Bank of America denies it debanks customers for religious views, says nothing about whether it debanks for political views
Famously 'woke' Bank of America has been on the hot seat among a group of state attorneys general, who've demanded information about whom it debanks and why, charging that they target conservatives and faith communities.
According to Fox News:
Over a dozen Republican attorneys general are warning a major U.S. bank against alleged practices of "de-banking" certain customers because of their religious or political views.
In a letter obtained exclusively by Fox News Digital, Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, along with 14 of his Republican colleagues told Bank of America CEO Brian T. Moynihan that the company "appears to be conditioning access to its services on customers having the bank’s preferred religious or political views."
"Your discriminatory behavior is a serious threat to free speech and religious freedom, is potentially illegal, and is causing political and regulatory backlash," the letter sent Monday states. "Your bank needs to be transparent with and assure us, its shareholders, and others that it will not continue to de-bank customers for their speech or religious exercise," the AGs wrote.
They laid out a pretty persuasive case for debanking of various individuals, some of them pretty innocuous-sounding, such as a Memphis religious-based Africa aid group called Indigenous Advance. They've also debanked gun sellers, gun makers, fossil fuel companies, and companies that run private prisons, all entities with many conservatives in them.
In what looks like a direct political hit, they've found themselves in the news for debanking leading Constitutional scholar John Eastman without explanation after he had been a faithful customer for 40 years, who is well-known for serving as President Trump's lawyer and advisor during the events of January 6. USAA, another bank, this one known for serving the military community, also debanked Eastman without explanation, which looked pretty political.
The AGs' letter didn't cite that -- it cited reports that the bank handed over personal information on its customers, such as where they shopped, without a subpoena and without notifying them, to the FBI and Treasury investigators in some of their Biden-led quests for domestic 'terrorists' and 'extremists' on the right.
The letter notes that it's not just Bank of America -- seven of the top 10 banks are doing the same, including the top three, creating de facto social credit scores, like China has, and penalizing disfavored political and religious groups. But Bank of America, the letter argued, was more blatant about it and had a longer and more extensive history of it than most.
The AGs also noted that such behavior was against the law, and exposed the bank to substantial lawsuits.
Bank of America is exposing itself to numerous legal risks by engaging in de-banking. It is opening itself up to potential legal liability under consumer protection and antidiscrimination laws, and creating substantial regulatory and political risk from states that are already taking action to stop debanking.
Kris Kobach, the Kansas state attorney general who wrote the letter on behalf of attorneys general from 15 states, gave Fox this statement about the matter:
"Bank of America’s practice of canceling the bank accounts of conservatives and even turning over information about customer’s purchases to federal law enforcement undermines free speech, religious freedom, and the right to privacy," Kobach told Fox News Digital. "It’s discriminatory and likely illegal. As state attorneys general, we will vigorously defend the constitutional rights of all Americans when they are threatened by big business."
The most interesting thing here is when Fox Digital decided to ask the banks some questions.
Questioned by Fox News about its practices, Bank of America denied it engaged in the practice of targeting religious and conservative customers, sounding weirdly Christopher Wray-like in its mild-mannered insistence that it would never do such a thing. Instead of sending the CEO or someone in power to say this to them, it sent a lowly 'media relations representative' to Fox to answer their queries.
Media relations representative, Bill Halldin, denied the claims in a statement saying, "Religious beliefs are not a factor in any account-closing decision."
Now, I would like to see the entire canned statement he made on the grounds that maybe he explicitly denied political persecution, too, but I can't imagine that Fox wouldn't print it if he did.
The lowly flak denied religious persecution but actually said nothing about political targeting, which by default suggests that maybe they do politically target their customers with all the financial data they collect on them, and can buy from other sources, too.
That presents a pretty ugly picture actually, and as the AGs noted, an illegal one, too, given federal laws against discrimination, plus all the bank bailouts with taxpayer cash they have been given, along with federal support for all kinds of banking needs. They should be a public-spirited and nonpartisan company, yet it's strange that they are not.
Maybe it's not them who are doing this.
Banks are highly sensitive, highly regulated entities so this suggests is that Joe Biden's White House is putting the political squeeze on them in the style of: 'Do this, or we will have regulators all over your Monopoly-man keister.'
That they didn't say anything about not politically monitoring their customers may mean that the main living corpse of politics, Joe Biden, is behind this, because we all know that he does target political opponents, everything from cheating in elections to fostering Zuckerbucks, to giving marching orders to social media platforms, to meeting with state prosecutors and giving them the 'go fetch' instructions to Get Trump. The latest news is that Eric Ciaramella, the so-called whistleblower of the first Trump impeachment, was deep in bed with the Biden camp well before that 'whistleblower' shot was fired to protect Hunter Biden and his corrupt dealings in Ukraine and take down Trump.
That USAA is also accused of this behavior suggests political persecution directed by the White House even more, because they aren't a wokester bank and seek out conservative customers, largely marketing themselves by waving the American flag.
All of a sudden, they're targeting conservatives, too?
So in a way, it looks as if Bank of America may have let the cat out of the bag about banks' political targeting of customers, which does indeed open it to lawsuits and certainly doesn't help its own reputation or its business with half the customer base of the country. A smart executive would steer clear of such practices, but somehow BoA does not, and it doesn't even deny it to Fox Digital, which would seem like a no-brainer if they weren't.
This points to political marching orders from the White House, in illegal business meddling, crony capitalism, and corporate statism of the worst kind. The banks ought to resist it to protect themselves, but let's just say they're no Elon Musk challenging Brazil.
It may mean that they have no fear of lawsuits because Biden is 'protecting' them.
Which paints a really ugly picture of the rot in the banking system and the state AGs should spare no expense in trying to get to the bottom of what's really going on here. Who is targeted? How do they pick whom to target? Why do they not care about potential lawsuits?
The trail through wokester banks they find may well lead to Joe Biden's White House.
Image: Pixabay / Pixabay License