Comments on: DOJ’s “Operation Choke Point” Strips Porn Stars of Bank Accounts

By: platypus

platypus — Sat, 03 May 2014 22:58:55 +0000

Well, it looks like we’ve come full circle to the original method – lanterns in a belfry.

By: platypus

platypus — Sat, 03 May 2014 22:56:28 +0000

Whoa! Better get a grant to investigate what’s wrong with it.

/sarc

By: Shane

Shane — Sat, 03 May 2014 18:28:29 +0000

LOL, Paul forget the overdraft fees how about fractional reserve that allows the bank to really earn 40% on your 4% loan. Now you see why credit cards are so lucrative.

By: Henry Hawkins

Henry Hawkins — Sat, 03 May 2014 02:50:07 +0000

Porn stars, eh? Looks like I need to go undercover on this.

By: plauer

plauer — Sat, 03 May 2014 01:32:36 +0000

And don’t forget, The FCC is now abandoning “Net Neutrality” and will be allowing “Fast Lanes”. If you can have fast lanes, you can have slow lanes, and very slow lanes. Guess what content will be placed there (For our own good of course).

By: randian

randian — Fri, 02 May 2014 23:46:29 +0000

Congress shouldn’t have mandated banks not operate across state lines in the first place.

By: genes

genes — Fri, 02 May 2014 22:13:34 +0000

It’s easier for the Feds to pressure 5 or 6 mega banks than all the 5 or 6 branch ones that used to exist. That’s why they’re letting them merge and bailing them out so they won’t be broken up.

By: innocent bystander

innocent bystander — Fri, 02 May 2014 22:01:31 +0000

Let’s get practical. What bank accounts are immune to this?

By: genes

genes — Fri, 02 May 2014 21:35:27 +0000

I seem to recall that recently the Feds seized a Bitcoin site.

By: Neo

Neo — Fri, 02 May 2014 20:29:41 +0000

They told me if I voted for Mitt Romney that this would happen

By: Ragspierre

Ragspierre — Fri, 02 May 2014 19:22:46 +0000

Right, and the laws of economics say they are not…

1. as “obscenely profitable” as they are claimed to be, and

2. nobody would use them if they weren’t of utility to them.

But they are very easy targets to demagogue.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 02 May 2014 18:55:32 +0000

oh lord, the payday lender debate again?

so it’s OK for the traditional banks to ding people $50-100 bucks a month in overdraft fees, but not ok for a payday lender to charge them short-term interest?

got it.

By: JBourque

JBourque — Fri, 02 May 2014 18:50:29 +0000

So now we have a concrete reason why banks have been dropping such businesses. I’d noticed the stories that have occasionally cropped up.

By: MarkS

MarkS — Fri, 02 May 2014 17:05:36 +0000

Anton Scalia recently suggested that if taxes got too high perhaps you should revolt. ‘wonder if he thinks that should also apply to too much loss of liberty and freedom?

By: Ragspierre

Ragspierre — Fri, 02 May 2014 16:50:59 +0000

I disagree. NONE of them are questionable.

A businesses is legitimate or not. Its cachet is something you and your neighbor can whisper about behind your hands (not you, per se…but you get it), but it is either a legal business or it is not, and NO Federal or state LEOs…or para-LEOs…have ANY business messing with them.

This practice is OUTLAW practice, not “questionable” at all.

By: mishka

mishka — Fri, 02 May 2014 16:40:07 +0000

First it’s porn stars. Then is it owners of Medical Marijuana clinics? Tobacco shop owners? Liquor store owners? Strip club owners? If the USDA is taken over by Vegans, do owners of grocery stores or butcher shops have their accounts closed? Where does it end?

By: MouseTheLuckyDog

MouseTheLuckyDog — Fri, 02 May 2014 16:38:35 +0000

Some other industries
Pharmaceutical Sales
Surveillance Equipment
Home Based Charities
Lottery Sales (???)
Drug Paraphernalia ( really Obama?)

they are certainly going after some sleazy people, ( eg most prominently Payday Loans ) but even they deserve due process. But some of these are highly questionable.

By: Olinser

Olinser — Fri, 02 May 2014 15:46:06 +0000

More like the Asian porn industry. They already have a pretty significant market share outside the US.

By: georgfelis

georgfelis — Fri, 02 May 2014 15:33:48 +0000

At one point in time (and I think it was under a Republican administration or two) IRS agents were not permitted to have any outstanding tax liabilities or discrepancies if they expected to remain employed with the agency. There are legitimate honest IRS agents who have been on the job for decades, but the recent flood of new hires and political appointees have made them duck for cover and count days until retirement (while hopefully collecting information for their tell-all book or the upcoming trials of their former bosses).

By: georgfelis

georgfelis — Fri, 02 May 2014 15:26:10 +0000

Those are a little difficult to slip into a dancer’s waistband…