Trump Again Threatens to Fire Powell as Pirro Prosecutors Make Unannounced Visit to Fed’s $2.5 Billion Renovation Site

President Donald Trump again threatened to fire Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell as federal prosecutors from U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office showed up unannounced this week at the Federal Reserve’s $2.5 billion headquarters renovation site and were turned away by contractors and referred to Fed attorneys. The visit—first reported by The Washington Post and confirmed by PBS and other outlets—involved two prosecutors and an investigator seeking to inspect the construction site; in a separate court filing Pirro’s office has conceded it has not found evidence of a crime in the renovation probe, and Chief Judge James Boasberg has warned that the inquiry appears “pretextual.” Trump told Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo he will “have to fire” Powell if the Fed chair does not step down when his term ends on May 15, 2026, repeating complaints that Powell has been too slow to cut interest rates and contrasting the $2.5 billion renovation with an offhand claim it could have been done “for $25 million.”

The episode sits at the intersection of criminal scrutiny, political pressure, and monetary-policy stakes. Kevin Warsh, Trump’s nominee to replace Powell, has an April 21 Senate Banking Committee hearing, but Sen. Thom Tillis has vowed to block confirmation until the renovation investigation concludes; Powell has said he would remain Fed chair “pro tem” under regulations if a successor is not confirmed. The broader context matters: U.S. presidents have historically tried to influence Fed policy — Richard Nixon’s pressure on Fed Chair Arthur Burns in the early 1970s is a notable precedent — and large federal construction programs frequently see cost overruns, as seen in other agencies’ projects where costs rose substantially, underscoring that high-priced renovations are not uncommon and do not by themselves prove corruption. Warsh’s public views that the Fed’s balance sheet has grown too large also signal significant policy differences that make the chair fight consequential beyond the renovation probe.

Reporting on the story has shifted from initial focus on the renovation’s price tag and the existence of an inquiry to greater scrutiny of the probe’s basis and its political implications. Early coverage highlighted questions about the $2.5 billion cost; newer reports from The Washington Post, PBS and others have emphasized that Pirro’s prosecutors were turned away at the site, that her team told a judge it had not found criminal evidence, and that a judge described the interest as potentially “pretextual.” Social media reactions mirror the split in traditional coverage: supporters of the investigation praise Pirro’s effort to hold Powell to account, while critics point to the court’s remarks and characterize the probe as politically motivated retaliation for Powell’s policy positions and public disputes with Trump. The unfolding disputes over inspections, judicial rebukes, and a stalled confirmation process make clear the controversy is as much about presidential leverage over the central bank as it is about the renovation’s costs.