Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell has a history of sparring with Trump Federal Reserve nominee Stephen Moore -- most infamously when she caught him red-handed making up numbers during a CNN segment on inflation in the American economy.
In a scathing new column, Rampell puts Moore through the shredder and she argues that he "could inflict more long-term damage than any of Trump’s other nominations" to key positions in government.
Rampell takes particular relish in knifing Moore's partisan economic analysis, in which he seems to completely change his views on monetary policy depending on which political party is in the White House.
"Moore’s many economic claims over the years have revealed him to be, shall we say, easily confused," she writes. "A decade ago, as the Fed was battling deflation (that is, price declines) during the financial crisis, Moore preposterously fearmongered that hyperinflation (that is, out-of-control price increases) was nigh: Americans could soon be carting 'wheelbarrows full' of cash a la Weimar Germany."
She then mocks Moore for getting banned from ever writing again for the Kansas City Star after he submitted an op-ed that was riddled with easily disprovable falsehoods.
The real danger in Moore's nomination, Rampell says, would be in making the Federal Reserve a central bank governed by political considerations over sound monetary policy.
"None of this bodes well for the future of central bank independence — not just for the remainder of Trump’s presidency, but for either the five or 11 years Moore would serve if he is confirmed by the Senate, depending on which vacancy Trump ultimately nominates him for," she writes. "Who knows what damage he might be tempted to inflict over that time to make a Republican president look good — or (based on his recommendations during Barack Obama’s presidency) a Democratic one look bad?"