Is Holder's DOJ trying to shut down porn?

[Derec]

Is the DOJ Forcing Banks to Terminate the Accounts of Porn Stars?

In May 2013, CNBC wrote about actress Chanel Preston’s sudden account termination at Los Angeles’ City National Bank, and porn studio head Marc Greenberg’s lawsuit against JP Morgan Chase for violation of fair lending laws. Greenberg wanted to refinance his longstanding home loan, and said a JP Morgan vice president told him he was being declined for moral issues.
Now, news is slowly surfacing that shows the US Department of Justice may be strong-arming banks into banning porn stars.
It’s called Operation Choke Point, and it has nothing to do with deep-throating.
Instead, it’s a targeted effort to shut down as many as 30 separate industries by making it impossible for them to access banking services.
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed Thursday, American Banking Association CEO Frank Keating wrote that the Justice Department is “telling bankers to behave like policemen and judges.”
“Operation Choke Point is asking banks to identify customers who may be breaking the law or simply doing something government officials don’t like,” Keating wrote. “Banks must then ‘choke off’ those customers’ access to financial services, shutting down their accounts.”

Now Keating's own WSJ op-ed doesn't mention porn directly, but the program of DOJ instructing banks to go after certain businesses seems well documented as does the concurrent issue of banks shutting down porn star accounts, so it is certainly worth questioning if these two phenomena are linked.
This seems truly a case of "with Democrats like these who needs Republicans" even without the porn connection and especially with (and remember there is much animosity against porn on the feminist left). In any case this is yet another reason to dislike Eric Holder. Why Obama chose him and chose to not fire him is a mystery.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Wait ... how'd this porn star get money to put into a bank account in the first place? Is there someone out there who's paying for porn?

 

[steve_bnk]

Sounds like a SCOTUS case in the making.

Why not deny sevice to gays, blacks, Jews....

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Now Keating's own WSJ op-ed doesn't mention porn directly, but the program of DOJ instructing banks to go after certain businesses seems well documented as does the concurrent issue of banks shutting down porn star accounts, so it is certainly worth questioning if these two phenomena are linked.

So well documented, you have one example? If something like this is happening, it would appear wrong, but I'd hardly say you have established that this is happening. There are certainly other potential criminal actions that banks could be guarding against.

This seems truly a case of "with Democrats like these who needs Republicans" even without the porn connection...

So umm... without that connection, what other moral crusades are there or is the DoJ just asking banks to be vigilant on what appears to be criminal holdings?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I know I can rate threads by how good they are, but why doesn't VB have a button to warn about the dumb ones?

- - - Updated - - -

Wait ... how'd this porn star get money to put into a bank account in the first place? Is there someone out there who's paying for porn?

Only the rich and stupid.

- - - Updated - - -

Here is a non-partisan take on Operation Choke Point.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/04/16/operation-choke-point-the-battle-over-financial-data-between-the-government-and-banks/

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think this is Chase bank trying to make itself into Chaste bank rather than a general targeting of porn. They're just blaming the Feds for their decision.

 

[boneyard bill]

So well documented, you have one example? If something like this is happening, it would appear wrong, but I'd hardly say you have established that this is happening. There are certainly other potential criminal actions that banks could be guarding against.

This seems truly a case of "with Democrats like these who needs Republicans" even without the porn connection...

So umm... without that connection, what other moral crusades are there or is the DoJ just asking banks to be vigilant on what appears to be criminal holdings?

If the banks were vigilant about criminal activities, they would quit employing them. It is well-established that the banks are engaging in money laundering for drug dealers and even terrorist organizations as well as for engaging in fraud. They've lost many civil suits. But government regulators cannot file criminal charges. Only the Justice Dept can do that, and Holder hasn't done it.

If this is the case of a single bank that was headed by a fundamentalist Christian or an Orthodox Jew or someone like that who had moral objections, then it would be easy enough to explain, but JP Morgan Chase does not fit into that category. If they are discriminating against porn stars, it is because they have something to gain by it even if that some is simply a quid pro quo for something favors the Justice Dept has done for them (and certainly the Justice Dept has done them a LOT of favors).

The real question is qui bono? Who benefits? I can't think that the feminist left has enough skin in the game to push this that far. And if they were going to push it, they would probably do so publicly because that is how such groups operate. They need public issues to raise money. Maybe the Hollywood movie industry? Just a guess, but the Hollywood left is closely aligned to the feminists so there could be a coordinated push. A number of Hollywood porn stars have come up with aids lately so maybe they want to drive that industry out of Hollywood. But I suspect that there is something even more nefarious here although I don't have real good idea of what it is.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If the banks were vigilant about criminal activities, they would quit employing them. It is well-established that the banks are engaging in money laundering for drug dealers and even terrorist organizations as well as for engaging in fraud. They've lost many civil suits. But government regulators cannot file criminal charges. Only the Justice Dept can do that, and Holder hasn't done it.

I disagree. Many criminal enterprises are based on taking the money and getting out before the system catches up with them. It's pretty hard to stop that without getting onerous on the legitimate startup.

If this is the case of a single bank that was headed by a fundamentalist Christian or an Orthodox Jew or someone like that who had moral objections, then it would be easy enough to explain, but JP Morgan Chase does not fit into that category. If they are discriminating against porn stars, it is because they have something to gain by it even if that some is simply a quid pro quo for something favors the Justice Dept has done for them (and certainly the Justice Dept has done them a LOT of favors).

Or there's a prude in a very high position in the bank.

The real question is qui bono? Who benefits? I can't think that the feminist left has enough skin in the game to push this that far. And if they were going to push it, they would probably do so publicly because that is how such groups operate. They need public issues to raise money. Maybe the Hollywood movie industry? Just a guess, but the Hollywood left is closely aligned to the feminists so there could be a coordinated push. A number of Hollywood porn stars have come up with aids lately so maybe they want to drive that industry out of Hollywood. But I suspect that there is something even more nefarious here although I don't have real good idea of what it is.

They're saying it's about reputation.

 

[Zeluvia]

Payday lenders too?

From the article, this is a pretty wide net that is being cast, not just at porn stars.

And just what kind of favors does Chase owe the DOJ that they would comply? And does China attempts to clean up the internet have anything to do with this?

Well, I guess if you control the currency, you should be able to control what it is spent on...right?

 

[steve_bnk]

From what has been reported organized crime is long gone from porn. Too easy to produce technically coupled with the net and decriminalization.

Porn companies are above board enterprises paying business taxes and actors-actresses get paid on the books with taxes being paid.

Pushing it back underground brings back all the associated negative consequences.

 

[Derec]

I think this is Chase bank trying to make itself into Chaste bank rather than a general targeting of porn. They're just blaming the Feds for their decision.

We'll see if they remain the only one doing this.

 

[Derec]

Payday lenders too?

From the article, this is a pretty wide net that is being cast, not just at porn stars.

Sure. And even without the porn angle it stinks of government overreach. But at least payday lenders are a shady branch of the financial industry so it makes some sense to scrutinize their financial transactions.
But porn stars depositing their paychecks? What could possibly be objectionable about that? That stinks not only of government overreach but also a kind of prudishness that exists on both the Right and the Left.

And does China attempts to clean up the internet have anything to do with this?

I have no idea. Wasn't there a scandal even way back in Clinton's day about him accepting campaign donations from China? And isn't Holder a Clinton man originally? Speculative, but interesting I guess.

 

[Derec]

I know I can rate threads by how good they are, but why doesn't VB have a button to warn about the dumb ones?

Why do you think the thread is dumb? Because the head of DOJ has a D behind his name?

Wait ... how'd this porn star get money to put into a bank account in the first place? Is there someone out there who's paying for porn?

Only the rich and stupid.

I guess porn industry has suffered lately like the music industry but they are still making billions overall. Even online porn makes money - you have pay sites and free "tube" sites have a lot of ads.

Here is a non-partisan take on Operation Choke Point.

1. You know you can post links using tags, right? 2. I fail to see how...d entire legal industries are being targeted.

 

[doubtingt]

On the news today I heard about Chase bank closing the accounts of several porn stars. They listed the stars names, so I googled them, found some of their porn and spanked it. Thanks Chase!!!!

What's in your wallet?

 

[TV and credit cards]

Sure. And even without the porn angle it stinks of government overreach. But at least payday lenders are a shady branch of the financial industry so it makes some sense to scrutinize their financial transactions.
But porn stars depositing their paychecks? What could possibly be objectionable about that? That stinks not only of government overreach but also a kind of prudishness that exists on both the Right and the Left.

2. I fail to see how this take makes the program look any better. Under the guise of combating fraud entire legal industries are being targeted.

Profiling perhaps. Looking for the bad apples where they are likely to be. If your part of a gang task force, you gonna cruise Rancho Santa Fe?