Some people appear to be “shocked” that President Trump during his recent World Economic Forum (WEF) address spoke about de-banking of political and ideological opponents in the US – but others, who have been observing that scene for years, are just shocked that anyone’s shocked.
Or is anybody? Certainly, virtually all corporate legacy media outlets are, or are pretending to be. Not to mention one giant Trump directly referred to, Bank of America, which is now saying it “welcomes conservatives” and “would never” deny its services to somebody for political reasons.
Bloomberg is calling any claims to the contrary “conspiracy theories” (that must appear to be a safe and easy way to discredit pretty much anything) – but, given all the evidence that has been accumulating over the years indicating that de-banking is very much a thing – the feverish attempts to discredit such claims come across as possibly, no more than a conspiracy of some description.
General Mike Flynn is one of those who are willing to speak about de-banking being as real as it gets, and calls assertions to the contrary – “total bullshit.”
“This is total bullshit. My wife and I lost our accounts with the Bank of Un-America. In nearly 30 years, never missed a mortgage payment, near perfect credit score, always paid my bills… they dropped us without warning. Strongest recommendation, dump them and use a credit union instead,” Flynn posted on X.
Flynn is one of a number of public figures in the US who are reacting to legacy media’s attempt at “retconning” the public on this particular issue, while Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott has urged both individuals and businesses that have been subjected to the practice in the past, to now come forward.
Meanwhile, Congressman James Comer, a Republican who chairs the House Oversight Committee, has confirmed that the accusations of political discrimination by major financial institutions are being investigated by that body as well.
“We’ve heard numerous instances of conservatives being debanked and what we want to know is this a process of the bank’s ESG policy,” he said, referring to the consideration of “environmental, social, and governance” factors.
Otherwise, the committee is curious if this might be “our (previous) government stepping in like what we found with Twitter and Facebook, where the government stepped in and said they wanted certain conservatives deplatformed and censored.”
For obvious legal reasons, it seems important to Comer to distinguish between the banks “simply” following some “bad liberal policy” they would have set out for themselves – as opposed to the former Democrat administration being directly involved.
When asked if he had evidence of banks actually denying services to conservatives, Comer replied:
“Yes, especially people that were involved in different energy type businesses and things like that, as well as very well spoken, outspoken conservative activists, so, there are numerous instances, enough to open an investigation.”
