: Rep Steven Horsford GRILLS Jamieson Greer on Donald Trump’s tariff reversal: “Is this market manipulation? If it’s not market manipulation, what is it? Who’s benefiting? What billionaire just got richer?” pic.twitter.com/Wfx8VlLemu
— Marco Foster (@MarcoFoster_) April 9, 2025
Last week, Trump himself suggested that he's deliberately manipulating equity prices, reposting a video claiming that he is "purposely crashing the market" as part of a "secret game" that "could make you rich."
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the agency tasked with investigating insider trading and other violations, is now headed by Wall Street-friendly Trump appointee Paul Atkins, whom the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate confirmed on Wednesday.
The Wall Street Journal reported that all three of the major U.S. stock indexes closed Wednesday "with moves unseen since some of the most volatile stretches in recent decades."
"The S&P 500 jumped 9.5% on Wednesday, its largest one-day percentage gain since the financial crisis of 2008," the Journal noted. "The Dow surged more than 2,900 points, or 7.9%—its biggest daily increase ever in point terms and the biggest percentage gain since the coronavirus swept the globe in March 2020. The technology-heavy Nasdaq Composite soared 12.2%, its highest one-day jump since the dot-com era."
In the days leading up to the tariff pause, Trump faced widespread criticism and backlash, including from some of his billionaire supporters. Bill Ackman, a billionaire hedge fund manager, had urged Trump to enact "a 30-, 60-, or 90-day pause before the tariffs are implemented."
"This was brilliantly executed," Ackman gushed after Trump announced the partial tariff pause. "Textbook, Art of the Deal."
"We sounded the alarm, and they're backing off," said Sen. Elizabeth Warren. "But the fight's not over."
Social Security advocates celebrated a hard-fought win on Wednesday while still stressing that the Trump administration poses a dire threat to millions of Americans' earned benefits.
The Social Security Administration on Tuesday seemingly walked back plans to require beneficiaries to verify their identities using an online system and force those who couldn't do so to provide documentation at an SSA field office—some of which may soon be targeted for closure.
"Beginning on April 14, Social Security will perform an anti-fraud check on all claims filed over the telephone and flag claims that have fraud risk indicators," the agency wrote Tuesday on X, the social media platform owned by billionaire Elon Musk, head of President Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
"Individuals that are flagged would be required to perform in-person ID proofing for the claim to be further processed. Individuals who are not flagged will be able to complete their claim without any in-person requirements," the SSA explained. "We will continue to conduct 100% ID proofing for all in-person claims. 4.5 million telephone claims a year and 70K may be flagged. Telephone remains a viable option to the public."
The Trump administration was previously accused of trying to "sabotage" SSA by cutting phone services and forcing people who could not verify their identity online through "my Social Security" to do so in-person. That policy was initially set to take effect at the end of March, a rapid rollout reportedly pursued at the request of the White House.
Then, late last month, SSA delayed the start date until April 14, and said that people applying for Medicare, Social Security Disability Insurance, or Supplemental Security Income would be exempt from the rule and could complete their claims by phone.
Reporting on the policy's apparent full rollback on Wednesday, Axios shared an email from a White House official who said that "because the anti-fraud team implemented new technological capabilities so quickly, SSA can now perform anti-fraud check on all claims filed over the phone."
Those who are flagged "would be required to perform in-person ID proofing for the claim to be further processed," the official told the outlet, echoing the X posts. "The administration remains committed to protecting our beneficiaries from fraud. There will no disruptions to service."
Welcoming the development on X, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said: "We sounded the alarm, and they're backing off. But the fight's not over. Trump and Musk still want to fire thousands of Social Security workers, close offices, and cut services. We'll keep fighting back."
Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, similarly said in a statement: "Organizing and mobilizing works. From the moment DOGE announced its dangerous plan to eliminate SSA telephone services, our members sprang into action—making thousands of calls to elected officials, organizing rallies and demonstrations, and demanding the protection of the services they have earned and paid for."
"We are grateful that our voices were heard. As of today, most Americans will still be able to apply for their earned retirement, survivor, or disability benefits through the method that works best for them—whether by phone, in person, or online," Fiesta continued. "Forcing millions of seniors and people with disabilities to rely solely on an understaffed network of closing field offices or an online-only system would have placed an unreasonable burden on vulnerable people and done little to curb fraudulent claims."
Like Warren, he vowed that "we will continue to fight to ensure that SSA is fully staffed and that local field offices remain open and accessible to the public."
Social Security Works also celebrated the news, writing on X: "After a massive public outcry, Elon Musk's DOGE is backing away from cuts to Social Security phone service that would have forced millions of Americans into overcrowded field offices. Your voice matters!"
"But DOGE is still making other huge cuts to the Social Security Administration," the advocacy group added. "These cuts are already making it far harder for Americans to claim their earned benefits. We need to stay loud! Plan or join a rally on April 15th."
"Elon Musk orchestrated a plan to rip off consumers with impunity when he tweeted 'Delete CFPB' and Congress just rubber-stamped it," said one campaigner.
In a move likely to further enrich Elon Musk, the world's richest person, the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday voted to revoke a rule empowering a federal agency to oversee digital payment applications including Apple Pay, CashApp, and Venmo like it monitors banks and credit card companies.
House lawmakers passed S.J. Res. 28 by a party-line vote of 219-211, a move that followed the Senate's vote last month to rescind the Consumer Financial Protect Bureau (CFPB) rule requiring payment apps to be regulated under the agency's supervisory authority.
"The vote," the progressive advocacy group Demand Progress said, "is the latest in a damning and telling chain of events benefiting Elon Musk," chairman of the social media company X.
The group laid out the timeline:
"Musk is now on a glide path to launch X Money this year without the watchdog agency to ensure that he follows federal rules mandating data security standards, disputes for fraudulent payments, consumer protections against debanking, and more," Demand Progress said.
"And through the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, Musk now has access to sensitive information about competitors in the digital payments space like Cash App, PayPal, and Venmo that have been investigated by the CFPB, potentially giving X Money an unfair business advantage," the group added.
BREAKING: Congress just voted to strip the CFPB of its power to make sure payment apps like CashApp protect consumers, just as Elon Musk gears up to turn Twitter into his own payment app.
[image or embed]
— Demand Progress (@demandprogress.bsky.social) April 9, 2025 at 2:03 PM
As Consumer Reports noted Wednesday:
The CFPB's rule (also known as the larger participant rule) applies to digital wallet and payment providers handling more than 50 million transactions per year. The most widely used apps subject to the rule process an estimated 13 billion consumer payment transactions annually, according to the CFPB.
In 2023 alone, consumers reported losing $210 million to scams on peer-to-peer payment apps, a staggering 62% increase from 2021. In addition, users who accidentally send a payment to the wrong person find it nearly impossible to get their money back.
"Elon Musk orchestrated a plan to rip off consumers with impunity when he tweeted 'Delete CFPB' and Congress just rubber-stamped it. Today's shameful vote means that X, an app already swarming with bots and scammers, will be able to connect to your bank account and allow fraudsters to take your money without accountability," Emily Peterson-Cassin, corporate power director at Demand Progress, said Wednesday.
"Thanks to the CFPB's supervision, $120 million was refunded to consumers who were scammed through Cash App," Peterson-Cassin added. "That kind of policing will be significantly harder now that Congress has voted to strip the CFPB of its ability to proactively watch over payment apps. And thanks to DOGE's intrusions into the CFPB's databases, Musk now has access to sensitive financial data from companies investigated by the agency, including virtually all would-be competitors to X Money in the digital payments space."
Other consumer advocates also panned the House vote, with Consumer Reports advocacy program director Chuck Bell arguing that "by voting to repeal the CFPB's rule, Congress is turning a blind eye to the fraud that runs rampant on payment apps and the privacy risks users can face when Big Tech companies collect their sensitive financial data and share it widely with other companies."
"Today's vote weakens the CFPB's ability to stop unfair practices that put consumers who use payment apps at risk and ensure that Big Tech companies are following the law," Bell added.