“I object to passing this bill right now. It is an unfair attack on Donald Trump and his family. The bill also has major technical flaws, and it helps the government spy on people's bank accounts for political reasons.”
“Mr. President, reserving the right to object, the immediate consideration of S. 5389, which the Senator from Massachusetts has requested, has given her an opportunity to blast again President Trump and his family. World Liberty Financial is not his business; it is his children’s business. This body has been very reticent, for good reason, to control the economic activities of the children of Members of the Senate. This is their business, and they have very good reason to choose to go overseas to do that business--because they were debanked in the United States for political reasons. If you have a business that has accounts in American banks and you are told you have got a week to get your money out of that bank and you are going to have to make payroll, you have got a problem. The Trump kids had a problem because, during the last administration, they were debanked. During the last administration, oil and gas companies were debanked. Firearms companies were debanked. Digital asset banks that were banking digital asset companies and were completely solvent were forced out of business. That is what happens with people who are obsessed with bank surveillance and obsessed with power--that is what they do with it--and now we are seeing it again in S. 5389. This bill has so many technical flaws that I don’t know where to start. So let’s start with the word ``control.’’ Does the Senator from Massachusetts use the word ``control’’ to mean control under the Bank Holding Company Act or the Home Owners’ Loan Act or the Change in Bank Control Act? It is not specified in the text. Does the Senator realize that there is a massive loophole in her bill that would permit a covered person to acquire a bank through a change of control application to purchase? The Senator from Massachusetts may also not have realized that the Federal Reserve Board is not the legal decisionmaker for master accounts under 12 U.S.C. 2488. The Federal Reserve Banks are. Many times, including in the Custodia case before the U.S. Supreme Court, the Federal Reserve Board directs an outcome to the Federal Reserve Banks, as is the case in Custodia, but the Board does not approve applications. I would also like to remind the Senator from Massachusetts that she cheered on the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, and the OCC when they weaponized their powers and terminated the bank accounts of many law- abiding Americans--those engaged in digital asset activities, firearms, and oil and gas. It was all part of Operation Choke Point 2.0. On the Banking Committee, we finally saw the guidance documents that were being used by the Federal Reserve through its division of bank supervision, which is overseen by the Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve. They were using guidance, saying: If directors of a bank or the president of a bank is making inappropriate political remarks, that is a reason for a little bureaucrat to get after him. That is what happened in Canada when the truckers had their bank accounts shut down because they were picketing the capital, and people who donated to their cause had their bank accounts shut down. This is a surveillance state in the making, and the leader of that surveillance state in the making is in this room tonight. She is the proponent of S. 5389. This is a stain on our country. We have to rid this country of this stain wherein we surveil our own people through their bank accounts-- how they spend their money--the seeing eye of the Federal Government on what you do. This is wrong. This is un-American. This bill is un-American. For these reasons, I object.”
Mr. President, reserving the right to object, the immediate consideration of S. 5389, which the Senator from Massachusetts has requested, has given her an opportunity to blast again President Trump and his family. World Liberty Financial is not his business; it is his children’s business. This body has been very reticent, for good reason, to control the economic activities of the children of Members of the Senate. This is their business, and they have very good reason to choose to go overseas to do that business--because they were debanked in the United States for political reasons. If you have a business that has accounts in American banks and you are told you have got a week to get your money out of that bank and you are going to have to make payroll, you have got a problem. The Trump kids had a problem because, during the last administration, they were debanked. During the last administration, oil and gas companies were debanked. Firearms companies were debanked. Digital asset banks that were banking digital asset companies and were completely solvent were forced out of business. That is what happens with people who are obsessed with bank surveillance and obsessed with power--that is what they do with it--and now we are seeing it again in S. 5389. This bill has so many technical flaws that I don’t know where to start. So let’s start with the word ``control.’’ Does the Senator from Massachusetts use the word ``control’’ to mean control under the Bank Holding Company Act or the Home Owners’ Loan Act or the Change in Bank Control Act? It is not specified in the text. Does the Senator realize that there is a massive loophole in her bill that would permit a covered person to acquire a bank through a change of control application to purchase? The Senator from Massachusetts may also not have realized that the Federal Reserve Board is not the legal decisionmaker for master accounts under 12 U.S.C. 2488. The Federal Reserve Banks are. Many times, including in the Custodia case before the U.S. Supreme Court, the Federal Reserve Board directs an outcome to the Federal Reserve Banks, as is the case in Custodia, but the Board does not approve applications. I would also like to remind the Senator from Massachusetts that she cheered on the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, and the OCC when they weaponized their powers and terminated the bank accounts of many law- abiding Americans--those engaged in digital asset activities, firearms, and oil and gas. It was all part of Operation Choke Point 2.0. On the Banking Committee, we finally saw the guidance documents that were being used by the Federal Reserve through its division of bank supervision, which is overseen by the Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve. They were using guidance, saying: If directors of a bank or the president of a bank is making inappropriate political remarks, that is a reason for a little bureaucrat to get after him. That is what happened in Canada when the truckers had their bank accounts shut down because they were picketing the capital, and people who donated to their cause had their bank accounts shut down. This is a surveillance state in the making, and the leader of that surveillance state in the making is in this room tonight. She is the proponent of S. 5389. This is a stain on our country. We have to rid this country of this stain wherein we surveil our own people through their bank accounts-- how they spend their money--the seeing eye of the Federal Government on what you do. This is wrong. This is un-American. This bill is un-American. For these reasons, I object.