The Divide: Presidents Who Didn’t Challenge the Federal Reserve vs. Those Who Paid the Price

In the history of the United States, few institutions have wielded as much power behind the scenes as the Federal Reserve and the deep state. While many presidents have worked within the established system, a select few—Donald Trump, John F. Kennedy, and Andrew Jackson—chose to challenge the entrenched financial elites and government insiders who control much of the nation’s policy from behind closed doors. Their defiance did not come without consequences, ranging from intense political opposition to assassination attempts.

On the other hand, the majority of U.S. presidents did not take on these hidden power structures, either working with the Federal Reserve or avoiding direct confrontation. For these presidents, their compliance shielded them from the extreme backlash that others faced.

Presidents Who Didn’t Challenge the Federal Reserve or the Deep State

Most U.S. presidents have chosen to avoid challenging the Federal Reserve’s power, either because they believed in its role in stabilizing the economy or because they recognized the risks of confronting the financial establishment.

1. Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933–1945)

• Compliance: FDR worked closely with the Federal Reserve during the Great Depression. His administration implemented the Glass-Steagall Act to regulate private banks, but he did not take any direct steps to limit the Fed’s power. Instead, FDR relied on the Federal Reserve to help manage the economy through the New Deal.

• Result: FDR avoided backlash from the financial elites, as his policies often aligned with the goals of stabilizing the banking system during a period of economic upheaval.

2. Richard Nixon (1969–1974)

• Compliance: Nixon took the U.S. off the gold standard in 1971, a move that gave the Federal Reserve more control over the money supply. By severing the connection between the dollar and gold, Nixon handed the Fed greater freedom to manage inflation and monetary policy. Nixon did not challenge the Fed’s authority but instead empowered it.

• Result: While Nixon faced backlash for other reasons—most notably the Watergate scandal—he did not face any serious consequences related to his relationship with the Federal Reserve.

3. Bill Clinton (1993–2001)

• Compliance: Clinton maintained a close relationship with the Federal Reserve, particularly with Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan. Clinton’s economic policies, including deregulation of the financial markets through the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, aligned with the interests of big banks and the financial elites. He did not challenge the Fed’s role or authority.

• Result: Clinton saw economic growth during his presidency and did not face significant opposition from the financial establishment. His legacy, however, contributed to the conditions that led to the 2008 financial crisis.

4. George W. Bush (2001–2009)

• Compliance: Bush worked closely with the Federal Reserve, particularly during the 2008 financial crisis. His administration’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) relied on the Fed to bail out major financial institutions, and Bush did not push back against the Fed’s role in managing the economy.

• Result: Bush faced criticism for the financial collapse, but not from the financial elites or the Fed. His administration’s decisions largely aligned with the interests of Wall Street and the banking system.

5. Barack Obama (2009–2017)

• Compliance: Obama, like his predecessors, worked within the established financial system and did not challenge the Federal Reserve’s authority. While his administration passed the Dodd-Frank Act to regulate Wall Street following the 2008 crisis, it did not dismantle the power of the Fed or the big banks. The Federal Reserve played a key role in stabilizing the economy through quantitative easing.

• Result: Obama faced political opposition from various factions, but his relationship with the Federal Reserve and financial elites remained stable. His administration’s economic policies, while criticized by some, were generally aligned with the interests of the financial establishment.

The Consequences of Challenging the Federal Reserve: Trump, JFK, and Andrew Jackson

In contrast to the presidents who worked with the Federal Reserve, Donald Trump, John F. Kennedy, and Andrew Jackson are examples of leaders who faced severe consequences for challenging the financial and political establishment. Their resistance to the Fed and the deep state marked them as threats to the status quo, and each suffered intense opposition, whether through political attacks or even assassination attempts.

1. Andrew Jackson: Defeating the Central Bank

• Challenge: Andrew Jackson took a stand against the Second Bank of the United States, the central bank of his time. He viewed the bank as an institution that wielded too much power over the economy and government, benefiting only the wealthy elites. Jackson’s refusal to renew the bank’s charter and his subsequent efforts to dismantle it were a direct challenge to the financial establishment.

• Consequence: Jackson’s war on the bank made him a hero to the common man but earned him powerful enemies among the financial elites. He survived an assassination attempt in 1835, when a gunman tried to shoot him but failed due to both pistols misfiring. While the motive remains debated, some speculate that his battle with the banking system contributed to the attempt on his life.

2. John F. Kennedy: Confronting the Fed and the CIA

• Challenge: Kennedy sought to reduce the power of the Federal Reserve through Executive Order 11110, which allowed the U.S. Treasury to issue silver-backed currency, bypassing the Fed’s control of the money supply. In addition to challenging the Fed, Kennedy also clashed with the CIA and the military-industrial complex, particularly after the failed Bay of Pigs invasion. His desire to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces” marked him as a threat to the deep state.

• Consequence: Kennedy’s assassination in 1963 remains one of the most controversial and widely speculated events in American history. While the official narrative blames Lee Harvey Oswald, many believe that Kennedy’s battles with the Federal Reserve and the CIA made him a target of the deep state. His death serves as a reminder of the risks associated with challenging powerful interests.

3. Donald Trump: Battling the Fed, the Deep State, and Surviving Assassination Attempts

• Challenge: Trump frequently criticized the Federal Reserve for raising interest rates, accusing it of acting against his administration’s pro-growth agenda. He openly clashed with Fed Chairman Jerome Powell and suggested that the Fed was working with the political establishment to undermine his presidency. In addition to his battle with the Fed, Trump constantly railed against the deep state, claiming that intelligence agencies, bureaucratic insiders, and the media were conspiring to sabotage his administration.

• Consequence: Trump faced relentless opposition throughout his presidency, from impeachment attempts to investigations and media attacks. However, he also survived two assassination attempts during his time in office:

• In 2016, during a campaign rally in Las Vegas, a man attempted to grab a police officer’s gun to assassinate Trump. The man was arrested before the attempt could proceed.

• In 2020, an envelope addressed to Trump containing ricin, a deadly poison, was intercepted by law enforcement. The suspect was arrested, and the plot was thwarted.

These assassination attempts, along with the intense political pressure Trump faced, illustrate the risks he encountered while challenging the entrenched power structures.

Why Some Presidents Avoid the Fight

The contrast between these two groups of presidents is stark. Those who complied with the Federal Reserve and deep state structures, such as Clinton, Obama, and Bush, largely avoided direct confrontation with the financial establishment. As a result, they enjoyed relative political stability from the entrenched powers, even if they faced criticism from the public or political opponents.

In contrast, those who dared to challenge the status quo—Jackson, Kennedy, and Trump—faced intense opposition. Whether through political attacks, assassination, or attempts to discredit them, the consequences for challenging the system were severe. These presidents’ experiences reveal the risks of going against the hidden forces that control much of the nation’s economic and political systems.

Conclusion: The Cost of Defiance

The story of America’s presidents is a tale of two paths: compliance or defiance. Those who worked within the system, particularly with the Federal Reserve, avoided major consequences from the financial establishment. But those who dared to challenge the entrenched power of the deep state and the Federal Reserve paid a steep price.

Whether it’s Jackson’s battle with the central bank, Kennedy’s efforts to weaken the Federal Reserve and CIA, or Trump’s modern-day war against the deep state, the lesson is clear: challenging these powerful institutions comes with serious risks. The financial elites and deep state have long controlled the direction of the country, and any president who threatens their influence can expect fierce opposition.

As history has shown, the cost of defiance is high—but for these presidents, the fight was worth it.

---