Chase Bank’s motto “What Matters Most” took on a menacing meaning this week after Michael Flynn claimed that the bank canceled his account and the credit card due to the “possible reputational risk to our company.” If true, the report is a chilling expansion of the role of private companies to isolate and harass those with controversial views in our society. As shown with censorship, such private enforcement of speech controls has proven far more dangerous and effective than the traditional government programs. Indeed, the move would show how a type of Chinese “social scoring” could easily take hold in the United States.
While I was highly critical of the handling of his prosecution, I have also been highly critical of former national security Michael Flynn and his reckless rhetoric in the wake of the 2020 election. However, it is precisely his unpopularity that is allegedly the reason for Chase taking action against him.
This remains only an allegation by Flynn since there is no confirmation from Chase or additional supporting material. Some have noted issues with the postings to suggest that the notice may not be directed at Flynn. However, neither Flynn nor Chase have publicly denied the account.
On Sunday, Flynn posted a message from Chase informing him that it is severing its banking ties with him “because continuing the relationship creates possible reputational risk to our company.” The partially redacted letter, dated Aug. 20, stated that the bank’s action would be effective on Sept. 18.
Chase bank has refused to respond to media inquiries on the matter.
Such an action would be chilling for free speech. In China, a “social credit system” was announced in 2014, is “an important component part of the Socialist market economy system and the social governance system.” According to a 2015 government document, the program was designed to reinforce for citizens that “keeping trust is glorious and breaking trust is disgraceful.”
In the last few years, we have seen an increasing call for private censorship from Democratic politicians and liberal commentators. Faculty and editors are now actively supporting modern versions of book-burning with blacklists and bans for those with opposing political views. Columbia Journalism School Dean Steve Coll has denounced the “weaponization” of free speech, which appears to be the use of free speech by those on the right. So the dean of one of the premier journalism schools now supports censorship.Free speech advocates are facing a generational shift that is now being reflected in our law schools, where free speech principles were once a touchstone of the rule of law. As millions of students are taught that free speech is a threat and that “China is right” about censorship, these figures are shaping a new society in their own intolerant images.
The most chilling aspect of this story is how many on left applaud such censorship. A new poll shows roughly half of the public supporting not just corporate censorship but government censorship of anything deemed “misinformation.” Perhaps the same citizens and academics will embrace the Chinese model on social scoring and praise actions that the reported move by Chase bank.
If Chase has taken this step, it could increase pressure on other companies in our “cancel culture” to refuse to do business with others deemed personas non grata. Dissidents and controversial figures would face greater and greater isolation — a deterrent for others who consider voicing unpopular views.
We have already seen the social media companies seek to effectively disappear those who challenge corporate or government viewpoints on subjects ranging from climate change to election fraud to Covid-19. Corporate banishment would ratchet up this pressure by making it difficult for people to travel and function in society. A thousand “Little Brothers” have already been found to be more dangerous than one “Big Brother” in terms of free speech. This could easily make the Chinese social scoring look tame in comparison if the cancel culture starts to target banks and other essential areas for unpopular figures like Flynn.
Again, we see that so-called free market capitalists are not in favor of the free-market. If you don’t like how a company does business, then don’t use that business. But Turley being Turley has to play the victim card for the cult, knowing that the cry babies will whine about how they are picked on, poor babies……
Yeah right. Your economic panties are showing. The free market doesn’t care about political leanings. It cares about profits in the main and freedom to contract — both ideas under assault by the leftist tomfoolery on display here.
Mespo, the free marked doesn’t care if Flynn is b_tthurt over a bank deciding not to do business with him. Luckily, the free market is all about choices. Obviously Flynn has plenty of choices with other banks. Even foreign ones.
Russian
Sounds like a great case for a business attorney who is hungry and wishing to make a name for themselves.
Even if they win this case, they have already lost their reputation. How ironic.
Fish,
JP Morgan/Chase isn’t anything near a Free Market Capitalist!
JP Morgan is one of the Globalist/Commie Mafia Leaders with never ending racketeering operations.
IE: It’s a Felony for anyone to sell/pledge Securities/Collateral they don’t own & control deliver. JPM/Chase does it all the time.
Just look at all the Felonies they’ve plead guilty as a company to in recent years, MBS, commodity markets, etc., but none of Mgt has went to prison for those crimes they’ve committed.
IE: It’s a Felony for anyone to sell/pledge Securities/Collateral they don’t own & ” Can Not Deliver.” JPM/Chase does it all the time.
“We have seen the enemy and he is us” — plus the Chinese Communist Party and their globalist apparatchiks like Chase. It’s long past time for talk. It’s time to act to permanently boycott these tyrants and set up our own parallel institutions with our values and traditions.
“set up our own parallel institutions with our own values and traditions” So what is that? Your form of fascism, or some kind of socialism? Parallel institutions has been done before, didn’t work out so well for the Confederacy.
No it’s called the free market.
Mespo says:
“It’s called the free market.”
No, it’s called cancel culture. Welcome to our side!
It would actually be a free market and welcome all speech. It would still believe that individual liberties are protected by the Constitution. It wouldn’t allow businesses to discriminate based on political affiliation and would add political affiliation as public accommodation and not allow political views as a basis for discrimination in hiring or deny services. Many state protect a long list of groups which you cannot discriminate with. LGBTQ+ hair style, transgender, military discharge, protecting ex-convicts from basing hiring decisions bc of a person’s arrest record, religion, race, sex. The situation in the country has been created by the left, that now necessitates, protection of political ideas. Equal enforcement of laws. Under the current law, Amazon or Facebook could decide not to serve people of color or who live in NY bc the Mayor and governor of disgusting. No law prevents big tech from doing that—do you stand for the idea that businesses can discriminate against any person or group?
Turley sure likes to make a lot of hay over something that is still an allegation according to him. Turley doesn’t know the circumstances of why chase chose to close his account. Michael Flynn, is known to be a prolific consumerist of conspiracy theories and all that jazz. He’s also known to have pushed for martial law in order to overturn the election results. A form of free speech censorship in itself.
Turley is sure fond of criticizing private companies who exercise their right to manage their business as they see fit. No private company can violate your constitutional right to free speech because the constitution’s free speech prohibitions are solely prohibitions on government. He knows that. What does Turley want? He can’t call for mandating private companies be regulated by restricting their own free speech rights.
What Turley doesn’t realize is that this new “era” of private entities exercising censorship is due to the increasing prevalence of deliberate lying and misinformation. The Trump administration ushered an unprecedented expansion of pushing falsehoods that are literally harmful to communities and the nation as a whole. Fighting such lying and misinformation with “more speech” has its limits and Turley thinks this old fashioned approach is sufficient. Sadly that is not true anymore. Censoring by private companies is perfectly legal and even backed by conservative courts.
Turley is also a massive hypocrite. He bemoans the ability of private companies to censor what they deem harmful or defaming their company’s reputation while he remains conspicuously silent on state legislatures actively suppressing free speech when they enact bans on teaching critical race theory or its controversial ideas. Many legislatures trying to frame such bans as protecting children from “indoctrination” while being careful not to admit what they are really doing, engaging in censorship of an idea. An action that is clearly unconstitutional. It’s just a matter of time before someone challenges the constitutionality of such bans.
Simple, if it is legal, the banks have to service it. As for CRT, that is considered to be the latest hip thing. If CRT is okay, so
should the KKK be allowed to come into schools and lecture.
Aquietday,
“ Simple, if it is legal, the banks have to service it. ”
No. There’s a simple premise that prevents that from being a requirement. Nobody has a constitutional right to have a bank account. A bank is not required to keep a customer if they pose a problem. Flynn has a history of sketchy and questionable actions. If a bank thinks it’s not in their best interest to have him as a customer they have absolutely no obligation to keep him as a customer. They can give him his money back, close the account and Flynn can go put his money and conduct his banking needs with someone else. Even a foreign bank if he wants to. He has plenty of other choices. Flynn lashing out at Chase and making a scene about it is his way of throwing a fit. We don’t know exactly why Chase decided to part ways with him, but there is more to it than what Flynn is alleging. Flynn is already known for lying and pushing crazy conspiracy theories. His claims should be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Actually, they do have to provide services to all. It’s a condition tied to Federal Deposit Insurance.
They have to offer services to all. Not provide them.
The FDIC’s requirements don’t stipulate that a bank must retain an account against it’s will or policy. You can’t force a bank to do business with you.
Now that’s a hot take on Jim Crow and the Civil Rights Act meant to put an end to it!
I wonder if a bank has successfully used this as a defense in court ….
“ If CRT is okay, so
should the KKK be allowed to come into schools and lecture.”
CRT is an academic theory often discussed in universities. The KKK is an organization promoting white supremacy. Two very different things. CRT doesn’t promote superiority of one race over another. It merely discusses that impact of racism and its continued influence in the country’s legal system and its founding.
CRT is a theory that presumes diversity [dogma] (i.e. color judgment) and normalizes it under a diagnostic pretense. It furthers the handmade tales that discuss the prevalence of diversity in the legal system and nation’s founding.
“CRT doesn’t promote superiority of one race over another.”
That is partly correct, though not in the way that you imagine.
CRT argues that Blacks are by nature weak, helpless, inferior (the perpetually “oppressed”). Whites, it argues, are by nature strong, able, superior (the perpetual “oppressors”). And *on that basis*, CRT concludes that Blacks deserve to be rewarded, e.g., with special considerations and favors (appointments, money, admissions, etc.) And that Whites deserve to be punished, e.g., by foregoing those appointments and admissions, and by coughing up that money.
No matter how you slice it, though, CRT is by its nature a racist ideology.
Sam,
“ CRT argues that Blacks are by nature weak, helpless, inferior (the perpetually “oppressed”). ”
CRT doesn’t make that claim at all. It makes none of the claims you posed.
That initial claim is more in line with the KKK’s own beliefs.
So, is it legal for a private company to censor speech? What about political speech?
Does the constitution prohibit private companies from censoring speech or any other form of expression?
The banks, bakers have to provide reasonable accommodation, short of endorsement.
CRT is a popular academic and sociopolitical theory that presumes and normalizes diversity [dogma] (i.e. color judgment), not limited to racism.
Some, Select [Black] Lives Matter has invaded neighborhoods to intimidate families and residents, carried out insurrections in cities and capitols, and normalized diversity, inequity, and exclusion.
Sevvy:
With all these complaints (unfounded for the vast majority) about our host, one wonders why anyone with an open mind would stick around? Ooops I’ve answered my own question.
Mespo,
“ With all these complaints (unfounded for the vast majority) about our host,…”
Which ones are you referring to? How are they unfounded?
Mespo,
I stick around to acquaint myself with Trumpist and Q-Anon subcultures because none live in my affluent area. I have been told repeatedly that I should listen to the forgotten man and hear his grievances. I feel it’s my civic duty.
Are you telling me I should just listen but keep my mouth shut?
Dear Svelaz: I smiled at your post. First of all, the good professor allows us to air our differences over his thought-provoking posts. He even prints personal attacks and name-calling against him, such as yours. Conversely, and without attacking you, I refer to your negative comments about Trump. I’m sure that someone as unbiased and fair-minded as you is fully aware of Joe Biden’s reputation for lies, plagiarism, and crude/ugly attacks on anyone who challenges him, including voters attending town-hall-style campaigns?
Lin,
Turley never engages with anyone on his own blog. So it’s impossible to assert that he “attacks” me.
“ He even prints personal attacks and name-calling against him, such as yours. ”
Yes he does and that’s the nature of this blog. I often see too many people conflating criticism with a personal attack and I have not done so on this column. One can denigrate or mock Turley for his hypocrisy or outright ignorance at times. Things that he is certainly guilty of when it’s obvious. Pointing it out is a consequence of exercising his own right to express his views. Free speech is not freedom from consequences of exercising it. Free speech involves personal responsibility for what you say too.
“ Conversely, and without attacking you, I refer to your negative comments about Trump. I’m sure that someone as unbiased and fair-minded as you is fully aware of Joe Biden’s reputation for lies, plagiarism, and crude/ugly attacks on anyone who challenges him, including voters attending town-hall-style campaigns?”
Of course, challenging Trump’s claims and criticizing his claims doesn’t excuse Biden’s own flawed rationales. He’s fair game, just as Trump is. The problem is those who bring up Biden’s lies, plagiarism, and crude ugly attacks on anyone who challenges him and criticize it have no grounds to complain given most accepted and justified the same behavior from Trump. If they found Trump’s own lying and crude ugly attacks on others as acceptable and didn’t bother to criticize him for it, but they now have a problem with Biden doing it they are in no position to complain. They enabled that behavior and accepted the fact that Trump did it too, far more egregiously I might add. Why should Biden’s own behavior that trump engaged in be an issue?
Svelaz: (1) calling someone a “massive hypocrite” is not conflation,- it is name-calling. (2) please identify by date and post all instances in which you criticized Biden for his lies, plagiarism or crude/ugly attacks. You seem to enjoy your efforts to wax prolix with pseudo-authority and then attempt to elicit validation (p.s., an observation, not a criticism), so it’s likely you saved all your posts and are able to respond. (3) so the remainder of your posts I will not address.
Lin,
“ Svelaz: (1) calling someone a “massive hypocrite” is not conflation,- it is name-calling.”
Nope, because calling him a massive hypocrite is describing the truth of his behavior as I explained in regards to legislation prohibiting the teaching of CRT. It’s literally government banning the discussion of what the theories assert. His criticism of social media’s platforms censoring or removing content as private entities as unjust or wrong because they are controlling what they deem against their policies despite his full awareness that it is well within their right to do so. Calling him a massive hypocrite is a correct description of his position. It’s not name calling. If I were to call Turley a moron because of his position I would certainly be guilty of the charge.
Lin, demanding I give you the proof you desire in order to justify my prior post in such detail is a poor attempt at rebuttal.
I can tell you I don’t agree with Biden’s ideas all the time or claim he is honest all the time. It should suffice to say I’m at least willing to admit it. Do you freely admit Trump has lied and engaged in similar questionable behavior as well?
Svelaz,
I must say that you are doing a great job holding down the fort against the assault of the Trumpists. Thanks for your service! I’m here to reinforce you.
Like you, I don’t deny that Biden has made some statements which strain credibility, e.g., his claim that he never discussed Hunter’s business ties. Moreover, I have said that Biden is not above the law and should be investigated if there is probable cause of his corruption.
But unlike a Trumpist, I would NEVER try to undermine a DOJ investigation by calling it a “witch-hunt.”
That is the fundamental difference between those that believe there is a sinister “Deep State,” and those of us like Turley who believe in the system.
Jeff Silberman, I concur.
I find it humorous how they gripe about Biden’s shortcomings as if they were the worst that could happen when the same was said about Trump was acceptable or simply brushed aside as mere boasting and exaggeration.
“deliberate lying and misinformation” is neither new nor a “Trump thing.” Go back as far as you like and you’ll see “deliberate lying and misinformation” for most wars America has fought. Or did you really think that Iraq had WMDs, despite all the liberal press and night-time hacks telling us they did? Yes, Democrats can lie and mininform as well as Republicans. As for the silly comment that “No private company can violate your constitutional right to free speech, etc” — well, call it whatever you like if you insist on playing word games, but censorship is censorship even if it doesn’t violate the Constitution. Yes, Twitter may have the “right” to censor, but that doesn’t mean that all is well because Twitter isn’t technically violating the Constitution. Every government that has committed these kinds of violations has made sure they weren’t “technically” violating any laws. Only fools fall for the word games.
Giocon1,
“ Or did you really think that Iraq had WMDs, despite all the liberal press and night-time hacks telling us they did?”
Actually it was the right wing media pushing the idea of WMD’s. It was the liberals who were questioning the claims of WMD’s in iraq.
“ As for the silly comment that “No private company can violate your constitutional right to free speech, etc” — well, call it whatever you like if you insist on playing word games, but censorship is censorship even if it doesn’t violate the Constitution. ”
It’s not word games, nobody including myself is saying that censorship is not happening. What I am arguing is the simple fact that private companies are not prohibited from doing that because the constitution’s prohibitions against censorship are strictly related to government entities.
“ Yes, Twitter may have the “right” to censor, but that doesn’t mean that all is well because Twitter isn’t technically violating the Constitution. ”
Twitter CAN’T violate the constitution if it tried because the constitution doesn’t prohibit Twitter from censoring people. It’s literally impossible for Twitter to violate the constitution. You can’t violate a law that doesn’t apply to you.
Twitter DOES indeed have a right to censor. It’s not a “right”. It’s their 1st amendment right.
If you think they are word games tell me how does Twitter violate the constitution?
Svelaz,
Fox News is censoring all Trump’s lawyers pushing the Big Lie as well as the Pillow guy.
I hear crickets from Trumpists…
That’s where my pointing out the hypocrisy comes in.
Turley’s silence is reinforcing the hypocrisy of his position on the matter. I wonder if he will eventually be deposed in the defamation case against Fox News.
Svelaz,
I think he would be because he held a contrary view to the prime time hosts. He did provide a legal hook upon which Hannity, Carlson and Ingraham could hang their conspiracy theories by legitimating the Trump lawsuits as being reasonable and made in good faith though he did express his skepticism in their success and the possibility of the courts granting them the relief they sought. As Smartmatic’s attorney, I would like to know whether he was asked but refused to explicitly endorse on-air the defamatory statements made by the Trump lawyers who were embraced by the prime time hosts. Turley’s brief appearances seemed very scripted so that he would never be presented with a question by a Fox host which would elicit a “no.”
Because Turley NEVER said THEN what he should have said that these Trump lawsuits were frivolous, it is impossible NOW for him to claim that they were! It’s too late. Which explains why he did not provide his analysis of the recent Michigan judge’s ruling that Trump’s lawyers were liars BECAUSE they were paraded on Fox as truth-tellers, and Turley was silent when he knew better.
Just a couple of words on the “bans” of CRT in schools.
First, States have the responsibility to determine the curriculum. They can determine what can or cannot be taught in schools — if you don’t like it, then perhaps it’s time we abolish public education. It’s not as if it’s teaching our kids, anyway.
Second, do you know how CRT is being banished from schools? Not by name — the name can be changed, overnight if necessary. It is merely banned by banning teachings that blame race for the ills of society, and hold people responsible things based on the color of one’s skin. In short, CRT is banned when racism is banned.
Third, I doubt you’re on the side of corporations. You are on the side of censorship, and only because they are censoring the views you consider wrong. I doubt you’d be singing this song if it were your side being censored by private corporations.
Just waiting for some s@@tlib to be explain in a moral, serious tone why a Chinese style “social credit” system is actually a good thing and how America will still be a free country after implementation.
Just like they justify censorship and claim to support the 1st Amendment.
I want a divorce.
antonio
Antonio,
“ Just waiting for some s@@tlib to be explain in a moral, serious tone why a Chinese style “social credit” system is actually a good thing and how America will still be a free country after implementation.”
They are not implementing anything. Banks have been able to do that for decades. It’s more likely Flynn is not being totally honest with why chase is getting rid of his account. Remember Flynn has engaged in some very questionable activities involving foreign governments. Chase may have noticed he was engaging in something that may come back and be liable for.
Flynn has plenty of options to choose from in terms of finding a new banking service.
Private companies engaging in censorship is perfectly legal and well within their own constitutional rights. Turley knows this and he readily admits it. Just because it may seem wrong doesn’t make it illegal or unconstitutional.
The road to American fascism is shorter and quicker than one ever thought possible. I hope he has legal recourse. Centralization of power within the state concurrent with intimidation of private sector entities is by definition fascist. Chase and other large corporations are acting in the same manner as German and Italian firms did in the 1930s
Alan K,
Germans persecuted Jews because of their bad blood, not their bad speech….
Yeah, I’m sure that the 6 million non-Jews who died in the concentration camps were there because of bad blood, and not bad speech.
Alpheus,
Point well taken. I was over-generalizing. No doubt, the Nazis persecuted political dissidents, intellectuals, communists, and homosexuals which had nothing to do with their race like Jews, gypsies and Slavs.
It would be interesting to know the rationale for the position that Chase is alleged to have taken here. For a bank to claim that continuing a particular customer relationship would result in “reputational” damage is counterintuitive unless its costumer made public statements about the banking relationship. That’s because under Regulation S-P, financial institutions (banks, broker-dealers and investment advisers) must safeguard customer/client non-public information.
Somebody that comments on this page owes me his paycheck for the week. He said he would give his paycheck to me if I could post a link with proof. I did yesterday, and here it is today. Contact me here…and I will give you my address to send it to me!! Thanks.!!
Here it is. From yesterdays twitter banning Berenson post….”Warren Miller, CPA, CFA, ASA says:August 30, 2021 at 11:13 AM
Kindly provide a hyperlink to prove your assertion. For the record, I’d bet a lot of money that you don’t have one.” Alright…you didn’t promise your paycheck, but I’ll take the money YOU were going to bet. Pay up!!!
Great opportunity for a conservative bank
It amazes me how quickly the slide has become though we all know that the the underpinnings have been laid for decades. The uber progressive fantasies that took shape in the mid-to-late 60s has resulted in two generations of professors/teachers with decidedly leftist viewpoints. The older ones are now administrators who see themselves as arbiters of all things rather than simple instructors. Thank God my parents raised me right and allowed me to use my ability to think for myself.
You are absolutely correct, and even worse is the insidious “unavailability” of full-spectrum information for our younger generations to “use [their abilities] to think for [themselves].” Google search algorithms prioritize left-leaning search results, Wikipedia contributors unabashedly edit and replace neutral content with left-leaning content, and MAINSTREAM media (NBC, ABC, PBS, NPR) engages in selective-fact reporting to favor liberal, left-leaning agenda. I favor the congressional creation of an independent entity that would rate media sources by their political underpinnings (fully appreciating the First Amendment’s inherent prohibitions). I fully support the independence and freedom of speech given to private media sources (CNN vs. FOX, e.g.) but truly resent the truly left-leaning manipulation of facts ( either by omission of facts, or commission of selective-fact reporting) as practiced by the likes of NBC, ABC, NPR, PBS anchors and journalists. We cannot allow one side to control media and academia.
Lin,
If all the top Conservative college graduates seek a professional careers in finance, law and medicine, and all the top Liberal graduates go into the arts, social sciences and the media, what are you going to do?
The fascists in the US have found a way to shut down opposing viewpoints with the internet and cancel culture. No need to jail those with opposing views like Castro in Cuba but these people are of the same mindset.
500 people in American Gulag right now don’t agree. None are charged with sedition or insurrection. Just Trespassing. 8 months now.
Chase donated to Democratic causes and organizations like the SPLC, so it’s no surprise they would act that way. This is not the first time Chase closed accounts of conservative activists, and always without providing clear reasons why. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/04/17/questions_for_chase_away_bank_140076.html
Chase closed Tarrio’s account because he participated in the insurrection on Jan 6 and was the leader of the proud boys who organized and encouraged people to assault the Capitol building.
Chase had every right to close his account and disassociate themselves with the leader of a group who is well known for inciting violence against others.
Chase can close the accounts of anyone who they deem a liability or a violation of their policies.
Your handlers are not sending us their best and need to send us better trolls.
Svelaz,
Right again! As if the Trumpists would complain if a bank refused to do business with Osama bin Laden.
Regarding the link that you posted indicating that the Democrats are facing an uphill battle in 2022: is that really a bad thing? Can you, as a Democrat, take a step back and say “Maybe the country WOULD be better off under Republican leadership right now?” Or will you continue to support the people who are destroying the country, whether intentionally or unintentionally only time will tell? Democrats are wringing their hands about 2022 – Republicans are wringing their hands about 2021, about the butchery in Afghanistan, the collapsing economy, the disintegration of due process. Voting GOP once doesn’t mean you become a Republican. It just means you care more about your country than your party politics.
HA…Chinese social scoring has already taken over!!!
We wonder what the German people experienced during the rise of the Third Reich, now we know. They blew off the little annoyances until it was too late.
Chase just blew their reputation.
Quite true, E.M. This is similar to what was happening in the late 1930s. You might say that Afghanistan was similar in importance as marking the decline of the western powers in their ability to control tyranny along with the Sudetenland and the Rhineland. But then again, the western power that just abandoned Afghanistan is itself becoming a tyrannical power and is behaving in many of the same ways the National Socialist Party did in 1933. Get rid of dissent first through censorship and isolation, then turn on the rest of the “undesirables.” I gave the American public more credit than perhaps was deserved. It’s too late to stop this onrushing train. Will Taiwan be Poland? We all know they are next, but there is no Churchill. There is no hope.
For at least four years we heard “reckless rhetoric” from just about everybody in the Democratic Party promoting the Russiagate hoax and pushing for greater tensions with nuclear-armed Russia. Adam Schiff was probably the worst offender, so if the banks were to adopt this standard Schiff at least would be completely barred from use of the US financial system.
Curri,
Perhaps you are new here, but Turley has NEVER called the Meuller investigation a “HOAX.”
That word is not in Turley’s legal lexicon. It is used exclusively by Trumpists.
Maybe because he is a foreign agent? The man belongs in jail. His pardon was an affront to all Americans. Having said that I’d have to know a lot more about this care. His word isn’t enough for me but I’m not comfortable with a bank shutting down a persons’s credit because of their political views.
Next we need to lock up all those foreign agents working foi Israel. But seriously, FARA is enforced very, very, very selectively. Ken Silverstein: “I’ve Covered Foreign Lobbying for 20 Years and I’m Amazed Manafort Got Busted. That’s because the foreign lobbying laws are so toothless that you can count on one hand the number of people prosecuted for what Manafort is accused of.”
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/30/paul-manafort-indictment-foreign-lobbying-russia-probe-215764/
Holmes,
I would agree that I would not shut down a Q-Anon’s credit card, but I doubt I would trust his rationality to grant him a loan and take a mortgage on his house. Conspiracy theorists are a bad risk!
Do you by any chance have actual evidence that conspiracy theorists are a bad risk? Does it have more or less of a correllation than actual credit history, or manual underwriting, if that’s what’s done instead? Who gets to decide what’s a “conspiracy theory”, and whether a particular individual engages in one? Indeed, I see you said that the word HOAX isn’t used here in conjunction with the Mueller investigation; can I safely assume you are a Russiagate Conspiracy Theorist, then? If this is such a great predictor, why don’t banks include a questionaire to determine whether people are conspiracy theorists before applying for a loan?
Or are you just making assumptions? Assumptions that just happen to match your views, but have no basis in fact whatsoever?
Alpheus,
When it comes to banks, there is only one rule- the Golden Rule- he who has the gold makes the rules.
I said “hoax” is not a word that Turley uses- EVER. It is a word used by Trump and his Trumpists. Calling me a “Russiangate Conspiracy theorist” is tantamount to calling the Meuller investigation a “hoax.” Turley never accused Meuller of being a conspiracy theorist as well.
I make presumptions not assumptions.
Mr. Turley,
You say you are critical of Gen. Flynn for his outspoken belief that the 2020 Presidential election was stolen. Have your read the TIME Magazine article of FEB 4, 2021 by Molly Ball? I have transcried that article with additional supporting material on my blog. Please take a look:
https://thedissedent.page/2021/07/01/2020-presidential-election-fraud/
-William Whitten
William,
He also harshly criticized Flynn (he is a Lt.Gen) for insinuating the need for a military coup by Q-Anon/Trumpists.
America needs a coup in the worst way
Fascist.
“People in glass house shouldn’t throw stones” or is it “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” Either way, Chase had to pay almost $1 Billion in fines for manipulative trading practices and they are worried about Gen. Flynn damaging their reputation? How would anyone even know that he had a Chase credit card? Did Chase make that information public?
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/23/jpmorgan-to-pay-almost-1-billion-fine-to-resolve-us-investigation-into-trading-practices.html
Simple response….all those who hold Chase Accounts should quit Chase and go to some other Bank/Credit Union and tell Chase to kiss their grits.
That is. how we fight this evil…..hit them where it hurts the most….their Wallet.
I. have left more than one bank when I grew weary of their poor service.
In one case I walked out with over a Hundred Thousand Dollars over a sorry assed Ban Employee who could not take time away from reading a magazine to provide me assistance he was charged with providing.
His Manager was distraught over it knowing he would have to make some sort of explanation over the loss of that account,….and the reason why.
In one case I walked out with over a Hundred Thousand Dollars over a sorry assed Ban Employee who could not take time away from reading a magazine to provide me assistance he was charged with providing.
I have done the same. I walked out of Wells Fargo with a check for over $100,000, and pulled my house mortgage the next day after I had arranged for a new lender. My Credit score is over 800. The “loan officer” ( a twenty something female that dressed like a runway model) kept me waiting 30 minutes for an appointment, and then failed to explain why their auto rates were 50% higher than the other places in town I had checked, and she could absolutely not adjust them. So I asked her if she could clear my cash accounts and write me a check. She said it would take until the next day, and I reminded her the low required I receive my money upon request.
Her age is not relevent, only that she lacked the experience to handle a very simple business meeting.
Ralph Chappell, isn’t that cancel culture tactics? Chase has trillions worth in accounts. It’s virtually impossible to “hurt” them.
What you should be glad about is that you still have choices.
Svelaz,
Exactly. Chappell is advocating that Flynn and every Q-Anon supporter of his cancel Chase.
Cancel for me but not for thee!
To see that kind of cognitive dissonance is painful sometimes.
These kinds of things wouldn’t be an issue if it weren’t for government actions like Operation Chokepoint, ie, government policy disguised as company action.
This type of action is most likely driven by regulators. See Operation Choke Point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point
The regulators are enforcing pro-Democrat Party political orthodoxy?
I’d be highly amused to see the evidence that the regulators aren’t particularly pro-Democrat Party.
Thank you for posting your comment and the link. I am enlightened by it.
Oh yes. Operation Choke point. Financial institutions targeting icky businesses. Its good to bring up operation ChokePoint, because the leftist here are adamant that big tech censuring private business, has nothing to do with the government so all above aboard.
Operation Choke point used federal regulators, going to financial institutions and “suggested” this list of businesses are ‘suspect’ so if they no longer did business with them, would look good on future audits by regulators.
Government controlling private business decisions…there aught to be a term for that.