Stocks Bitcoin Gold The New Fed Chair Changes Everything for 2026

President Trump will be nominating Kevin Walsh to be the next chair of the Federal Reserve to replace Jerome Powell in May. Okay what does this mean for stocks, for crypto, for bitcoin, and for gold and silver? What I'm about to present to you today has not been presented to you by the media, at least not to my knowledge, and if you're an investor you're going to want to hear this. In today's video I want to do two things. So the first thing is I want to break down Walsh's monetary policy and I want to show you a very important video clip of him just basically laying it out for us. And the second thing is I want to explain how Walsh's monetary policy is going to affect investments. Okay we need to start here to give you some context. So who is Kevin Walsh? I'm going to give you some highlights and here's what you need to know. Kevin Walsh is not an outsider to the Federal Reserve system. He served as a Fed governor from 2006 to 2011. That means that he was there. He was in the Federal Reserve during the 2008 financial crisis. He worked directly on crisis era policy, bank rescues, liquidity programs, and the early stages of QE, quantitative easing. Okay after leaving the Federal Reserve, Walsh became a big critic of how the Federal Reserve handled monetary policy with the constant money printing. Okay so the big takeaway is that Walsh is proposing going a completely different direction. He's basically talking about reforming the Federal Reserve. I'm going to tell you how but it's going to be different compared to under Powell. Okay let me ask you what do you know about Kevin Walsh? What is he proposing? What is he going to do? What's he saying? You probably read a headline. You probably read an article or two and you've probably concluded that Walsh wants to cut interest rates and do quantitative tightening, QT. Okay but now I'm going to tell you what Walsh is really proposing and how this is going to affect your investments. Right now the strategy of the Federal Reserve under Jerome Powell is to prevent an emergency or prevent a crisis by steadily printing money. In December 2025, the Federal Reserve started printing 40 billion dollars a month, of course out of thin air, to buy U.S. Treasury bills to increase liquidity in the markets. That's because the financial plumbing started to show signs of distress. Okay so this approach, there's pros and cons to this. The good thing is that we don't get an emergency. We don't get a crisis. But the bad thing is that we get in environments of constants and elevated inflation. Now let me tell you what Walsh wants to do. What he wants to do differently. Walsh is saying that he wants to stop the money printing. Like stop the constant money printing. Let there be an emergency. Let there be a crisis. And only then will the Federal Reserve come to the rescue with a flood of money printing. Okay so let me ask you, what do you prefer? Like which path do you prefer? Like Powell's policy or Walsh's policy? Print money to prevent a crisis or let a crisis happen and then print money to solve the problem. So I'm going to share with you my thoughts after I show you some video clips of Walsh. In this first video clip, as I told you, Walsh was on the Federal Reserve during the financial crisis of 08, right? And he supported the historic amount of money printing. Doubling of the Federal Reserve's balance sheets. And the interviewer is going to ask, you're going to see it, why did you support this? Basically the insane amount of money printing. And I want to show you how Walsh answers. You were on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors during the financial crisis of 2008, which led to the worst economic contraction since the Great Depression and unemployment in this country of 10%. Are you drawing a causal relationship there, Peter? I'm scared where the rest of this is going. You're just playing bad luck, Kevin. The Fed responded with a number of actions, but perhaps the most dramatic was to flood the system with liquidity. Let me give you some sense of the magnitude of the Fed's action. Between the first and second quarter of 2008, the Fed's balance sheet, measure of the supply of reserves in the banking system, the balance sheet doubled in the space of a quarter from a trillion to 2 trillion. Now you've written that you strongly supported that decision. So before we get to the QE 2, 3, 4, and so forth, about what you're deeply, or at least, well, you'll explain yourself in a moment. But first tell me why you supported that dramatic infusion of money into the markets in 2008. Okay, that was the question. And now I want to show you how Warsh responds. But please pay attention to this. Look out for this. Because Warsh is going to say, you're going to see it, that he believes essential banks are created to respond to panics. And how are they supposed to respond? And you're going to see it. He says respond by overwhelming force, which means if there's a crisis, if there's an emergency or a panic, then they're going to solve the problem with an overwhelming amounts of money printing. So please take a look. Central banks were first created, or this generation of central banks, to respond to just this sort of situation. A panic in the old days, what we now call a deep recession, a financial crisis, is when markets aren't working. When there are spreads between what buyers are willing to play and sellers are willing to sell. The job of the central bank is to show up with all sorts of money, there's that dirty word again, and get those markets to function. Not to set prices, but to make sure that buyers and sellers could clear. And the central bank was there to provide liquidity when no one else would. We were the backstop and are the backstop to the banking system, not just in the U.S., but in the rest of the world. Because if we blew it, it would have been even worse for the rest of the world. So that's what we did in crises. And some of your and my friends on the right, including at institutions we care deeply about, their views then were, you should let the system burn down. A phoenix will rise from the ashes. You really have no business in doing this. That's not my view. My view is the central bank was created to respond to panics. We had one. We recognized it belatedly, but then we showed overwhelming force. And the word you used, I think, is the right word. It was an emergency. So you're prepared to cross more lines than you would in benign times. Okay, after showing you that, I want to share with you my opinion. Now the question is, which path is better? Keep on printing money to prevent a crisis, like how Apollo is doing it, or let a crisis happen, and then print an overwhelming amount of money to solve the problem. But the thing is that if they stop the money printing, then we're going to have an emergency. We're going to have a crisis, which is why the Federal Reserve is currently printing $40 billion a month, because of liquidity problems. Therefore, my opinion is that it's going to be the same outcome. Both result in money printing and ongoing inflation. Listen, so I just want to share with you my point of view. It's like asking, do you want to get paid on a monthly basis, or do you want to get paid on a bi-monthly basis? But you know what? At the end of the month, you're still going to get paid the same amount of money. However, I'm willing to bet that most people would answer that they would rather be paid on a bi-monthly basis, like twice a month. It's an obvious choice. I don't have to get into why. Because if you get paid monthly, people that are living paycheck to paycheck, they're going to be suffering the last few days before a paycheck arrives, and then those days are going to become very stressful. And with Warsh's plan, the financial marketplace, stocks, crypto, precious metals, they're going to be subject to more volatility and more stress. But in regards to inflation, in regards to de-dollarization, when you look at the big picture, the timing's not going to matter. It's just going to care about the totals. And again, just like getting paid on a monthly basis or a bi-monthly basis, the total at the end of the month is going to be the same. So if you really think about it, Warsh is not presenting any solutions. All he's talking about is just adjusting the timing of the money printing, which means that there's just going to be more volatility because Powell's just doing it steadily and Warsh is going to do it lumpy. Okay, so I mean, the news is not presenting this to you, like this information to you, but now you know. Okay, so what does this mean for investments? In the short term, I expect more volatility. That's because investments may struggle with policy uncertainty, mixed signals between rate cuts and liquidity tightening, and reduced confidence in the Fed put. Okay, markets like predictability and Warsh, he's introducing a new regime of uncertainty and that, of course, is going to show up as volatility. In the medium term, with Warsh in power, I expect a rotation if there's going to be less liquidity being provided. So most likely there would be a rotation out of speculative growth investments and a rotation to value stocks that are actually making a profits and cash flow. So in other words, with less liquidity, Kevin Warsh would be very bad for Bitcoin and for crypto. So sure, a lack of liquidity, that's going to be bad for stocks, for precious metals, you know, in general, but Bitcoin, of course, that's going to trade like an amplified tech stock. So Warsh, he is going to be the worst Fed chair for Bitcoin. For precious metals investors, I would say don't worry if you're a long-term investor because Warsh is not offering any solutions to reinstate confidence in the U.S. dollar. De-dollarization is going to continue, inflation is going to continue, it's just going to be lumpier. However, with all of this being said, I have to address this. As much as Kevin Warsh is talking about tightening and selling or letting mature trillions in U.S. treasuries, there's always the scenario of talk is cheap. So you get the good old bait and switch or the switcheroo. So there's the possibility that Warsh says that he's going to be against money printing, you know, outside of a crisis, but he ends up printing money just like Powell. So Warsh can have a change of heart or he could just be all talk. Because you have to remember, why would Trump nominate someone that's going to restrict liquidity and be a headwind to the stock markets? Listen, it's still my opinion that the Federal Reserve and President Trump are going to run it hot, especially leading up to the midterm elections. Nothing's going to change. What's changed? They're still going to print money. It's just the timing that Warsh is talking about. So the money printing is going to continue, inflation is going to be ongoing, the dollar will continue to devalue, de-dollarization is still an ongoing thing. So what's different? Like nothing has changed. Okay, if you want to see what I'm doing personally with my investments, I encourage you to please check out my Patreon site and I'll leave a link for you down below. Thank you so much, please subscribe, and I wish you a very nice day. Take care.