Aggregator

Ex-Fed Adviser Sentenced To 38 Months For Passing Sensitive Info To China

Zero Rss
3 weeks 5 days ago
Ex-Fed Adviser Sentenced To 38 Months For Passing Sensitive Info To China

Authored by Frank Fang via The Epoch Times,

A former senior Federal Reserve official has been sentenced to more than three years in prison for lying to federal investigators about sharing sensitive economic information with Chinese intelligence operatives.

The Department of Justice in Washington on March 11, 2026. Madalina Kilroy/The Epoch Times

John Harold Rogers, 64, was senior adviser for the international finance division of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, the main governing body for the U.S. central bank, from 2010 to 2021.

He was arrested in January 2025 and convicted by a jury on Feb. 3 of making false statements to investigators conducting the probe, but acquitted on a charge of conspiracy to commit economic espionage.

On July 15, U.S. District Judge Dabney L. Friedrich sentenced Rogers to 38 months in federal prison, followed by 12 months of supervised release.

"John Rogers spent years secretly funneling sensitive Federal Reserve information to Chinese spies, then looked investigators in the eye and lied about it. And when that wasn't enough, he lied again under oath at trial," U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro of the District of Columbia said in a statement.

"Federal Reserve employees entrusted with America's most sensitive economic information cannot sell out their country and their colleagues for personal gain and then expect to hide behind a single word."

Rogers, of Vienna, Virginia, is a U.S. citizen who holds a doctoral degree in economics from the University of Virginia.

'Deliberately Lied'

Rogers began developing a "clandestine relationship" with Chinese intelligence operative Lee Hummin in 2017, after the two met at a conference in China, according to prosecutors.

In the years that followed, Rogers met with Lee and other Chinese associates in hotel rooms in China, using academic classes as a cover while sharing Fed information that Lee had directed him to collect.

His role as senior adviser gave Rogers access to confidential information from the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), according to his indictment.

The FOMC, the Federal Reserve System's monetary policymaking body, sets the target range for the federal funds rate and directs monetary policy actions, including quantitative easing and tightening.

FOMC information is classified under a three-tier system based on its sensitivity, according to the indictment. The highest tier, or Class I, includes policymaker views and pre-publication drafts of the committee's statements, while Class II covers economic forecasts and open market operations.

In a sentencing memorandum filed in May, prosecutors said Rogers printed Class II FOMC documents and took them with him on a trip to China in June 2019. In another instance, prosecutors said he removed the Class II markings from information and sent it to his personal email account before forwarding it to a professor at China's state-run Fudan University in Shanghai.

On Feb. 4, 2020, investigators from the Fed's Office of Inspector General interviewed Rogers and asked if he had ever shared restricted Fed information outside the Federal Reserve Board. According to prosecutors, he replied, "Never."

"John Rogers deliberately lied to our investigators to conceal the fact he shared restricted non-public Federal Reserve information with intelligence agents working for China," Michael E. Horowitz, inspector general for the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, said in a July 15 statement.

'Abused His Position of Trust'

Prosecutors had sought a 60-month prison sentence against Rogers, saying he had "abused his position of trust," according to the sentencing memorandum.

"He knew that the restricted information he provided to the PRC government could allow it to make untold sums of money by trading with its roughly $1.5 trillion in U.S. Treasury securities and related instruments," prosecutors wrote, using the acronym of China's official name, the People's Republic of China.

After leaving the Fed, he became a professor at Fudan University. According to the sentencing memorandum, he earned at least $900,000 in salary and grants from Fudan University from February 2022 until his arrest in January 2025.

In exchange for the restricted information, Rogers received "tens of thousands of dollars in benefits," and told investigators that he "owe[d] everything to" Lee.

"Through Hummin Lee, the PRC provided the defendant with a new wife, a new family, money, friendship, and professorships at prestigious universities," prosecutors wrote.

Prosecutors argued that a 60-month sentence would serve as a general deterrent because Beijing is known for recruiting current and former U.S. government officials with access to sensitive information.

"The recruitment pattern the evidence established in this case - a foreign intelligence service cultivating a target over years through the gradual development of personal affection and indebtedness, before progressively tasking the target with increasingly sensitive intelligence collection - is not unique to the defendant," prosecutors wrote.

Rogers's lawyers, in their sentencing memorandum filed in May, asked the court to sentence him to time served, noting that he had been detained for more than 16 months, citing his poor health and "regrets [for] having provided an incorrect and imprecise answer" during his 2020 interview with investigators.

"Dr. Rogers recognizes that such conduct is wrong for a federal employee in a position of trust and he regrets having made the statement," his lawyers wrote.

The Epoch Times contacted Rogers's lawyers for comment but didn't receive a response by publication time.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/16/2026 - 23:25
Tyler Durden

These Are The Highest-Paying College Majors

Zero Rss
3 weeks 5 days ago
These Are The Highest-Paying College Majors

College is one of the largest investments many people make, and a student’s field of study can shape its long-term financial return.

Which Majors Earn the Most by Mid-Career?

The chart below, via Visual Capitalist's Srijaa Chatterjee, ranks college majors by median mid-career wage.

Data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York compares median wages across dozens of college majors for workers ages 35 to 45.

Engineering and technical disciplines dominate the upper end of the ranking. Alongside the three leading majors, electrical engineering pays a median of $123,000, while computer science, construction services, and mechanical engineering each reach $120,000.

Economics, finance, and business analytics are among the highest-ranking fields outside engineering and computer science, with median wages of $115,000, $112,000, and $109,000, respectively. At the other end of the ranking, several education-focused majors have median earnings between $52,000 and $62,000.

These differences can compound substantially over time. Even a gap of tens of thousands of dollars per year can translate into significantly different lifetime earnings, savings, and investment opportunities.

How Much Does Your Major Matter?

The spread between the highest- and lowest-paying majors exceeds $80,000 annually, suggesting that field of study can have a substantial influence on long-term earnings. While this ranking focuses on workers in their mid-career, we also examined which college majors earn the highest salaries right after graduation, highlighting how pay differences begin early and evolve over time.

Research from the Federal Reserve has found that both a student’s major and institution can affect labor market outcomes, partly by shaping access to higher-paying employers and industries. Majors tied to specialized technical skills may also command higher wages because employers have a smaller pool of qualified candidates.

Salary outcomes are not predetermined, however. Industry, location, work experience, internships, professional networks, and certifications can all influence a graduate’s earnings trajectory.

What About Humanities and Graduate School?

Some studies have argued that humanities graduates can narrow earnings gaps later in life as communication, management, and analytical skills become more valuable. In the current data, however, engineering, computer science, economics, and finance remain the clear leaders in median mid-career pay.

Graduate education can also change the equation. For students pursuing advanced degrees, an undergraduate major may be only one factor shaping future earnings. Professional credentials in law, medicine, business, and specialized technical fields can significantly alter career outcomes.

Salary is also only one consideration when choosing a major. Personal interests, job satisfaction, work-life balance, and career flexibility all matter. Still, for students evaluating the financial return on a degree, field of study remains an important part of the equation.

Want to explore more education and labor market data? Check out Most Underemployed College Degrees on the Voronoi app.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/16/2026 - 23:00
Tyler Durden

America's Gerontocracy Goes Deeper Than Aging Politicians

Zero Rss
3 weeks 5 days ago
America's Gerontocracy Goes Deeper Than Aging Politicians

Authored by Connor O'Keeffe via The Mises Institute,

Senator Lindsey Graham died seemingly out of the blue over the weekend after a tear in his aorta. He was 71 years old.

The news was shocking, in part because Graham was a very active senator - he was just returning from a trip to Ukraine - and because he was seemingly at the height of his power, having built one of the most influential relationships with President Donald Trump of any politician.

But another reason the news was such a surprise was because, compared to many of his colleagues in Washington, Senator Graham was on the younger side.

That impression was fueled by the ongoing ordeal of Senator Mitch McConnell. The 84-year-old serving senator was reportedly found unconscious weeks ago after a fall, leading to his ongoing hospitalization.

Early reports that EMS had responded to a cardiac arrest at McConnell's residence when he was first hospitalized, his wife's strange trip to China in the middle of all this, and the total radio silence for weeks from a supposedly active senator all led to speculation online that McConnell was faring far worse than his staff and Republican party insiders were admitting.

Others went as far as to speculate that McConnell had already passed away, but that his team and establishment allies were attempting to delay the public acknowledgment of his death until after it would no longer force a special election. That theory gained enough traction online to prompt McConnell's team to post a literal proof-of-life photo of the senator holding that day's newspaper.

This all follows, of course, the age-record-breaking presidency of Joe Biden, and the campaign that was derailed because of it. Now, Trump is on track to break Biden's record and, at the end of his term, become the oldest serving US president in history.

In addition to McConnell, many of the most prominent members of Congress are quite elderly, have been in office for decades, and show no interest in ever retiring. Senator Dianne Feinstein - who died of old age in 2023 at the age of 90, hours after casting a vote on the Senate floor - provides a good example of how many of these career politicians apparently plan to leave office.

With all this happening, it's easy to understand why many have increasingly come to consider the United States to be a gerontocracy, or a society ruled by old people.

As with just about anything online, there are sophisticated and unsophisticated versions of this observation.

The unsophisticated version simply points to the multitude of examples of politicians remaining in office long after most people would have retired from just about any line of work and concludes that the prevalence of exceptionally elderly politicians is hampering the government's ability to function properly.

This narrative is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the actual role of politicians within the American political system.

While American politicians certainly have power, in the last century or so - and especially in the decades since WWII - the bulk of federal power has shifted from politicians in Congress and state legislatures to the bureaucracies that make up the ballooning federal agencies in the executive branch.

The vast majority of those in Congress are simply expected to show up and vote with their party's leadership on the latest massive omnibus spending bills, made up almost entirely of carve-outs to special interests. Or to pass legislation crafted with diligent collaboration from "experts" at the executive agencies that will receive the new funding.

The most effective politicians will lobby to add additional spending that in some way benefits some special interest in their own district. But mostly, their modern role is to fundraise for their party, engage in legitimizing rituals, and stoke vicious debates with the other party over what are, in the scheme of things, incredibly minor policy issues to keep us all believing that we truly live in a functioning representational democracy. And, especially because the politicians themselves are merely the frontmen for a larger staff handling the specifics on all those fronts, it's a role that quite elderly people are certainly capable of doing well into the physical and mental decline that often accompanies one's later years.

The more sophisticated version of the "America is a gerontocracy" narrative focuses less on the politicians themselves and more on what the government is doing. Because, if one takes even a passing glance at how the federal government taxes and spends, it quickly becomes clear that government programs are actively transferring vast amounts of wealth from younger generations to older generations who are, on average, much wealthier.

There are a lot of reasons for this. Many can be traced back to seemingly innocuous attempts to ensure that elderly people without close family members, adequate housing, or connections to any kind of community were cared for. The programs that would eventually become Social Security and Medicare were sold as small programs to help those on the margin. The same goes for the founding of interest groups and lobbies such as AARP (formerly the American Association of Retired Persons).

But as with just about any government program started in the name of helping a small number of genuinely downtrodden Americans, these entitlement programs exploded in size as they were quickly expanded to also benefit whichever groups were organized and motivated enough to lobby effectively.

And even setting lobbying aside, the elderly tend to be disproportionately dependable, and therefore powerful, as a voting bloc. Retirees especially often have more time to focus on issues, call lawmakers, watch cable news, write letters to the editor, engage with local parties and candidates, and vote than their younger working counterparts.

So promising to protect - or better yet, expand - entitlement programs that seniors benefit from is a straightforward way for any politician to secure the support of a lot of enthusiastic voters, while even muttering a half-formed thought about potentially cutting them is almost certain to torpedo any campaign.

Meaning the conditions for the substantial growth of programs transferring money to seniors were already there. But, on top of that, the baby boomer generation - now making up most retirees - has grown old at the same time that medical technology advanced substantially. So, on top of being an unusually large generation, they are also living longer. That's, of course, a positive development. But in our increasingly socialized elder-care system that also puts a growing financial burden on younger generations.

Contrary to what the government's shockingly-effective propaganda says, the money seniors receive through Social Security is not their own money that had been taken from their previous paychecks and set aside to be returned to them in retirement. The money they "paid in" to the program had already been used for Social Security checks for earlier generations and other government programs. The money today's seniors are getting through the program is being taxed directly from today's younger workers - workers who are forced to pay for a much larger pool of Social Security recipients than the previous generations were.

Add to that the other programs like Medicare that don't even pretend to come from a "lockbox." Or the fact that some of these programs cover things like golf fees and ski trips. Or the various government programs explicitly helping seniors stay in full family-sized homes long after downsizing would make more financial sense while simultaneously pushing the price of those homes higher and higher. And the disproportionate burden younger generations experience from the Fed's permanent price inflation - especially the price inflation that came as a result of the trillions of dollars printed to prop things up as the federal government shut down the economy, the schools, and every aspect of life for younger generations to keep the elderly safe from a disease everyone was always going to get anyway. And, above all, much of this wealth is being transferred into the pockets of older Americans who are much wealthier than the younger people that are forced to pay for it.

Lay all that out, and it's easy to see why we are experiencing so much generational strife right now. How could there not be?

The justified frustration younger generations are experiencing with the current setup often gets directed towards the handful of exceptionally old politicians and justices at the top of all three branches of the government. But the true root of this problem lies in the intergenerational wealth-transferring government programs that have been built up over many decades. And that will, if not properly understood and subsequently abolished, continue to fuel this generational conflict long after the current group of geriatric politicians is gone.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/16/2026 - 22:35
Tyler Durden

zero rss