This feels like another case where there should be legislation, but would never get done. It would also require admitting that auditing requirements are so burdensome that they are used to arbitrarily enforce policies, which no one wants to do.
This was actually a significant problem during the Biden administration.
The rules were so vague that de-banking could be used in whatever context the administration found convenient. Apparently many companies were pushed offshore as a result.
Of everything he's done with EOs, this might actually be the most legal one.
the President has authority to allocate enforcement resources. "We are going to make sure the law was followed" is that authority. He can dress it up with all the flowery "no political debanking" rhetoric he wants, but if there's no actual law against refusing to hold accounts for the KKK, there's nothing for enforcement to do, and that's that.
(Apart from that, increased scrutiny could of course uncover other kinds of lawbreaking. When we're talking banks? Not against that.)
unbanking is a very widespread issue that affect actual minorities all over the country. this text ignores that, then play the victim saying unbanking is affecting rich white people who want to obviously avoid taxes and launder money via illegal tokens, but are being denied because they are trump supporters. that's most definitely not unbanking, that's the system working as intended and the "because" part is obviously false. but now everything is upsidedown.
this is not about the kkk having bank accounts (they already do!). this will be another technicalities to be abused on the coming cryptocurrency fleece to end all cryptocurrency fleeces.
Both this and the other Trump EO that came out today (requiring colleges to report detailed race data to ensure they’re complying with SFFA) are good ideas and democrats should steal them. Don’t let Trump bait you into supporting Wall Street debanking people for their political views. That’s a total loser issue.
15 comments
[ 366 ms ] story [ 921 ms ] threadEarlier:
White House Preps Order to Punish Banks That Discriminate Against Conservatives
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44793168
Andreessen/Horowitz talk about it here
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=n_sNclEgQZQ
the President has authority to allocate enforcement resources. "We are going to make sure the law was followed" is that authority. He can dress it up with all the flowery "no political debanking" rhetoric he wants, but if there's no actual law against refusing to hold accounts for the KKK, there's nothing for enforcement to do, and that's that.
(Apart from that, increased scrutiny could of course uncover other kinds of lawbreaking. When we're talking banks? Not against that.)
unbanking is a very widespread issue that affect actual minorities all over the country. this text ignores that, then play the victim saying unbanking is affecting rich white people who want to obviously avoid taxes and launder money via illegal tokens, but are being denied because they are trump supporters. that's most definitely not unbanking, that's the system working as intended and the "because" part is obviously false. but now everything is upsidedown.
this is not about the kkk having bank accounts (they already do!). this will be another technicalities to be abused on the coming cryptocurrency fleece to end all cryptocurrency fleeces.
Well, don’t call Insurrection then!!