Jump to content

Operation Choke Point


bernorange

Recommended Posts

Quote

Crypto banking activity was paused or prevented by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. at a large number of U.S. banks in 2022, according to communications pried loose by a research firm hired by Coinbase Inc. (COIN).

Coinbase's hired help, History Associates Inc., had taken the FDIC and the Securities and Exchange Commission to court in June and finally won access to certain internal FDIC communications. The heavily-redacted documents emerged on Friday, showing the banking regulator slamming the brakes on lenders offering or considering products and services in the digital assets sector.

"We respectfully ask that you pause all crypto asset-related activity," the regulator wrote in one of the 23 letters shared by the crypto exchange. "The FDIC will notify all FDIC-supervised banks at a later date when a determination has been made on the supervisory expectations for engaging in crypto asset-related activity."

The industry has long complained that it's been under a banking crisis in which companies and leading crypto figures are blocked from U.S. bank services. Coinbase Chief Legal Officer Paul Grewal argued that these letters represent hard evidence that crypto businesses were systematically walled off from banking by the regulator.

"The letters show that this was no conspiracy theory at all, that this was not just rank speculation or the musings of a paranoid industry," Grewal said in an interview with CoinDesk. "There was a concerted plan on the part of the FDIC that they carried out — without any reluctance — to deny banking services to a legal American industry. That should give everyone great pause."
...

https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2024/12/05/u-s-regulator-told-banks-to-lay-off-crypto-letters-obtained-by-coinbase-reveal

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading the plain text of the article, it's not like there's some huge conspiracy to break crypto. They didn't even have an idea of what a regulatory framework would look like to appropriately have safeguards in place to avoid money laundering and being a way to avoid sanctions if you're Russia or North Korea.

In my professional work, it would be malpractice for one of my customers to run headlong at full scale into a brand new technology without having any sort of idea of how to manage it. Once something exists, it tends to keep on existing. Temporary fixes become permenant dogma.

This is coinbase and the crypto industry in general self-victimizing because the government isn't moving as fast as they'd like it to.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Crypto bros are so dumb. It will eventually have its place, but that is not anytime soon. Quit crying. It’s not a fucking conspiracy. 

Bernorange owns a precious metals and crypto message board fwiw, so he is the truest of believers 

Edited by Captainant
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bernorange said:

@elfenix- that's a gross mischaracterization of my contributions to this thread.  It's not like I don't have a history of ranting about issues pertaining to government abuse of power or  personal and financial liberty.  Do what you like, but at least be honest about it.

personal and financial liberty is shorthand for oligarchs fucking the rest of us. you're gleeful about it.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It occurred to me that your comments were specific in referring to Marc Andreessen?  If so, it's a dumb take as my interest in debanking and Operation Choke Point 2.0 was piqued long before he cast a light on the subject.  It's not about him or any other "crypto billionaire".  I was quite clear on page one of this thread with my interest in the subject.

~~~

Quote

Majority of Crypto Hedge Funds Report Facing Banking Issues in Recent Years

Cryptocurrency hedge funds have run into widespread banking problems in recent years, according to a new survey.

  • Out of 160 crypto hedge funds, three-quarters reported issues with basic banking services over the past three years. The funds invest in digital currencies and blockchain-technology companies.
  • None of the 20 other alternative investors surveyed, in areas including real estate and private credit, reported similar issues.
  • Of the crypto funds that faced issues, a little more than half were told that banks planned to end the relationship. The rest either weren't informed or didn’t answer the survey question.
  • When banks communicated, most didn't give crypto funds a clear reason for denying access. Banks told two funds they were limiting crypto clients and industry exposure.


...

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-sp500-nasdaq-live-12-20-2024/card/majority-of-crypto-hedge-funds-report-facing-banking-issues-in-recent-years-Nat2gsEh0xPEleK6583O

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Quote

...
Another area in which a reset is sorely needed is the agency’s approach to digital assets and tokenization. In 2021, the banking agencies issued a roadmap describing plans to publish various policy documents in 2022 detailing the agencies’ expectations for banks engaging in activities related to digital assets.7 Ultimately, this work was discontinued in early 2022 following a change in leadership at the FDIC, and instead the agencies established processes in which each institution must engage with its regulator on an individual basis before engaging in any activities related to digital assets or blockchain.8

I have talked in the past about how damaging this approach has been, as it has stifled innovation and contributed to a public perception that the FDIC is closed for business if institutions are interested in anything related to blockchain or distributed ledger technology.9 Recent disclosures that the FDIC sent “pause” letters to more than twenty banks instructing them to refrain from “all crypto-related activity” have reinforced this perception.10 I continue to think a much better approach would have been — and remains — for the agencies to clearly and transparently describe for the public what activities are legally permissible and how to conduct them in accordance with safety and soundness standards. And if regulatory approvals are needed, those must be acted upon in a timely way, which has not been the case in recent years.

Debanking

Closely related to the agencies’ recent approach to digital assets is the problem of “debanking.” Over the past few years, there have been various accounts of individuals and businesses associated with the crypto industry losing access to bank accounts without explanation. This follows a long history of other types of customers experiencing the problem of debanking, including the politically disfavored business groups targeted by the original “Operation Choke Point,”11 individuals associated with certain religious or political groups,12 and many others.13

Access to a bank account is essential for individuals and businesses to participate in many aspects of the modern economy. A longstanding goal of the FDIC’s has been to decrease the number of people who are unbanked. Efforts to debank law-abiding customers are unacceptable, regulators must work to end it, and there is no place at the FDIC for anyone who has pushed — explicitly or implicitly — banks to stop serving law-abiding customers.

While adopting a new approach to digital assets — and putting an end to any and all Choke Point-like tactics — are essential first steps, regulators also need to reevaluate our approach to implementing the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). While we all share the goal of ensuring criminals and terrorists are not using the banking system to fund drug trafficking, terrorism, and other serious crimes, the current BSA regime creates an incentive for banks to close accounts rather than risk massive fines for inadequate BSA compliance. It is also worth reexamining the policy of requiring banks to provide adverse action notices explaining the reasons why a customer is denied a loan, while at the same time often prohibiting banks from providing any reason if a customer’s entire account is closed. These issues, along with others in the BSA realm,14 warrant attention and scrutiny during the next Administration.
...

https://www.fdic.gov/news/speeches/2025/charting-new-course-preliminary-thoughts-fdic-policy-issues

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy shit if true...

Quote

🚨 FDIC Scandal EXPOSED!🚨Whistleblowers leak damning recordings revealing corruption, abuse, & cover-ups at the highest levels! 😱 From sex scandals to insider trading & crushing whistleblowers—FDIC’s darkest secrets are out! #FDICLeaks 🔥💣 (a thread 👇)

Preface: None of the below should implicate the hard-working line-level employees who want nothing more than to do their jobs. This thread focuses on executive management at the agency, with 1-2 exceptions for middle managers. FDIC has an important job; eliminating it will not solve these issues.

Warning: The post below contains accounts of sexual assault and agency coverup, which may invoke emotions. Please be mindful if reading. 

We have been working closely with whistleblowers who have secretly recorded and intercepted hundreds of hours of communications, including private calls, agency telephone conversations, and mainly Microsoft Teams meetings at @FDICgov over the past seven years. The findings are nothing short of astonishing. They show signs that the FDIC is the most corrupt, disgruntled, and defunct organization ever.

We cannot discuss how these recordings were obtained; we can only say we have them. Some of the information below has been integrated into previous posts, but we provide an initial look at some of the cohesive findings. Astute observers will note we've been hinting at the below from our first post. 

As discussed in the preface, we are only commenting on recordings obtained from mid-level to senior executives, not line-level employees who mostly follow directions and policy.

We are working closely with several attorneys and intend to approach media outlets once we have a strategy. However, given the current environment, especially with VC Hill taking office soon, we believe it's the right time to reveal some key findings. We debated not providing a summary until we could publish the recordings themselves but decided the truth must come out, especially with a changing of the guard. We might not need to publish these recordings if the people involved do the right thing: resign and VC Hill opens up the FDIC's records.

The allegations below are alleged to be true but remain unverified as we are not releasing the recordings. Moreover, we delayed releasing these facts as if we had released them earlier; we were concerned that the FDIC would enact new restrictions or entirely change their posture to prevent us from getting new recordings. Because of their knowledge of some of our recordings, the FDIC has already passed a new directive regarding employee recording and has taken disciplinary action against several employees intending to chill future recordings.

We believe the time is right as we can no longer sit idly by allowing FDIC to control the narrative with inaccurate and patently false assertions using friendly journalists to amplify their reach.

Among the content in the recordings: 
1. FDIC senior managers laughed at “crypto” supporters' attempts to hold them accountable online, suggesting they’d never be organized enough to hold @FDICgov accountable, especially with the FDIC's disinformation campaign. The FDIC specifically discussed how they'd win, as they have a dedicated media relations team that pays more than most individuals make. One employee bragged that his annual salary is probably more than @nic__carter makes in a decade. Nic is not the only target, but we feel secure disclosing his name.

2. FDIC discussing intentionally mislabeling documents or including “mixed language” that would allow for FOIA suppression. An attorney says, "As long as you're able to include something in the document that would give rise to a FOIA exception, chances are we can withhold the entire thing." Others suggested reading FOIA requests in the strictest fashion, only doing the exact search the requestor asked even if they knew other responsive systems or derivative terms would hold the records the requestor truly sought.

3. Discussions around including FDIC attorneys in meetings to meet the minimum standard to claim attorney-client exemptions on topics that might be targeted for FOIA. "If we've got an attorney in the meeting and they are giving legal advice, even if it's about FOIA, it's still enough for us to claim attorney-client privilege over the entire meeting and its derivative products."

4. An organized coverup to suppress and minimize the rapes and sexual assaults occurring at the FDIC hotel and office buildings, including going so far as to secretly release suggestive photos and videos to suggest that rape victims "asked for it." Specifically, one Division of Administration (DOA) official said, "We've got the CCTV of her walking back in looking like that. I don't think anyone will second guess what she was looking for."

5. Discussions on whether FDIC chairman Martin Gruenberg's hands-down-his-pants scandal threatened his chairmanship and provided a verbal playbook such as instructing executives to "claim it's like having your grandpa tuck his hands inside his belt, just a natural reaction."

6. Concerns about whether revelations that Chairman Gruenberg physically abused his wife would end his tenure and essentially make it impossible for the agency to recover from the WSJ reporting. "We're concerned [the media] has become close as we've seen they FOIAed the local police department at Marty's house for any police records." They were concerned about FOIAs submitted to Mr Gruenberg's local police department.

7. Office of Communications Director Amy Thompson, Senior Media Affairs Officer Brian Sullivan, and others discussed with several reporters the possibility of providing the agency with "less harsh" coverage of specific topics, including Chairman Gruenberg's antics and Operation Choke Point 2.0, in exchange for further information about other "higher value" issues in a quid quo pro arrangement (we may name these individuals personally in a subsequent post).

8. Communications on how to stop sources from corresponding with journalists by "making an example" out of employees publicly within the agency and then spreading the truth via rumors that conversations around @rebeccaballhaus reporting and how to stop it. FDIC went as far as potentially having employees contact Rebecca and provide alternative accounts of what occurred to discredit the honest whistleblowers who contacted her.

9. How to disrupt @JelenaMcW leadership to and after she left strategies to blame any issues on her. Specifically, RMS Director Doreen Eberley and DCP Director Mark Pearce were involved in conversations about how McWilliams had no idea what she was doing and suggested it'd be easy to blame her for issues arising outside her tenure. Executive employees talked about fighting McWilliams at every turn because she was "not one of us." They laughed at her cooking book, one executive saying he had a video of himself burning it in his fireplace.

10. Specific meetings about this very account @FDIC_Exposed talking about how to minimize its impact and a 10-point action plan to feed to journalists or others questioning the accusations raised by stating it's an account run by fed-up employees with nothing better to do and a chip on their shoulder. After-day events conversing about a whiskey party where some executives poked fun at 'online detractors' saying they would never prove anything going so far to say (in an indirect reference to Signal) 'good luck even subpoenaing records that don't exist.

11. Conversations including employees airing personal vendettas against organizations such as @custodiabank, @coinbase, and others because they would not give into FDIC demands, and some FDIC execs thought the employees of these organizations were "assholes who think they know how to regulate themselves." There are at least eight other named organizations, but we want to discuss this with them before naming them.

12. Discussions about the sustainability of regulatory institutions if blockchain and Web3 take off. Specifically, concerns about what might become of the 5,000+ permanent employees should Web3 and blockchain companies prove that finance is stable and viable without banks.

13. Concerns have been raised that the US government may lack the ability to restrict, control, and monitor citizens' financial transactions if Web3 and decentralized finance continue to advance at their current pace. "Who needs deposit insurance when you can't lose money on the blockchain?"

14. Concerns by Senior Deputy Director Jenny Traillie in a conversation with Brian Sullivan that reporters were close to releasing articles about her trades and profits on Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank (SBNY). You heard it right: a senior FDIC executive responsible for supervising and overseeing SIFIs owned, traded, and profited from two failed FDIC banks. Moreover, they discussed active methods to explain away how she actively supervised and held stocks of (these were not individually named in the recordings, but we have records from her own ethics filings): 
(a) Morgan Stanley Private Bank NA (BDPS),
(b) Morgan Stanley Bank NA,
(c) Signature Bank New York (SBNY),
(d) SVB Financial Group (SIVB),
(e) JP Morgan Chase & Co (JPM),
(f) Charles Schwab NEW (SCHW),
(g) East West Bancorp (EWBC),
(h) Citizens Financial Group Inc (CFG),
(i) American Express Co (AMEX),
(j) Synchrony Financial (SYF),
(k) Bank of America Corp (BAC),
(l) California Bancorp Common Stock (CALB)

15. General Counsel Harrel Pettway called FDIC whistleblower Michael Williams a piece of trash for reporting Harrels' intentionally misfiled ethics forms. Harrel tried to previously fire the same FDIC employee for not disclosing a subsidiary company on his ethics forms whilst he did not disclose numerous holdings, including his own business, which he dissolved after being confronted.

16. Conversations with Office of Communications Director Amy Thompson with several reporters trying to explain away her actively trading bank stocks, saying her financial advisor did it and she did not know anything about her profiting on bank stock trades, including on Synchrony Financial, State Street Corporation, Citizens Financial Group, Inc., Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., and Citigroup Inc.  

Moreover, we have recordings of Amy discussing concerns that reporters were close to exposing kickback agreements that reciprocal organizations gave to her husband, Brian Thompson because she awarded them contracts under the guise and preference of "helping veterans."

Further communications discuss concerns from FDIC attorneys that Amy was hiding and deleting internet content critical of the FDIC, including suppressing posts on X (by hiding the responses to the FDICgov official account) that she did not like. They verbally told her she could not suppress communications she did not like as it was against the law. Amy rebuffed the suggestion but agreed not to further delete or hide communications with which she disagreed.

17. Discussions by OCISO Deputy Director Rami Dillon concerned that reporters were getting close to exposing her awarding contracts to companies who privately agreed to provide derivative kickback hiring to her relatives. Essentially, Rami would award a contract to a company, and that same company would hire her relative, specifically Manpreet Dillon, for another contract at a fantastic wage. 

18. Agency infighting, including Doreen Eberley's personal campaign to attack another FDIC division, CISR, and reclaim their supervisory authority. She talks about discrediting fellow employees and personally attacks other employees in CISR, claiming they are incompetent to do their jobs to merge CISR back to RMS.

19. Division of Information Technology Deputy Director Jyotsna Jame (who is likely now gone) discussed concerns about her trading numerous stocks and holding bank stocks and her wilful ethics nondisclosure being exposed after a whistleblower reported it to the agency.

20. Human Resources Specialist (Labor/Employee Relations) Lisa Lander discusses how to fire whistleblowers and ensure they do not return because they are bad people. The recordings include her forcing managers to use certain words in their reports and counseling others on following a process that makes it nearly impossible for the employee to appeal the findings.

21. Agency supervisor Jennifer Lucas (now in Chief of Training Section I in Risk Management Supervision)  discussed how she had sex with another employee who she knew was a whistleblower to gain leverage over him, then reported him to FDIC's ethics department using disparaging remarks in an attempt to get him fired. She disclosed this to two other executives in an attempt to advance her career.

This is just the beginning. We've summarized previously disclosed facts and distilled them into a cohesive narrative; there's far more to come.

As discussed in this narrative, the following employees must be fired and jailed:
1. Legal General Counsel, Harrel Mychal Pettway
2. Office of Communications (OCOM), Director Amy Thompson
3. Office of Communications (OCOM), Senior Media Relations Officer Brian Sullivan
4. Office of the Chief Information Security Officer (OCISO), Deputy Director Rami Dillon
5. Division of Complex Institution Supervision and Resolution (CISR) Senior Deputy Director Jenny G. Traille
6. Divison of Administration (DOA) Human Resources Specialist (Labor/Employee Relations), Lisa Lander
8. Risk Management Supervision (RMS) Training Section I, Chief, Jennifer Lucas
9. Risk Management Supervision (RMS), Director Doreen Eberley
10. Division of Consumer Protection (DCP), Director Mark Pearce

We have a comprehensive list coming of other employees who must go, but this is the start.

- From your friends at FDIC Exposed

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...