Adam Kinzinger: "Powell has the ability to calm the market, Trump's economic policy is from the '80s"

Adam Kinzinger shares his insights

One of the key components of investment strategy during global events like the US election and the new President is staying updated on any news developments that could impact the markets.

To mark Trump 2.0’s first 100 days and to provide our clients with unique insights covering the latest updates and changes to global markets, we’ve invited former Republican US Representative Adam Kinzinger to give us his take on the trending news stories.

After two decades in the US Air Force and 12 years as a representative of his home state of Illinois, he became a vocal critic of Donald Trump and was one of the 10 Republicans who voted to impeach Trump for incitement of insurrection in his second impeachment. He also voted to create, and was subsequently appointed to serve on, the select committee to investigate the 2021 Capitol attack and was pre-emptively pardoned by Joe Biden from future prosecution. After politics, he joined CNN as a senior political commentator and spoke at the Democratic National Convention ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

Who is Adam Kinzinger

Adam Daniel Kinzinger is an American politician, senior political commentator for CNN, and former lieutenant colonel in the Air National Guard. A member of the Republican Party, he served as a United States representative from Illinois from 2011 to 2023. After leaving office, he wrote the 2023 book Renegade: Defending Democracy and Liberty in Our Divided Country with fellow CNN journalist Michael D'Antonio. It captured one of the most transformative periods in recent political history in a personal account from inside Congress, including the January 6 attacks on the U.S. Capitol and his vote to impeach Donald Trump.

This is a transcript of the interview with Adam Kinzinger, which took place on 23 April 2025.

Can Jerome Powell and the Federal Reserve calm the markets?

Adam Kinzinger: Yes, I think they can. I think the biggest thing is that Jerome Powell has the ability to calm the markets. The question is, does Donald Trump keep attacking Powell when he doesn't like what he does, or does he finally let Powell continue to operate independently? I think that's going to be the lynchpin to the markets. Recently, they've [Trump’s administration] signalled that they're going to lay off Powell again, and that does a lot to calm markets. So, I think that's the real question there and we'll see what happens.

Has Trump gone mad with market power?

Adam Kinzinger: As Spider-Man's uncle said, with great power comes great responsibility, and I think Donald Trump truly, and I mean it, he got his economic policy in 1985. If you think of the United States in the '80s, the United States had the Ford Motor Company, which was struggling, and then Japan had their car makers which were doing very well as they were coming up in the '80s. And so the obsession in the mid-'80s was with the idea of a trade deficit. The United States is not exporting cars, but we are importing a lot. That's understandable in the context of the US auto industry being kind of the gold standard of the world. But the reality is, as the world has progressed, as the United States and frankly the West have become first-world nations that do not necessarily profit from putting screws in iPhones, the trade deficit has become less important.

So, what I think you're seeing now, keep in mind Donald Trump's base, I'd say about 50% to 60% of his actual base are hardcore MAGAs. He could do anything on national TV, and people wouldn't care. But there's a significant amount of the Republican base that voted for him because they thought he was better on the economy than Joe Biden. Maybe they're typically Republican like I am, and they thought Biden was bad on the economy. These are the people he can lose and is losing at this moment.

Yes, the market shakes people, but the market is just an emotional tool. The reality is that the market goes down. It's going to come up someday when people decide it's time to come up—it's a canary in the coal mine—but it's a temporary thing.

It was the long-term bond yields that really scared this administration. You think about the United States of America, with the dollar being the reserve currency of the world, and the fact that we're USD 36 trillion in debt. The reason we can sustain that debt is that the world looks at us and says that it is a safe place to invest. Even with the debt, as long as they believe it's a safe place to invest, we can sustain the debt. They started to not think that, and what you saw in these 10-year bond yields was an increase when it should have gone down. I think that did more to shake Donald Trump than the stock market reaction.

But to see that and recognise that the US has to refinance USD 8–10 trillion in debt in the next few months, and now all of a sudden, you're doing it at higher interest rates. We're already spending more in interest on our debt than on national defence, and so, I think that was the thing that probably shook him and his allies the most.

With Musk stepping away from Trump, what do you think this means for Trump, Musk, and their respective business interests?

Adam Kinzinger: They [Tesla] recently reported earnings down 71% in the first quarter. You don't have that in a company unless you're in floppy disks, and they just invented the hard disk. That is not for an electric car company that makes a pretty good product. So, that is 100% related to Elon Musk and his controversy.

So, I think he truly does care, and I think he's panicking a little bit. Frankly, this is great for America that he's stepping out because one of the things that has angered me and most Americans is the richest man in the world—who will probably be the first trillionaire at this rate in the world ever—is the one with a chainsaw on stage telling Americans what they can live without in government.

Everything he's cutting and the jobs he's cutting, he probably makes in 10 seconds in interest on his own wealth, and so I think it is good that he leaves. He doesn't understand government and the problem with these tech bros is they did some things really well, but they think that makes them experts in everything and, I'm sorry, you may be really good at inventing cars or rockets, but that doesn't mean you understand how government works. So I think this is ultimately good for the United States that he steps away but he'll probably be replaced with some other clown somewhere.

What's the worst-case scenarios that could arise from Trump's time as president look like? How bad could things get?

Adam Kinzinger: Yeah, I think it can get pretty bad. I feel like, to an extent, he's starting to stall a little bit, which is good, but that doesn't mean he's stalled. It doesn't mean there's not going to be more crises.

This is far worse than I imagined it could be quite honestly, in terms of the brazenness and the outright disregard for norms, for institutions and everything else. The big real crisis point will be determined by what happens when the Supreme Court, which seems to be right now pretty aggressively pushing back against him, what happens when they do something he doesn't like, and does he follow that order or does he refuse it? I think that is the lynchpin that will determine if we are in a real crisis or not.

It's one thing to say to the Supreme Court that ‘I don't agree’ and I think honestly that moment could come within the next few weeks.

Do you believe the Supreme Court’s Republican/Conservative/Trumpian bias will favour Trump?

Adam Kinzinger: So they're not the same. Within the Supreme Court, I think there are a couple that are probably more Trumpian. That would be Samo [Samuel A. Alito, Jr.] and Justice [Clarence] Thomas.

But if you look at something extraordinary that happened a handful of days ago, the Supreme Court made the decision, literally the fastest decision I've ever seen the Supreme Court make, as the administration is getting ready to deport more people to El Salvador. The Supreme Court at 1:00 am, which, again, maybe it's happened before, but I've never seen it, put out a 7–2 decision to stop that movement.

This means two things. It means number one, they're paying attention. So everything happening in the news means they're very concerned about what the administration is doing. So I think we can take some heart from the fact that at 1:00 am, 7 to 2 of the justices said this has to stop. And I think we're starting to see much better indications out of the Supreme Court than maybe we did at the beginning.

But I don't think there will be a 9 to 0 decision in the court because there are a couple that are certainly favourable to Trump, but I do think it's at least a 5–4 to 6–3 sanity majority on the court.

On 4 April, Adam Kinzinger sent the following message on X: “Dear MAGA: Your great leader is finally doing what he promised on tariffs. Let’s see how this goes. Let’s see if all your wishes are coming true.” How does he think it is going so far? Are MAGA supporters listening to reason? Any evidence they realise the policies are going to hurt them?

Adam Kinzinger: First off, I think that MAGA is kind of waking up. Not completely yet—we're still in the first 100 days. Even if you get 150 days, humans are not willing to admit they were wrong in that short of time. And they may never admit they were wrong. Even if they start to know it inside, they'll find a reason [not to admit it]. I don't expect there to be a great, come-to-Jesus moment for them, but there will be a disappointment. And the thing about Donald Trump is when you see him as a god-like figure and all of a sudden you see he's human and he's fallible, that's when you collapse. That's the danger of being a cult leader or a godlike figure; you have to be perfect. Because the second you're not perfect, you're showing your fallibility. So that's where he's exposed.

Any encouraging signs as we approach the first 100 days, that the grown-ups in the administration are having some influence on Trump?

Adam Kinzinger: In terms of any green shoots out there, I'm seeing a few. If you'd have talked to me 20 days ago, I'd have been much more pessimistic. Even though I'm still seeing real danger out there, I see somebody like Scott Bessett who's pulled Trump back on the tariffs a little bit, which means he has some version of influence, so that's good.

I'm also seeing a lot of Americans hitting the streets, and that is really important in this country. It's not just a rally in New York. What you're seeing right now are Americans hitting the streets in every city and small town in the country. We have millions out there, and it's only been a hundred or some days. And so, what that says to me is America's fed up. They're standing up. And that is actually the most powerful thing to defend our democracy.

And of course, the last guardrail that exists at this moment is the Supreme Court, which appears to be holding. The biggest disappointment in the United States of America is Congress. Congress is Article One of the Constitution, which means it's the most important. The job of the president really is national defence and to execute the laws of Congress. What we've done, temporarily at least, is we've created an emperor. And I think America is going to see that the emperor has no clothes.

What comes after Trump 2.0 for the Republican Party?

Adam Kinzinger: In terms of the Republican party after Trump, I don't think anybody knows. Donald Trump is uniquely capable of shamelessness. So even if you see JD Vance, he goes and does something stupid, and he takes hits for it, right? Donald Trump has the ability to do something stupid and get away with it. So he's uniquely powerful in that. There's nobody who's going to be like Trump or have the spell that Trump has. The question is: does the party wake up and go back to the party of Reagan, or does it continue this populist thing?

The answer will come when we see how badly they get crushed in 2028, where America resoundingly says we don't want that brand. Then I think they will have to have a come-to-Jesus moment. If their answer in 2028 is that it was pretty close, I think we'll be stuck in the cycle for a little bit.

Who do you think will be President in 2028?

Adam Kinzinger: If I had to predict, I don't have names because I think whoever we're talking about today will not be president. If you look back at the American tradition—with the exception of course of an incumbent's running again—typically at this time when you're talking about who's going to be the candidate in three or four years, it's never that person so how can I describe who I think the next president's going to be.

They’ll probably be a Democrat and I would like to think and it may be a Democrat that runs unabashedly as a centrist Democrat because I think the concern I have with the Democrats right now is that they're going to come up with the wrong idea that the answer is to run a Bernie Sanders or an AOC [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez].

And look, America didn't turn against the Democrats because they weren't liberal enough. They turned against them because they were playing identity politics. And so, if you have another conservative Democrat in the mold of Bill Clinton without the interns, for instance, I think the Democratic Party will win and I think it can maintain some dominance in this country winning back blue-collar voters, which they have lost, and winning back men, which they've lost. So I do think that if I had to describe the candidate, that's what it would be.

How likely do you feel peace between Ukraine and Russia is within Trump’s presidency?

Adam Kinzinger: Within Trump's presidency, the war will end. The question is how? As Ronald Reagan said, we can have peace, and we can have it this next second. Surrender, right?

So if the demand on Ukraine is to surrender to Russia and give them everything they want with no security guarantees, we'll have peace per se, but it's not a peaceful situation. I think if Ukraine is allowed to defend itself through the rest of the year, Russia has run out of offensive combat power. There's no world in which Russia breaks through the lines and occupies Kyiv. And so I think the best thing we can do is, and it probably will be up to Europe now, is to continue to supply Ukraine as best they can.

But I do think within Trump's presidency, there will be an end to the war because frankly, both sides will want it. It's like a boxer in the 10th round. They're both just kind of hanging on each other, swinging occasionally, and that's really where the war is right now.

What do you think Trump's most likely mistake is that will trigger WW3?

Adam Kinzinger: Trump’s biggest mistake may be underestimating Vladimir Putin. We're hearing about these offers that the United States is making to Ukraine, which is basically everything Russia wants and they're on the edge of losing in Ukraine. This is the most insane thing.

The worst thing the administration can do is not confront Russia. Russia doesn't want World War III either. The worst thing they can do is send the message that we're not interested or engaged.

What does that mean? That means that Russia has to make a decision to challenge the Baltics and maybe attack through a grey area to determine if NATO really stands up. That could obviously trigger World War III.

We’re creating a trade war where our allies are actually having to make deals with our enemies like China, because we're taking on the entire world at this time. Those are the kinds of things when the United States finds itself isolated and without allies that I actually think make conflict more likely.

And domestically, the things that make conflict more likely are if the Trump administration makes the decision that the court system doesn't matter or that the president is a king.

And in the United States of America, we don't have a king, and a president isn't even an emperor; he's somebody who technically works for Congress. I would love to see Congress take its power back. That's not going to happen anytime soon.

In light of the fallout from the Zelenskyy meeting and the leaked Signal messages showing hostile opinions about Europe/the EU from some within Trump’s inner circle, how do you foresee the Trump administration navigating relations with the bloc—particularly when it comes to brokering peace between Russia and Ukraine?

Adam Kinzinger: I think they're navigating it pretty poorly. I think Europe as a collective, including the United Kingdom, has basically an economy the size of the United States. And the United States economy is the biggest in the world. You put these two together, natural allies, Europe, the UK, the United States, and let's even throw Australia and New Zealand in there, there is nobody that could challenge us. But when we decide to alienate ourselves from our allies, it's obvious at that point that we're going to find ourselves in real trouble. So, I think the administration is handling our friendships very poorly.

And I think when you hear things like Peter Hegseth complaining on the Signal chat that Europe is not doing enough to defend the Red Sea, I want to remind people of a couple of things. Up until the Trump administration, every time we struck the Houthis, we usually had the Brits and the French with us on that, which would also strike.

Secondly, the United States Navy has made it clear that we are the entity that will defend the freedom of navigation of the seas. We've told this to Europe, "Hey guys, focus on whatever and the Navy will cover the sea. We'd love to have you with us in certain areas, but don't worry. The United States Navy owns the freedom of navigation of the seas." So to then turn around to Europe and say, why aren't you working with us to defend the navigation of the seas is unfair. If you want Europe to defend that with us, great.

And also, don't be shocked when Europe now has demands of their own in terms of access to things like the Suez Canal. So, look, this administration does not understand the promises we've made. My hope is that our friendships can last through the next three and a half years until we get somebody better who recognises the importance of that friendship.

Is Donald Trump in thrall to Vladimir Putin and if so why?

Adam Kinzinger: Yes, I do think Trump's enthralled with Putin. I'm not one of those who necessarily goes off to think that he's a KGB spy, but if you look at who Donald Trump is, this is a guy where narcissism is actually a generous word for him. He's a psychopath times two or whatever that is.

If you look at that and you understand the psychology, he sees somebody like Xi of China or Vladimir Putin, who seem to have control over their country, and he admires that because, to him, everything that happens in the United States of America, if it's beneficial for our country, great. That's a side product of what is beneficial for him. He sees how somebody like Putin can rule with an iron fist and stay in office for 20 years, and I think he just admires that.

The other thing is, despite the fact that he can tweet in all caps and that he's a loud guy, he's actually very, very intimidated. He's intimidated very easily. You see that with, for instance, the Iran deal, which they're getting ready to try to codify, which is basically the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action] that he railed against in the first administration, because he doesn't want to confront Iran.

I think a peace deal is better than a confrontation, but he has no desire to use the American military because he's honestly a coward. And I think you just have to understand that with him, his ability to tweet in all caps is not indicative of his actual internal courage.

As the 100th day of his administration approaches, do you believe Donald Trump sees the UK as a genuine strategic ally, or is he more likely to leverage the relationship—including royal pageantry—for personal legacy and political gain?

Adam Kinzinger: Trump is always looking to gain personally. I know he has some property in Scotland, so I'm sure whatever helps him there, he's going to do that. The rule with Donald Trump is what is going to benefit him first and foremost, and that's what he’ll do. I truly think he believes that there is a special relationship with the UK. I don't think that's one in danger.

I think given our tightness [between the US and UK], the UK, for instance, monitors some things intelligence-wise that the United States has chosen not to because it's a UK speciality. Obviously, we [the US] can do the same in certain areas that the UK can't. I just think we're drawn together so tightly that it would be very hard for us to lose that relationship. But honestly, if you want to get to Donald Trump's heart, start playing golf in the United States of America, and give him a whole bunch of money. That's the way to do it, unfortunately.

Will King Charles be able to mend bridges between the UK and US ahead of Trump’s state visit in September?

Adam Kinzinger: I do think the king can do that. I think the Prime Minister has the ability to do that as well. Because the thing to keep in mind is that we can have differences, as the UK and the U.S. and we even did in World War II for God's sakes, but the alliance is like no other alliance ever in history.

Particularly with a King standing with Donald Trump, there's going to be something that impresses him about that. So I think he [King Charles] does have the ability to influence him. What I would encourage the King, if I were daring enough to give him advice, is—obviously show whatever respect you do as a King to a President, but be very strong in your defence of Ukraine, for instance, and the partnership in the alliance. And I think Trump could listen to that.

There are many Bitcoin advocates in the US legislative and executive branches these days, however, you have been taking a less 'optimistic' stance on BTC, claiming that it will not be the salvation of the US or the US debt, can we say that the same is true of dollar-backed stablecoins?

Adam Kinzinger: [Being asked about Bitcoin not being the salvation for the US debt] Right. Yeah. [Views on a dollar-backed stablecoin] The dollar-backed stablecoin I think is a little different in that it has inherent value as far as I understand.

I still think when it comes to where my concern is when we talk about a crypto reserve for instance in the United States, are we doing that because it's benefiting the United States—and I don't necessarily know the answer—or are we doing it because in order for these folks that have invested in a lot of this crypto to keep gaining value, you have to keep gaining investors. And are we tapped out? And now what's the best investment venue ever? The federal government. And so is that the reason? I would just say so, the stablecoin is unique to me. It's something that could potentially have more value than Bitcoin or any of these meme coins because something is backing it.

In terms of Bitcoin, one of the worries I have is with a strategic currency reserve is what does that actually mean? Are we really going to use it by taking seized Bitcoin and use that? I'm fine with that. That's great. Or is it going to be used eventually as a venue for US taxpayer dollars to continue to invest in some of these cryptocurrencies that continue to make them rise so that people can sell out? Because ultimately, if you can leave the taxpayer holding the bag, everybody with the money will profit. And so that's my concern there.

I think we really do, as a world, honestly and as an investor community, as a country, we need to wrestle with the fact of what is inherently backing cryptocurrency. Is it being used for its original purpose or is it just a conveyance for investment? And if it's just a conveyance for investment, you're kind of playing a little game of blackjack at the casino.

There has been an increasing legislative push for comprehensive and crypto-friendly regulation. Do you think these efforts are going in a positive direction, and what are the key areas legislators should be focusing on?

Adam Kinzinger: If you think about how crypto started, it was a way to make payments that weren't trackable. Now it's a legitimate currency, especially when you look at Bitcoin, that has a role, but for the most part, crypto is not being used for very much in terms of actual purchases or sales or anything like that. It's become a commodity with no real value. And that's the interesting thing is—what is the value people are willing to pay for it.

I do think Bitcoin has some inherent value behind it. It has seemed to hold its level. But when you start with memecoins, what you end up doing is saying, "Look, I'm going to start an Adam Kinzinger memecoin and see if anybody out there wants to put money on it and I'll profit from it." I mean, we saw the Hawk Tuah girl do it. We see Donald Trump do it.

In a free market economy, people can do whatever they want. If you want to put your money into a memecoin—great. I don't think it's a great investment, personally, but if you want to play and ride that until the ship drops, you can do that. The concern I have with crypto is the level of corruption that can come with it. And this is why I think there's got to be a middle ground between transparency in crypto, but also understanding that it has a unique role.

Trump’s WLFI has attracted concerns, especially among Democratic legislators, for potential conflicts of interest. You have been a vocal critic of Trump. What is your view on these criticisms? With President Trump involved in the crypto industry directly, is there a risk that legislators may be under pressure to pass legislation that favors Trump’s businesses? What can they do to make sure that legislation protects investors while also being fair to all industry players?

Adam Kinzinger: When Donald Trump, for instance, has a Chinese crypto investor who basically invests eight figures into a Trump cryptocurrency and then a week later, the Securities and Exchange Commission drops a case against him having to do with crypto scamming, that's a huge problem, and this is my concern.

My other concern with crypto is not what it means between Joe Blow over here and Joe Public over here and their interactions with each other. What I am concerned about is when it is used as a conveyance for corruption. There is nothing that will destroy the trust in a democracy more than corruption.

I honestly think that when this administration is over, we're going to be stunned at the level of corruption there was in this administration. And I think crypto will have played a role in that because they've recognised how to hide some of this. Why is it that Trump Jr. is involved in apparently every crypto investment? Eventually, you have to start asking questions.

So what I would like to see the government do is, in a perfect world, to actually have some version of oversight while maintaining the original purpose of crypto, but having a way to defend against particularly public service corruption, because I think that's the thing that can destroy countries more than anything.