<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n

Tedesco’s\u200d testimony also revealed that federal \u2063regulators are pressuring financial institutions to \u200bdiscriminate against customers based on their religious and political\u200d beliefs. This indirect discrimination would be unconstitutional \u2063if\u200c carried out directly by the federal government.\u200d In fact, 16 state attorneys general \u200crecently called on Wells Fargo to cease using “debanking” as a political tool\u2062 to advance the Biden \u2064Administration’s \u200cpolicies throughout the economy.<\/p>\n

According to a letter from the attorneys general, Wells Fargo has implemented discriminatory practices by imposing\u2064 race and sex-based quotas in credit agreements\u200d with customers like BlackRock.\u200b The bank, \u200dalong\u200d with others, is working to limit \u200bcustomers’ access to affordable\u2064 energy sources and increase their grocery bills in\u2064 order to align\u2063 with the economic central-planning goals\u200c of the Democratic Party.<\/p>\n

In essence, the same government pressure\u200d that is creating an\u200d “Iron Curtain” around the Internet is now constructing a financial \u2064social credit system within the United States, \u2064similar to that of Communist\u2064 China.\u200c The FBI has provided\u2062 financial institutions with a document listing “indicators \u200cof domestic violent extremism” that banks should monitor in customer purchases, including objections\u200c to firearm legislation, easing of immigration restrictions, and Covid-19 lockdowns.<\/p>\n

Prior hearings have\u2064 revealed that Treasury Department\u2064 officials instructed financial \u200cinstitutions to flag law-abiding Americans \u2063as \u2063potential domestic \u200dterrorists if they\u2064 purchased religious texts like the Bible, supported former President Donald Trump, or shopped at sporting goods stores.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

Furthermore, major banks have participated in meetings concerning misinformation and disinformation organized\u200d by the CISA \u2063Cybersecurity Advisory Committee. JPMorgan \u2062Chase, \u2064for example, attended \u200ca \u200dmeeting where CISA identified “financial services” as \u2064”critical\u2062 infrastructure” at\u2062 risk due to the spread of false and\u2062 misleading \u200cinformation.<\/p>\n

CISA, a Department of Homeland Security agency, has designated Americans’ “thoughts, ideas, and beliefs” as\u2062 “critical infrastructure” to justify \u200ccensoring online speech about elections. It defines “malinformation” as true information\u200c that federal employees believe \u2062should\u200c be accompanied by government talking points.<\/p>\n

During the 2020 election cycle, CISA acted as a “switchboard” \u200dpressuring social media companies to silence individuals expressing views disliked by the Democratic Party. This behavior\u200d is the subject of \u200cthe constitutional lawsuit Murthy v. Missouri, currently before the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

Tedesco’s testimony reveals that the unconstitutional social media censorship apparatus is\u200b now being applied to financial transactions. CISA has expressed its commitment to a “whole-of-government approach”\u200d in implementing its communist social \u2062credit initiatives.\u2063 The cancellation or seizure of Americans’ bank \u2063accounts, \u2063similar to what occurred \u2064in Canada with \u2062donors\u200b to the trucker protest in\u200c 2022, poses an even greater threat to American liberties than \u200cthe cancellation or secret \u2062muting of Facebook and Twitter accounts.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

“We don’t know the extent to which AI is currently being used to make these decisions, but we know that Congress is\u2062 funding projects \u200dand providing AI\u200d tools to banks,” Tedesco stated during \u2062a press \u200cconference. “The problem of censorship at scale that we see in\u200b the context of social media also exists\u200d in\u2062 the financial context.”<\/p>\n

Tedesco’s testimony provides numerous examples of banks closing accounts of Christian charities without sufficient explanation. For instance, \u2064Bank of America terminated the account of Indigenous \u2063Advance \u2062Ministries, a Tennessee-based charity\u2064 that supports orphans, prisoners, \u2062and \u2063sex trafficking victims \u200bin Uganda. The bank also closed the account of an organization that donated to Indigenous Advance Ministries.<\/p>\n

According to \u200cTedesco, Indigenous Advance\u200c Ministries had to \u200binform its nine Ugandan employees that they would have to wait an extra week to receive their paychecks, which they rely on for survival. In Uganda, \u200dwhere many \u200dpeople live meal\u200c to\u200b meal, waiting an additional week for a paycheck can mean the \u2063difference between eating\u2062 and\u2062 going hungry.<\/p>\n

When asked for an explanation, the bank simply stated that the charity operates in a business type that Bank of America\u200d chooses not to serve. Chase Bank similarly\u200d closed the account of the National Committee for\u200b Religious Freedom, \u2062a charity founded by former U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback, and demanded that the charity disclose a \u200dlist of donors who contributed \u200b10 percent or more of its \u200doperating budget, as well as the criteria used to determine \u2064political support.<\/p>\n

Tedesco also revealed that since 2019, 13\u200b ADF donors have\u2062 reported\u2063 that their banks, including Fidelity Charitable, the largest grantmaker\u200b from donor-advised funds, \u2062have either \u200cbanned or delayed donations to ADF. \u200cImpact Assets, Fidelity Charitable, the Chicago Community Foundation, and the Community Foundation of Greater Memphis have all \u2063refused to allow \u200dAmericans to send their own money to ADF due \u200dto the Southern \u2062Poverty Law Center’s designation of Christian charities, including ADF, as “hate groups.”<\/p>\n

Despite the fact\u200b that ADF has won 15 cases \u200dat the U.S. Supreme Court in the past 30 years, the Southern Poverty Law Center is an\u2064 actual hate group and a financial scam\u200c machine that consistently expresses bigoted animus and relentless persecution against\u200b Christians. Its “hate group” designation inspired\u200b a gunman to attack the Family Research Council’s offices in 2012.<\/p>\n

Treasury \u200dofficials have also shared reports from the Anti-Defamation League and \u2062Institute for Strategic Dialogue with \u200cbanks, falsely\u2063 labeling Christian charities as “hate groups” and symbols like the Celtic cross as\u2063 “hate symbols,” according to a report published by the weaponization committee.<\/p>\n

ADF’s 2023 Viewpoint Diversity\u200d Score Business Index revealed \u200bthat over half of large financial \u200ccompanies have policies that allow them to deny service based on customers’ religious\u2062 or political beliefs. These policies, often \u2062referred\u2062 to as “reputational risk” policies, \u200cfrequently include provisions \u200bagainst “hate speech” that were added to international treaties by Soviet Communists \u200cafter World War II. Banks’ “reputational risk” policies also serve \u2062as a\u200b pretext \u2064for punishing clients who have been defamed by \u2063media smear campaigns, even if the\u200d smears\u2062 are fabricated.<\/p>\n

Tedesco warned \u2064that these policies can be easily weaponized by third-party \u2064activists. He cited instances\u200c in the payment\u200d processing space where activists pressure payment processors to deny service to individuals based on their speech. “Reputational risk” policies essentially allow activists to dictate how\u200b banks enforce their own policies.<\/p>\n

JPMorgan Chase closed the account of the\u200d Arkansas Family Council due\u2063 to its\u200c conservative \u200dviews, while\u2063 Wells Fargo refused to process payments to The Ruth Institute, a Christian charity,\u2064 falsely claiming that it is affiliated with hate, violence, harassment, and abuse. PayPal\u2063 is notorious for denying service to Christians and conservatives.<\/p>\n

Tedesco emphasized that there is an opportunity to address this issue before \u2064it becomes as pervasive as social media censorship. Opposition to discrimination in banking is \u2062a bipartisan concern, and the implementation of social credit scoring tools in financial \u200bdata is still in its early stages.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

\t\t\t\t\t \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n

rnrn <\/p>\n

What examples of indirect discrimination in \u2063the financial sector were \u2064highlighted\u200b in Jeremy\u200b Tedesco’s testimony?<\/h2>\n
Federal Agencies Enabling Censorship \u2064and Discrimination in Financial Sector, Testimony Reveals<\/p>\n
In a recent \u200bHouse committee hearing, it was revealed that federal \u200cagencies are providing banks with automated tools to\u200b identify potential domestic terrorists among Americans who purchase Bibles or\u200d support immigration law enforcement. This alarming revelation was brought forth by Jeremy Tedesco, senior counsel at the nonprofit \u200dFirst Amendment law firm, \u2063Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), during his written testimony. \u200bTedesco stated \u200bthat similar to the social media platforms’ efforts to target misinformation and hate\u200d speech, federal agencies are funding tools for the\u200c financial sector. \u200bHowever, he emphasized that this is just the\u200d tip of the\u2064 iceberg.<\/p>\n
Tedesco’s testimony \u200dalso exposed the pressure\u2064 being exerted by federal regulators on financial institutions to\u2064 discriminate against customers based on their religious and political beliefs. While\u200d such indirect discrimination \u2064would be unconstitutional if carried out directly by the federal government, it is nonetheless occurring through financial institutions. Sixteen state \u200dattorneys general have recently denounced Wells Fargo’s use of “debanking” as \u200da political tool to advance the Biden Administration’s policies throughout the economy.<\/p>\n
The attorneys\u200d general’s letter highlighted Wells Fargo’s discriminatory \u2063practices, such as imposing race and sex-based quotas in \u200ccredit agreements with customers like BlackRock. The bank, along with others, \u200bis actively working to limit customers’ access to affordable\u200c energy sources and increase their grocery bills, all in \u2063alignment with \u2062the economic central-planning goals of \u2063the Democratic Party.<\/p>\n
The implications of these revelations are \u200dgrave. They indicate that the same government pressure responsible \u2062for the “Iron Curtain” around the Internet is now constructing a financial social credit system within the United States, resembling that of Communist China. The FBI\u200d has supplied financial institutions \u200bwith a \u200cdocument\u2063 listing indicators of domestic violent extremism to monitor in \u2064customer purchases, including objections to firearm legislation, easing of\u2063 immigration restrictions, and COVID-19 lockdowns.<\/p>\n
Past hearings have\u2063 exposed the Treasury Department’s \u200cinstruction to \u2062financial institutions to flag law-abiding Americans as potential domestic terrorists if they purchased religious texts like\u2064 the Bible, supported former President\u200b Donald Trump, or shopped at sporting goods stores.<\/p>\n
In addition, major banks have participated in meetings organized by the CISA (Cybersecurity and Infrastructure \u2063Security Agency) to address misinformation\u2062 and disinformation concerns. CISA designated “financial services”\u200b as critical infrastructure at risk due to the spread of \u200dfalse \u200dand misleading information. CISA, a Department of Homeland Security agency, has even\u200d labeled Americans’ “thoughts, ideas, and beliefs” as critical infrastructure to justify online speech censorship about elections. It defines “malinformation” as true information that federal employees believe \u2062should be accompanied by government\u200c talking points.<\/p>\n
During the\u200b 2020 election cycle, CISA acted as a “switchboard” pressuring social\u200d media companies to silence individuals expressing views\u2064 disliked\u200b by the Democratic Party. This behavior\u2063 is\u2063 now the subject of the constitutional lawsuit Murthy v.\u2064 Missouri, currently before the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n
Tedesco’s testimony underscores that the unconstitutional social media censorship apparatus is now\u2063 being applied to\u200c financial transactions. CISA’s\u2064 commitment to a \u200c”whole-of-government approach” in implementing \u200bits communist social credit \u2064initiatives poses an even greater threat to American liberties. The cancellation or seizure of Americans’ bank accounts, similar to what occurred in Canada\u2062 with donors to the trucker protest in\u200c 2022, is a more significant threat than the cancellation or secret muting of\u2064 Facebook and Twitter accounts.<\/p>\n
“We don’t know the extent to which AI is currently being used to make \u200dthese decisions, but we know that Congress is funding projects and providing AI tools to banks,” Tedesco emphasized during a press conference. “The problem of censorship at scale that we see in the context of social media also exists in the financial context.”<\/p>\n
Tedesco’s testimony provides concrete \u2062examples of banks closing accounts of Christian charities without proper explanation. Bank of\u2063 America terminated the account of Indigenous Advance Ministries, a Tennessee-based charity supporting orphans, prisoners, and sex trafficking victims in Uganda. The bank \u2062also closed the account of an organization that\u2063 donated to \u200bIndigenous Advance \u2062Ministries.<\/p>\n
Tedesco revealed that Indigenous Advance Ministries had to inform\u200c its nine Ugandan employees that they would have to wait an extra week to receive their paychecks, which they rely on for survival. In Uganda, where many\u200b people live meal to \u2062meal, \u200bwaiting an additional week for a paycheck \u2062can mean the difference between eating and\u2064 going hungry.<\/p>\n
When asked for an explanation, Bank of America simply stated that the charity operates in a business type that it chooses not to\u200d serve. Chase Bank \u2062similarly closed the account of the\u2062 National Committee for \u200bReligious Freedom, a charity founded by former U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback, and demanded the disclosure of a list of donors who contributed 10 percent or more of its operating budget, as well as the criteria\u200d used to determine political support.<\/p>\n
Tedesco also highlighted that since 2019, 13 ADF donors have reported that their banks, including \u200cFidelity Charitable, Impact Assets, the Chicago Community Foundation, and the Community Foundation of Greater Memphis, have either \u200cbanned or delayed \u2063donations to ADF. These actions were taken due to the Southern Poverty Law Center’s designation of Christian charities, including ADF, \u2064as \u200c”hate groups.”<\/p>\n
Despite\u200c ADF’s success in winning 15 cases at the U.S. Supreme Court\u200b in the past 30 years, the Southern Poverty Law Center\u2064 continues to label it as a hate\u2063 group,\u2064 a designation that inspired a gunman to attack the Family Research\u200c Council’s offices in 2012.<\/p>\n
These revelations emphasize the need for urgent action to address censorship and discrimination in the financial\u2063 sector. American liberties and principles of \u2063free\u2062 speech and expression must\u2063 be safeguarded, ensuring that financial institutions do not infringe upon individuals’ rights based on \u200ctheir beliefs or affiliations. The role of federal agencies and their influence\u200d over the financial system must be thoroughly examined to protect the constitutional rights of all Americans.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Testimony today reveals that federal agencies provided banks with automated censorship tools. These tools flag Americans who purchase Bibles or advocate for immigration law enforcement as potential domestic terrorists. The funding of such tools by federal agencies mirrors those used by social media to combat misinformation and hate speech<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":519,"featured_media":2194915,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/53045736602_621ce46350_k.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[546],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2194914","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-federalist"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/53045736602_621ce46350_k.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2194914","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/519"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2194914"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2194914\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2194915"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2194914"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2194914"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2194914"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}