YubNub Social YubNub Social
    #pet #brasscablegland #corrosionresistance #industrialpower #waterproof
    Advanced Search
  • Login
  • Register

  • Night mode
  • © 2025 YubNub Social
    About • Directory • Contact Us • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

    Select Language

  • English
Install our *FREE* WEB APP! (PWA)
Night mode
Community
News Feed (Home) Popular Posts Events Blog Market Forum
Media
Headline News VidWatch Game Zone Top PodCasts
Explore
Explore Jobs Offers
© 2025 YubNub Social
  • English
About • Directory • Contact Us • Privacy Policy • Terms of Use • Android • Apple iOS • Get Our App

Discover posts

Posts

Users

Pages

Group

Blog

Market

Events

Games

Forum

Jobs

The Blaze Media Feed
The Blaze Media Feed
38 w

Obama DOJ initiative became political de-banking scheme, Netscape co-founder Marc Andreessen tells Joe Rogan
Favicon 
www.theblaze.com

Obama DOJ initiative became political de-banking scheme, Netscape co-founder Marc Andreessen tells Joe Rogan

Brexiteer Nigel Farage was de-banked last year for political reasons. While acknowledging he was a commercially viable customer, Coutts bank, part of the NatWest Group, dropped the British politician because of his comparison of Black Lives Matter rioters to the Taliban; his criticism of climate alarmism and his suggestion that "net zero is net stupid"; his "endorsements of Donald Trump"; and other expressions thought unpalatable by the powers that be. Although Britain has done its best in recent months to clamp down on perceived wrong think, including silent prayer, it is hardly exceptional when it comes to the practice of de-banking. Marc Andreessen, co-founder of Netscape and general partner at the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, recently told Joe Rogan that scores of tech founders have been de-banked under the Biden administration through a coordinated and politically motivated effort he referred to as "Operation Choke Point 2.0," an apparent update on a scandalous Obama Department of Justice initiative. In the days since the interview, numerous crypto entrepreneurs have gone online with their own de-banking tales. The 'wrong politics' After explaining that "de-banking is when you, as either a person or your company, are literally kicked out of the banking system," Andreessen told Rogan that it has hit close to home — his business partner's father was de-banked. When asked why David Horowitz, a critic of Islamic and leftist extremism, would have been de-banked, Andreessen said, "For having the wrong politics. For saying unacceptable things." "I mean, David Horowitz is, you know — he's pro-Trump," said Andreessen. "I mean, he's said all kinds of things. You know, he's been very anti-Islamic terrorism. He's been very worried about immigration, all these things." Other individuals and groups who have been de-banked in recent years were similarly on the right, which may explain why the Southern Poverty Law Center has defended the practice. 'There's no constitutional amendment that says the government can't de-bank you.' In September 2023, Bank of America de-banked John Eastman, founding director of the Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence and one of the attorneys also targeted by the 65 Project for his work with President-elect Donald Trump. Two months later, USAAA Federal Saving Bank similarly de-banked him. Former Nebraska state Treasurer John Murante (R) noted in an op-ed last year that Chase had de-banked multiple individuals and organizations — including the Arkansas Family Council, Defense of Liberty, and retired general Michael Flynn Jr. — over "mainstream American views." Months after JPMorgan Chase canceled the checking account for former Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback's faith-based nonprofit National Committee for Religious Freedom, Brownback reportedly received an email from Chase indicating that he was a "politically exposed person." "Under current banking regulations, after all the reforms of the last 20 years, there's now a category called a 'politically exposed person,' PEP," Andreessen told Rogan. "You are required by financial regulators to kick them off, to kick them out of your bank. You're not allowed to have them." According to a 2021 Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council document, the "term PEP is commonly used in the financial industry to refer to foreign individuals who are or have been entrusted with a prominent public function, as well as to their immediate family members and close associates." The term has also been applied to domestic individuals similarly entrusted with prominent public functions. The Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering, an international outfit hosted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, noted in its own definition that due to their position and influence, many PEPs "are in positions that potentially can be abused for the purpose of committing money laundering offences and related predicate offenses, including corruption and bribery, as well as conducting activity related to terrorist financing." Andreessen suggested that the de-banking of domestic PEPs tends to go only one way, noting, "I have not heard of a single instance of anyone on the left getting de-banked." A private-public scheme The tech entrepreneur explained that this politically unidirectional mechanism is wielded by a combination of governmental and private forces. "There's a constitutional amendment that says the government can't restrict your speech, but there's no constitutional amendment that says the government can't de-bank you," said Andreessen. The government leans on private banking institutions to do its dirty work, which gives it the benefit of distance, such that "the government gets to say, 'We didn't do it. It was the private company that did it, and of course, JPMorgan can decide who they want to have as customers.'" Andreessen characterized the political persecution scheme as a "privatized sanctions regime that lets bureaucrats do to American citizens the same thing that we do to Iran: Just kick you out of the financial system." According to Andreessen, this "regime" has been targeting numerous crypto entrepreneurs since President Joe Biden took office. 'It's just raw administrative power.' "This has been happening to a lot of the fin-tech entrepreneurs, anybody trying to start any kind of new banking service, because they're trying to protect the big banks," said Andreessen. "This has been happening, by the way, also in legal fields of economic activity that they don't like." Thanks, Obama Andreessen suggested that this coordinated effort to crush perceived political adversaries through monetary pressures kicked off in earnest "about 15 years ago with this thing called Operation Choke Point." Jeremy Tedesco, senior counsel and senior vice president of corporate engagement at the Alliance Defending Freedom, told members of the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government in March: In the now infamous Operation Choke Point, President Obama's DOJ and FDIC spearheaded a multi-agency initiative to target legal industries like firearms dealers, tobacco sellers, dating services, coin dealers, and payday lenders. After a group of payday lenders sued the FDIC, litigation filings and subsequent federal oversight offered a rare look into the world of financial regulation. The FDIC expanded "reputational risk" to include "any negative publicity involving the third party." It then worked in conjunction with the DOJ and other agencies to pressure financial institutions to deny service to disfavored industries. The DOJ issued over 60 subpoenas; the FDIC and OCC issued related guidance on the reputation risk presented by payment processing for these entities; and the FDIC listed the above businesses as "high-risk businesses," all with the intent to cut off banking access to these industries. Andreessen suggested that the Biden administration extended the concept to apply to political opponents as well as to crypto and tech entrepreneurs. "Choke Point 2.0 is primarily against their political enemies and then to their disfavored tech startups," said Andreessen. "And it's hit the tech world hard. We've had like 30 founders de-banked in the last four years." According to the tech entrepreneur, those he knows who have been de-banked effectively had to reinvent themselves or get creative with where they put their money to "try to get away from the eye of Sauron." Tyler Winklevoss, co-founder of Gemini, noted after Elon Musk highlighted Andreessen's comments that he was de-banked and suggested that there have likely been far more than 30 individuals de-banked in the burgeoning industry. "Totally unlawful, evil behavior," said Winklevoss. Brian Armstrong, co-founder and CEO of Coinbase, responded to Andreessen's claims, noting, "Can confirm this is true. It was one one of the most unethical and un-American things that happened in the Biden administration, and my guess is we'll find Elizabeth Warren's fingerprints all over it (Biden himself was probably unaware). We're still collecting documents via FOIA requests, so hopefully the full story emerges of who was involved and whether they broke any laws." Konstantin Richter, CEO of Blockdaemon, claimed that Bank of America similarly cut his organization loose. The nature of de-banking leaves victims with few or no means to seek remedy. "You can't go sue a regulator to fix this. It's not through any kind of court judgment. It's just raw power. It's just raw administrative power," said Andreessen. "It's the government or politicians just deciding that things are going to be a certain way, and then they just apply pressure until they get it." To make matters worse, "There are no fingerprints," said Andreessen. Those behind the de-banking are virtually untouchable. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Like
Comment
Share
The Blaze Media Feed
The Blaze Media Feed
38 w

Bill Maher exposes Jane Fonda's ignorance about extremist left-wing policies
Favicon 
www.theblaze.com

Bill Maher exposes Jane Fonda's ignorance about extremist left-wing policies

Liberal host Bill Maher had far-left celebrity Jane Fonda on his show and spent much of his time explaining to her the existence of far-left policies that had pushed so many Americans to vote for Republicans. Fonda blamed criticism of the far left on people like Maher but then appeared completely ignorant of the reasons for the criticism. Maher offered her some examples in the contentious interview. 'That shows where your politics are. That's not where mine are.' "The NAACP last year issued a travel advisory," Maher explained. "You know where they issued a travel advisory for black people not to go? Florida. Every day there's stories like that, where that just makes people roll their eyes and go, 'Are you people nuts?' Even if they don't matter that much, I don't think one person listened to this and thought, 'I can't go to Florida.' But they just suggest something to the average person." He went on to offer another example of transgender activists demanding that all of society affirm that men can get pregnant. "Do you really think men can get pregnant? You know, that kind of stuff. I understand that a trans [man] can get pregnant. That's different from a man getting pregnant," he continued. "And the way they insist on blurring that line, as if that's some sort of reasonable social cause, as opposed to just being for having full rights, respect, and protection for trans people. We get that!" "So I've never heard about men getting pregnant. I've never heard about this argument. It must be some part of what you call the 'far left' that is so minuscule that I —" Fonda interjected. "No, Jane, it's not minuscule, and I'm sorry, you can't throw this back on us," he interrupted. Maher also had to explain why many consider California over-regulated. He gave her an example from his own home, where he said that he was required to have three separate inspections when he tried to change his garage door. "You've never heard that California is over-taxed and over-regulated? That we are a one-party state where there's no checks on that sort of extreme leftism?" Maher asked her. "I don't for a minute consider California a state that is extreme leftist," she scoffed. "Not at all. Not in any way.""Well, that shows where your politics are," he said. "That's not where mine are." Fonda is famous for infuriating patriotic Americans when she posed with communist forces during the war in Vietnam in opposition to the U.S. military operation. She has since admitted that it was a mistake to do so but has continued supporting far-left causes and policies. The entire interview can be viewed on the YouTube channel for the Maher show. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Like
Comment
Share
The Blaze Media Feed
The Blaze Media Feed
38 w

Trump’s border strategy exposes myths about posse comitatus
Favicon 
www.theblaze.com

Trump’s border strategy exposes myths about posse comitatus

Our military was not built for urban renewal projects in Kabul or to referee Sunni versus Shia conflicts in Baghdad. Its primary purpose is to protect our country from foreign invaders. If the military cannot be deployed to address the millions of people strategically funneled into the country by ruthless drug cartels — cartels that are killing hundreds of thousands of Americans with fentanyl — then what purpose does it serve? The fact that these individuals do not remain near the border does not transform mass removals into a domestic law enforcement issue; it remains a matter of national defense. Many in the media shout, “Posse comitatus!” as if invoking it magically prohibits the military from addressing the invasion, attempting to sound legally astute. Some Republicans, such as libertarian-leaning Rand Paul of Kentucky, express concern over the “optics” of using the military for mass deportations. While cutting off employment and benefit incentives would likely eliminate the need for mass deportations by encouraging many to leave on their own, we cannot legally preclude the military’s use based on a flawed interpretation of the law. Prudence or 'optics' should not mislead us into spreading misinformation about the legal authority we must preserve. Ulysses S. Grant signed the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act to prevent the military from enforcing domestic Reconstruction-era laws against American citizens in the South without explicit authorization from Congress. But repelling an invasion at the border — or within the nation’s interior — is precisely the kind of mission our founders envisioned for the military. Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution obliges the federal government to protect states against invasion. We owe this to border states like Arizona and Texas, as well as every state impacted by illegal migration. Article IV, Section 4 should serve as the constitutional exception to the Posse Comitatus Act prohibition on military enforcement. The Constitution itself expressly authorizes federal action to secure the nation from invasion, making this a legitimate use of the military in the face of an ongoing crisis. Even without the constitutional provision, the law itself only prohibits the military from enforcing domestic laws targeting Americans, such as tax laws or traffic regulations, under the direction of local marshals. This prohibition stems from the term “posse comitatus,” which means “the power of the county.” The 1878 law prevents the military from acting as reinforcements to enforce local laws under the authority of a county sheriff. The act responded to Attorney General Caleb Cushing’s 1854 opinion during the “Bleeding Kansas” conflict, which held that “every person in the district or county above the age of fifteen years,” including “militia, soldiers, marines,” was part of the posse comitatus and subject to the sheriff or marshal’s commands. As the Congressional Research Service notes, Congress was alarmed by this precedent even before 1878 and attempted to restrict it through an Army appropriations bill, prohibiting the use of the military to enforce territorial law in Kansas. Under Trump’s proposed plan, however, the military would focus solely on those who invaded the country and enforce national sovereignty laws. Just as states can declare an invasion, the federal government has the authority to treat the 10-million-man border incursion as an invasion. When gangs like Tren de Aragua operate across half the states, their numbers exceed the size of any force America’s founders envisioned threatening the nation during the Constitution’s adoption. Using the military in this context is entirely legitimate. Labeling it “immigration law” does not transform it into a domestic territorial matter outside the scope of national defense. During “Operation Wetback,” President Eisenhower deported up to 1.3 million illegal aliens using the U.S. military, including National Guardsmen operating under Title 10 federal orders. The operation was completed within a few months, and no court challenges were filed on the grounds of violating the Posse Comitatus Act. At the time, cartels and transnational gangs posed a far lesser national defense threat than they do today. The absence of legal challenges stemmed from the fact that deportation is not equivalent to a law enforcement action depriving someone of life, liberty, or property — protections covered under the 1878 act. As the Supreme Court ruled in Fong Yue Ting v. United States (1893): The order of deportation is not a punishment for crime. It is not a "banishment," in the sense in which that word is often applied to the expulsion of a citizen from his country by way of punishment. It is but a method of enforcing the return to his own country of an alien who has not complied with the conditions upon the performance of which the government of the nation, acting within its constitutional authority and through the proper departments, has determined that his continuing to reside here shall depend. He has not, therefore, been deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process or law, and the provisions of the Constitution securing the right of trial by jury and prohibiting unreasonable searches and seizures and cruel and unusual punishments have no application. In short, actions not governed by the laws of due process are not subject to the Posse Comitatus Act’s limitations on military use. If the goal were to prosecute and imprison illegal aliens indefinitely, that would constitute a domestic law enforcement action. However, removing individuals who invaded national sovereignty by escorting them across the international border falls squarely within the military’s legal authority. A large military force going house to house to deport illegal aliens likely won’t be necessary. Cutting off incentives such as employment, identity theft opportunities, welfare benefits, and K-12 education would prompt most to leave voluntarily. State enforcement of laws, combined with state guard units operating under Title 32 (and not subject to the Posse Comitatus Act), in red states would ensure that any encounter with the state leads to removal. This approach would deter illegal immigration, limiting active deportation efforts to targeting criminal aliens. In fact, some illegal immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, are already leaving in anticipation of Trump taking office. Prudence or “optics” should not mislead us into spreading misinformation about the legal authority we must preserve. This is about protecting territorial sovereignty — the very purpose for which America’s founders envisioned a standing army — far more than defending the fragmented territories of warring Islamic capitals.
Like
Comment
Share
Twitchy Feed
Twitchy Feed
38 w

Dick Durbin Finds the Bubble of Denial More Comforting Than Admitting Trump Can Fire an FBI Director
Favicon 
twitchy.com

Dick Durbin Finds the Bubble of Denial More Comforting Than Admitting Trump Can Fire an FBI Director

Dick Durbin Finds the Bubble of Denial More Comforting Than Admitting Trump Can Fire an FBI Director
Like
Comment
Share
Twitchy Feed
Twitchy Feed
38 w

Ric Grenell Just Needs 3 Words to Drop Adam Schiff on His Pointy Little HEAD for Whining About Kash Patel
Favicon 
twitchy.com

Ric Grenell Just Needs 3 Words to Drop Adam Schiff on His Pointy Little HEAD for Whining About Kash Patel

Ric Grenell Just Needs 3 Words to Drop Adam Schiff on His Pointy Little HEAD for Whining About Kash Patel
Like
Comment
Share
Twitchy Feed
Twitchy Feed
38 w

Hypocritical Harpies at 'The View' React to Hunter Biden's Pardon EXACTLY How You'd Expect
Favicon 
twitchy.com

Hypocritical Harpies at 'The View' React to Hunter Biden's Pardon EXACTLY How You'd Expect

Hypocritical Harpies at 'The View' React to Hunter Biden's Pardon EXACTLY How You'd Expect
Like
Comment
Share
RedState Feed
RedState Feed
38 w

Democrat Staffer Arrested for Trying to Bring Cache of Ammo Into House Office Building
Favicon 
redstate.com

Democrat Staffer Arrested for Trying to Bring Cache of Ammo Into House Office Building

Democrat Staffer Arrested for Trying to Bring Cache of Ammo Into House Office Building
Like
Comment
Share
RedState Feed
RedState Feed
38 w

Lombardo Calls for Election Reform in Nevada, Slams Delayed Results As a 'National Embarrassment'
Favicon 
redstate.com

Lombardo Calls for Election Reform in Nevada, Slams Delayed Results As a 'National Embarrassment'

Lombardo Calls for Election Reform in Nevada, Slams Delayed Results As a 'National Embarrassment'
Like
Comment
Share
RedState Feed
RedState Feed
38 w

Hamas Had Better Take Notice After Trump Issues Fiery Ultimatum to Terrorist Group
Favicon 
redstate.com

Hamas Had Better Take Notice After Trump Issues Fiery Ultimatum to Terrorist Group

Hamas Had Better Take Notice After Trump Issues Fiery Ultimatum to Terrorist Group
Like
Comment
Share
RedState Feed
RedState Feed
38 w

Report: 'Dr.' Jill Biden's Role in Hunter Biden Pardon Situation Is Revealed
Favicon 
redstate.com

Report: 'Dr.' Jill Biden's Role in Hunter Biden Pardon Situation Is Revealed

Report: 'Dr.' Jill Biden's Role in Hunter Biden Pardon Situation Is Revealed
Like
Comment
Share
Showing 1555 out of 56668
  • 1551
  • 1552
  • 1553
  • 1554
  • 1555
  • 1556
  • 1557
  • 1558
  • 1559
  • 1560
  • 1561
  • 1562
  • 1563
  • 1564
  • 1565
  • 1566
  • 1567
  • 1568
  • 1569
  • 1570

Edit Offer

Add tier








Select an image
Delete your tier
Are you sure you want to delete this tier?

Reviews

In order to sell your content and posts, start by creating a few packages. Monetization

Pay By Wallet

Payment Alert

You are about to purchase the items, do you want to proceed?

Request a Refund