Fed Chair Kevin Warsh Delivers First Jackson Hole Keynote With 30-Year Treasury Yield at Its Highest Since 2007
Warsh, sworn in May 22, 2026, spoke at 10 a.m. ET Friday with headline CPI inflation at 3.4%, core CPI at 2.5%, and futures markets split on whether the Fed's next move is a rate hike.
The 5.31% Question Sitting Behind Warsh's Podium
At 10 a.m. ET on Friday, Kevin Warsh walked out to deliver his first Jackson Hole speech as chair of the Federal Reserve[2]. He'd been in the job just over three months, sworn in May 22 as the 17th chair, after President Trump nominated him back on March 4[9]. This was his first extended chance to explain how he reads the economy, not just to announce what a committee decided[7].
The Kansas City Fed, which hosts the annual gathering of roughly 120 central bankers and economists from more than 70 countries, had picked a bland official theme for this year's symposium: "Financial Innovation: Implications for Payments and Policy[1]." Nobody in markets cared about that theme. What they cared about was a number: 5.31%. That's where the 30-year Treasury yield closed on August 17, the highest it's been since 2007[7]. A separate $42 billion auction of 10-year notes priced even worse, clearing at 4.683%, also a post-2007 high[5].
Here's the part that made the moment strange. The Fed's own short-term interest rate — the one it directly controls — has been sitting still. Long-term borrowing costs climbed anyway. Normally those two things move together. When they split apart like this, it means investors are demanding something extra to hold government debt for 30 years, and nobody fully agrees on why[19].
Two Inflation Numbers, Two Different Speeches
The argument over what Warsh should do starts with a strange fact: markets going into the speech weren't sure whether the Fed's next move would be a rate hike, not a cut[20]. That's unusual on its own. But it gets stranger, because the two most-watched inflation readings are pointing in opposite directions, and both are correct at the same time[3][4].
Headline consumer prices rose 3.4% over the year through July. That number is heavily pumped up by energy, where gasoline alone rose 24.6% from a year earlier[3][4]. Strip out food and energy costs, which swing around for reasons that have nothing to do with the broader economy, and you get "core" inflation. That figure was just 2.5% in July — the lowest since 2021[4][20].
Which number a story leads with tends to predict its conclusion. Lead with 3.4% and the Fed looks like it has unfinished business. Lead with 2.5%, add in a recent weak jobs report, and the Fed looks like it's about to tighten policy right as the economy is cooling off[20]. Futures markets reflected that split heading into the speech, swinging between roughly 35% and 65% odds of a hike at the Fed's September 16 meeting[20].
Why Nobody Can Fully Explain the 5.31%
The fight over that 30-year yield matters because three different explanations are floating around, and the data doesn't clearly rule any of them out[19]. The first is fiscal: the U.S. government is selling a lot of debt, and buyers want more return to absorb all of it. The second is that investors just don't believe inflation is really headed back to the Fed's 2% target, whatever the core number says.
The third explanation is the one that turns this into a political story. Some investors and Democratic senators argue that part of the extra yield is a risk premium on the Fed itself — payment demanded because investors doubt a chair with close ties to the president will raise rates if the White House doesn't want that[11][15]. Warsh has pushed back directly. In July he said the Fed "has been an independent central bank for a very long time" and "you're going to see no changes to that[10]."
It's worth being clear about why long-term rates are even in play here, since the Fed doesn't set them directly. The Fed controls a short-term overnight lending rate. Mortgages, corporate borrowing, and the government's own long bonds follow the 10- and 30-year Treasury yields instead, which are set by investors weighing inflation, debt supply, and risk together[19]. That gap is exactly why yields rose even while the Fed held still — and why the Fed can't just fix this on its own.
The Treasury Steps In, and Creates a New Trap
While Warsh was staying quiet, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was acting. On August 19, the Treasury Department doubled its quarterly buybacks of longer-dated government bonds, a move meant to push those stubborn 30-year yields back down[7][8]. Buybacks work by having the Treasury repurchase its own older debt, which supports prices and holds borrowing costs down.
There's a straightforward reason the administration wants this. Every one-point rise in long-term yields adds directly to how much the government pays in interest on new debt, for as long as 30 years[7]. That's a permanent financial pressure on Treasury regardless of anyone's view on inflation, and it explains the buyback push without needing to assume anything sinister behind it[8].
But the intervention put Warsh in a bind. If his speech reads as dovish now, it risks looking like the Fed is simply falling in line behind the Treasury's own market support — the exact appearance he most needs to avoid as a new chair trying to prove independence[19]. Trump, for his part, has said publicly he wouldn't have picked Warsh if he'd wanted higher rates[21].
Four Groups, Four Reasons to Want a Different Answer
Warsh's own approach has been to say almost nothing in advance. Since taking office, he's dropped the usual practice of hinting where policy is headed, saying he's "not constrained by market prices[19][20]." Central bankers who telegraph their next move too clearly can end up trapped by it, forced to choose between breaking their word or following a plan the data no longer supports.
Hawks on the Fed's rate-setting committee, along with long-bond investors, read the 5.31% yield as the market's verdict that the Fed eased up too soon. Their strongest argument is historical: cutting rates too early in the 1970s let inflation come roaring back worse than before, and several committee members have kept pushing for a hike[20]. Democratic senators, including Elizabeth Warren, Jack Reed, and Andy Kim, raised independence concerns during Warsh's confirmation, pointing to reported frequent contact between Trump and Warsh since May[11][12][13]. Kim specifically said Trump "has shown zero inclination to stop his crusade against the Federal Reserve's independence[13]."
Outside the U.S., the framing looks completely different. The South China Morning Post covered the speech as a straightforward global rate event, headlined simply "Dovish or Hawkish?[17]" without touching the domestic independence fight at all. That's not an oversight — for central banks and currencies from the ECB to the People's Bank of China, the Fed's decisions ripple through capital flows and exchange rates whether or not Washington's politics are settled, and their coverage tends to track the dollar index rather than Beltway disputes[24].
What the Speech Can't Settle
The coverage split tells its own story about how this event gets read. Fox Business led with the 3.4% headline inflation figure, giving the 2.5% core reading — the lowest since 2021 — far less space[16]. CNN and NPR centered their stories on whether Warsh would "show his hand," and on bond-market unease tied to the independence question, treating the fiscal explanation for high yields as a secondary point rather than the lead[14][15]. Euronews went further, describing the Treasury's buyback program as a "rescue" of the bond market, a characterization the Treasury itself doesn't accept and one the article didn't attribute to any named critic[18].
None of the underlying facts actually resolve the argument. Inflation is genuinely mixed, with a slowing monthly pace and a still-elevated annual rate sitting side by side[3][4]. Yields are at their highest since 2007 while the Fed's policy rate holds steady, and reasonable people disagree on whether that's about debt supply, inflation doubts, or something else[7][19]. The Treasury is actively trying to steer long rates down while the Fed insists it isn't influenced by that effort[8][10].
What happens next has a firm deadline. The Federal Open Market Committee meets September 16, less than three weeks after Friday's speech[20]. Whatever Warsh said in Jackson Hole will be read against that date, by investors trying to guess a policy path he's declined to preview.
Summary
Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh gave his first Jackson Hole keynote on Friday, August 28, 2026, at 10 a.m. ET[2]. It is his first extended public account of how he reads the economy, rather than a summary of what a committee decided[7]. He took office on May 22, 2026, as the 17th Fed chair, after President Trump nominated him on March 4[9]. The Kansas City Fed's symposium ran August 27-29 in Wyoming, and its official theme was financial innovation and payments — not interest rates[1].
The backdrop is unusual in two ways. First, the argument is about whether the Fed will raise rates, not cut them. Futures markets swung between roughly 35% and 65% odds of a hike at the September 16 meeting[20]. Second, the two main inflation gauges point different directions. Headline consumer prices rose 3.4% over the year through July, but that number is heavily driven by energy: gasoline was up 24.6% from a year earlier[3][4]. Strip out food and energy and core inflation was 2.5% — the lowest since 2021[4][20]. Hawks look at 3.4% and see a job unfinished. Doves look at 2.5% and a recent negative payroll number and see a Fed about to tighten into a slowdown[20].
Sitting over all of it is the bond market. The 30-year Treasury yield closed at 5.31% on August 17, its highest since 2007[7]. A $42 billion auction of 10-year notes cleared at 4.683%, also the highest since 2007[5]. Long-term yields have climbed even though the Fed's own short-term rate has been on hold. On August 19 the Treasury Department stepped in to try to push long-term borrowing costs down, and Secretary Scott Bessent doubled the size of quarterly buybacks of longer-dated bonds[7][8].
The sharpest genuine dispute is over what that rise in long-term yields means. One camp says it is fiscal: the government is issuing a lot of debt, and buyers want to be paid more to hold it[19]. Another says it is inflation expectations — investors simply do not believe 2% is coming back[19]. A third, pressed mainly by Democratic senators and some market commentators, says part of it is a risk premium on the Fed itself, because investors doubt a chair who talks frequently with the president will raise rates when politics says not to[11][15]. Warsh has publicly rejected that, saying in July that the Fed "has been an independent central bank for a very long time" and that "you're going to see no changes to that"[10].
The Event
Kevin Warsh, chair of the Federal Reserve since May 22, 2026, delivered the keynote address at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City's Economic Policy Symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, at 10 a.m. ET on Friday, August 28, 2026[2][9]. It was his first Jackson Hole speech as chair. The symposium ran August 27-29 under the announced theme "Financial Innovation: Implications for Payments and Policy," and draws roughly 120 central bankers, policymakers and academics from more than 70 countries[1]. The speech came less than three weeks before the Federal Open Market Committee's September 16 decision[20]. As of this writing, the delivered text and the day's market close were not available in the sources consulted; this account covers the event and its documented backdrop.
Undisputed Facts
- Kevin Warsh was nominated as Fed chair on March 4, 2026, and took office as the 17th chair on May 22, 2026, succeeding Jerome Powell[9].
- The Kansas City Fed announced the 2026 symposium for Aug. 27-29 with the theme "Financial Innovation: Implications for Payments and Policy"[1].
- The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported consumer prices rose 0.1% in July 2026 and 3.4% over the prior 12 months[3][4].
- Core CPI, which excludes food and energy, rose 0.2% in July and 2.5% over the year — the lowest annual core reading since 2021[4][20].
- Energy prices were 14.7% higher than a year earlier, with gasoline up 24.6% over that span[4].
- The 30-year Treasury yield closed at 5.31% on August 17, 2026, its highest level since 2007, and a $42 billion 10-year note auction cleared at 4.683%, also the highest since 2007[5][7].
- The Treasury Department intervened in the bond market on August 19 to try to lower long-term borrowing costs, and announced a doubling of quarterly buybacks of longer-dated bonds[7][8].
- Democratic senators including Elizabeth Warren, Jack Reed and Andy Kim publicly objected during Warsh's confirmation that his selection threatened Fed independence[11][12][13].
- On July 1, 2026, Warsh publicly stated the Fed would remain independent and said "you're going to see no changes to that"[10].
The Pressure
Strip away the moralizing and blame. What structural realities persist regardless of which narrative wins?
- A new chair must buy credibility early
- Warsh was picked by a president who says openly he wanted lower rates[21]. Any dovish move now gets read as obedience, whatever the data says. That pushes a new chair toward sounding harder than he might otherwise, simply to establish that the choice is his[15][16].
- The Treasury's borrowing bill is a political number
- Every 1 percentage point rise in long-term yields adds directly to federal interest costs on new debt for as long as 30 years[7]. That gives the administration a permanent, structural interest in lower long rates, independent of any view about inflation — and it explains the buyback program without needing to assume bad faith[8].
- Long rates are not the Fed's to set
- The Fed controls a short-term overnight rate. Mortgages and government borrowing follow the 10- and 30-year yields, which are set by investors weighing future inflation, debt supply, and risk[19]. This is the constraint everyone talks past: yields rose while the Fed held still, so the Fed cannot fully fix it, and neither side's story is fully testable.
- Two inflation gauges, two arguments
- Headline CPI at 3.4% includes gasoline, up 24.6% on the year; core CPI at 2.5% excludes it[3][4]. Both are official and correct. Which one leads a story reliably predicts the story's conclusion, so the choice of number is itself the argument[20].
Material realityAs of the speech, the record shows the following regardless of framing. Consumer prices rose 3.4% over the year through July, but only 0.1% in the month itself, and core inflation was 2.5%, the lowest since 2021[3][4]. The 30-year Treasury yield closed at 5.31% on August 17, its highest since 2007, and a 10-year auction cleared at 4.683%, also a post-2007 high[5][7]. The Fed's policy rate is paused, and futures put the odds of a September 16 hike between roughly 35% and 65%[20]. The Treasury has doubled buybacks of longer-dated bonds to hold long rates down[8]. A recent payroll report was negative[20]. Those facts fit both stories: an economy where price pressure is fading and tightening now would be a mistake, and one where investors no longer believe inflation is beaten. Nothing in the data settles it, and the September meeting will happen whether or not it is settled.
Narrative as a weaponFour groups are actively shaping how this is read. The White House and Treasury want you to see remaining inflation as an energy shock that rate hikes cannot fix, and their bond buybacks as routine debt management. FOMC hawks and long-bond investors want you to see the post-2007 high in the 30-year yield as the market's verdict that the Fed stopped too soon. Democratic senators want you to see Warsh's frequent contact with Trump as the reason those yields are high — that investors are charging extra for a Fed they no longer trust. Warsh himself wants you to see a chair who refuses to be steered by markets or politicians, which is why he has stopped giving forward guidance at all. Watch which inflation figure a story leads with — 3.4% or 2.5% — and which cause it assigns to the 5.31% yield. Those two choices, made in the first two paragraphs, usually determine everything that follows.
How Each Side Sees It
Each major actor’s view — how it frames things, its underlying incentive, and how it’s materially affected. Tap a side to read it.
Frames it asWarsh's case rests on a simple principle: a central bank that manages the market's mood is not doing its job. Since taking office he has stopped supplying Wall Street with advance clues about the next move[19]. He has said he is "not constrained by market prices" — in central-banker language, a warning that he may do something markets have not priced[20]. The reasoning behind that is not stubbornness. When a chair pre-commits to a path, traders bet on it, and the Fed then faces a choice between breaking its word and following a plan the data no longer supports. Warsh's second argument is credibility: inflation has been above the Fed's 2% target for years, and a chair appointed by a president who wants lower rates has to prove early that he will not deliver them on demand[16].
WhyHe needs to establish that the policy he sets is his own, both to bond investors who set long-term borrowing costs and to the FOMC colleagues who must vote with him[14][19]. A reputation for independence is the main asset a new chair has, and it is cheapest to build in the first year[15].
Impact on themHis words move trillions in bonds, mortgages and currencies within minutes[14]. A speech read as hawkish would sell off rate-sensitive stocks; one read as dovish would drop yields and the dollar, and would look like a favor to the Treasury's intervention[19][8]. Either reading follows him into the September 16 meeting.
Frames it asThis camp starts from the headline number: 3.4% is not 2%, and it has not been 2% for a long time[3]. Their strongest specific point is the bond market itself. Normally, if investors trusted the Fed to get inflation down, long-term yields would fall while the Fed holds rates steady. Instead the opposite happened — the 30-year hit 5.31%, the highest since 2007, with the policy rate paused[7]. To hawks, that gap is the market saying it does not believe the 2% promise[19]. They also argue that stopping a tightening cycle too early is the classic 1970s error: inflation falls, the central bank relaxes, and it comes back worse. Several FOMC members have continued pushing for a hike[20].
WhyThey want the Fed's 2% target to be treated as a commitment rather than an aspiration. For bondholders there is also money at stake: a holder of a long-term bond is repaid in future dollars, so unexpected inflation is a direct loss to them.
Impact on themFutures markets have priced September hike odds oscillating between roughly 35% and 65%, with odds of a hike by December reported around 67.6%[20][24]. If they win the argument, borrowing costs rise across mortgages, car loans and business credit.
Frames it asThe administration's position is that inflation's remaining bulk is energy, not demand — gasoline alone is up 24.6% over the year, an effect of conflict-driven oil prices, and raising interest rates does not produce more oil[4]. Trump has said publicly that he would not have chosen Warsh if he had wanted rate hikes[21]. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's separate argument is about the government's own borrowing bill. When the 30-year yield rises, every new long bond the government sells costs more for decades[7]. His response was to double quarterly buybacks of longer-dated bonds — the Treasury buying back its own older debt to support prices and hold yields down[8]. Officials frame that as ordinary debt management, not market rigging.
WhyLower long-term rates cut federal interest costs and support housing and business investment ahead of the November midterm elections[8][14]. The administration also has an interest in not being blamed for a slowdown it says the Fed caused.
Impact on themThe intervention already moved markets: yields fell on a report that Treasury might tap its General Account to fund buybacks[23]. But it created a trap for the Fed. A speech read as dovish now looks like the central bank falling in behind the Treasury, which is exactly the appearance Warsh needs to avoid[19].
Frames it asTheir argument is institutional rather than about any single rate decision. Fed independence works because the chair's job cannot be taken away for an unpopular decision, so investors can trust that rates reflect the economy and not the election calendar. Senator Andy Kim said Trump "has shown zero inclination to stop his crusade against the Federal Reserve's independence," pointing to pressure on Powell and Governor Lisa Cook[13]. Senator Elizabeth Warren said she feared Trump had picked someone he could use to shape the economy[11]. Their strongest specific evidence is behavioral: frequent reported calls between Trump and Warsh since May, on subjects from the Iran conflict to artificial intelligence. They argue that once markets price political risk into the Fed, Americans pay for it in higher long-term rates — which is one reading of the move to 5.31%[7][15].
WhyCongressional oversight of the Fed, and a political interest in establishing responsibility now for any later inflation or downturn[11][12].
Impact on themThey have no vote on rates. Their leverage is oversight hearings, the confirmation of future governors, and the ability to keep the independence question in the coverage — which itself pressures Warsh toward a visibly hawkish stance.
Frames it asFor countries outside the U.S., the Fed sets conditions they must live with but did not choose. When U.S. rates rise, money moves to dollar assets, other currencies fall, and imported food and fuel get more expensive for people who never voted on U.S. policy. Many governments and companies abroad also borrow in dollars, so a stronger dollar raises their debt payments in local-currency terms. Their argument is that the world's reserve-currency issuer should weigh spillovers — and that a chair who declines to give forward guidance makes their planning harder, since surprise moves hit them hardest[17][24].
WhyCurrency stability and predictable capital flows. Central banks from the ECB, Bank of England, Bank of Japan and People's Bank of China attend Jackson Hole precisely to read the Fed's direction[24].
Impact on themEmerging-market currencies edged lower before the symposium, and the dollar index has swung on Bessent's buyback announcement amid what traders described as debasement worries[24]. A hawkish Warsh tightens conditions worldwide; a dovish one eases them.
Like this article?
The Bias Ledger average rating 3.5
The same story, as framed by outlets across the spectrum, ordered least to most biased. The bias score (1 = straight, 10 = heavily spun) is an AI assessment of that framing — click an outlet to see its track record. The tell is the word choice or omission that reveals the angle.
| Outlet | Vantage | Bias | How they frame it | The tell |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CNBC | U.S. center, markets-focused | 2 | "Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh delivers his key Jackson Hole speech Friday. Here's what to expect" — a trader's preview built around the 10 a.m. ET timing and the September 16 meeting. | Frames the whole event as a trade to be positioned for. The independence question appears as a market risk factor rather than a constitutional one, and policy is judged by whether it surprises investors. |
| South China Morning Post | Hong Kong, owned by Alibaba Group | 2 | "Dovish or Hawkish? Markets await Warsh's Jackson Hole debut for rate, policy clues" — a two-outcome trading question. | The U.S. political fight is almost entirely absent. Written for Asian investors, it treats the Fed as an external weather system, which is cleaner reporting but also omits the domestic dispute driving the story in the U.S. |
| Fox Business | U.S. right | 4 | "Federal Reserve's Warsh faces inflation pressure ahead of Jackson Hole" — the pressure comes from inflation, not from the White House. | Leads with the 3.4% headline CPI. The 2.5% core reading, the lowest since 2021, gets far less prominence, and the Trump-Warsh calls barely feature. That selection makes hawkishness look like the only serious position. |
| CNN | U.S. center-left | 4 | "Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh faces pressure to show his hand" — the story is Warsh withholding information markets are owed. | The phrase "show his hand" casts the no-forward-guidance approach as evasion rather than a stated doctrine. Warsh's own reason for dropping guidance gets less space than the market's frustration with it. |
| NPR | U.S. center-left, partly federally funded | 4 | "The stakes are high as Kevin Warsh is set to give his first major speech as Fed Chair" — an institutional test framing centered on bond markets. | Reaches for the independence angle as the organizing frame. The alternative fiscal explanation for high yields — heavy government debt issuance — is present but subordinate, which quietly makes political interference the default reading of 5.31%. |
| Euronews | European, partly EU-funded | 5 | "Warsh's first Jackson Hole: Bond yields, a Treasury rescue and inflation that refuses to fall." | The word "rescue" characterizes Bessent's buyback program as an emergency bailout of the bond market — a judgment the Treasury does not accept and that the article does not attribute to a named critic. "Inflation that refuses to fall" also personifies a number that did in fact slow in June and July. |
References
- Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City to Host Annual Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium Aug. 27-29 — Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City · Primary source; regional Federal Reserve bank, the event's host
- Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh delivers his key Jackson Hole speech Friday. Here's what to expect — CNBC · U.S. business news, owned by Comcast/NBCUniversal; investor-oriented
- Consumer Price Index Summary — 2026 M07 Results — U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics · Primary source; U.S. federal statistical agency
- CPI inflation report July 2026: Prices rose 0.1%, annual rate 3.4% — CNBC · U.S. business news, owned by Comcast/NBCUniversal
- US Sells 10-Year Debt at Highest Yields Since Financial Crisis — Bloomberg · U.S. financial wire owned by Michael Bloomberg; institutional-investor audience
- US 10 Year Treasury Note Yield — Quote, Chart, Historical Data — Trading Economics · Commercial market-data aggregator
- Jackson Hole 2026: What to Watch When Warsh Steps to the Podium Friday — Tech Times · U.S. commercial tech/business site; aggregation-heavy
- Dollar and bond markets 'on edge' ahead of Jackson Hole as Bessent's market intervention piles pressure on Warsh — CNBC · U.S. business news, owned by Comcast/NBCUniversal
- Kevin Warsh — Wikipedia · Volunteer-edited encyclopedia; used only for dates cross-checkable elsewhere
- Federal Reserve Chair Warsh emphasizes political independence, signals focus on inflation — The Washington Times · U.S. right-leaning daily founded by the Unification Church
- Warren Calls on Fed Chair Nominee to Answer If He Supports Trump Administration's Actions Against Powell and Cook — U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs (Minority) · Primary source; Senate Democratic staff release — an advocacy document by a party to the dispute
- Reed Statement on Nomination of Kevin Warsh for Fed Chair — Office of U.S. Senator Jack Reed · Primary source; Democratic senator's office
- Press Release on Federal Reserve Chair Nomination — Office of U.S. Senator Andy Kim · Primary source; Democratic senator's office
- Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh faces pressure to show his hand — CNN · U.S. center-left cable and digital news, owned by Warner Bros. Discovery
- The stakes are high as Kevin Warsh is set to give his first major speech as Fed Chair — NPR · U.S. public radio; member-station and partly federally supported, center-left audience
- Federal Reserve's Warsh faces inflation pressure ahead of Jackson Hole — Fox Business · U.S. right-leaning business network, owned by Fox Corporation
- Dovish or Hawkish? Markets await Warsh's Jackson Hole debut for rate, policy clues — South China Morning Post · Hong Kong English daily owned by Alibaba Group
- Warsh's first Jackson Hole: Bond yields, a Treasury rescue and inflation that refuses to fall — Euronews · Pan-European broadcaster; majority owned by Alpac Capital with partial EU funding
- Bond market anxiety raises stakes for Warsh's debut Jackson Hole speech — Reuters · International wire service owned by Thomson Reuters; institutional style guide
- Will Warsh Talk Down the Hawks at Jackson Hole? — Investing.com · Commercial trading-analysis site; contributor analysis, not newsroom reporting
- Trump says he wouldn't have chosen Warsh for Fed chair if he wanted rate hikes — Seeking Alpha · Investor-contributor financial site; news desk aggregates official remarks
- For Kevin Warsh, 'big questions' and few easy answers at Fed's Jackson Hole — NBC News · U.S. center-left broadcast news, owned by Comcast/NBCUniversal
- Yields decline on CNBC report Treasury could use General Account to fund buybacks — CNBC · U.S. business news, owned by Comcast/NBCUniversal
- Emerging Market Currencies Edge Lower Ahead of Ukraine-Related Meetings and Jackson Hole Conference — Tiger Brokers · Singapore-based online brokerage's news arm; aggregates wire content for retail traders