TLDR: The Feds asked US banks to spy on Republicans using search terms like ‘Trump’ and ‘MAGA’
A new report from the House Judiciary Committee reveals that under the guise of investigating the events of January 6th, federal investigators asked banks to search and filter customer transactions using terms like “Trump” and “MAGA.” The Treasury Department also requested that banks query terms like “Bass Pro Shops” and “Dick’s Sporting Goods” to track gun purchases. This means that individuals who made purchases related to President Trump or his campaign, as well as those who purchased sporting goods or guns, could have potentially ended up on a federal target list of domestic violent extremists. These actions seem to be a surveillance tactic to monitor Republicans, as the term “domestic violent extremists” appears to be synonymous with Republicans in the eyes of the Feds.
The use of the January 6th events as a justification for spying on Republicans is concerning, as it seems like the government is using it as an umbrella term to justify various actions. The excuses given by the Treasury Department, that the searches were initiated under the previous administration, only further raise questions about the government’s conduct. It essentially implies that they were investigating supporters of the sitting president, which is problematic.
The report also revealed that Bank of America voluntarily provided the FBI with a list of customers who made credit card transactions in the D.C. area between January 5 and January 7, 2021, as well as customers who had made historical purchases of firearms or had purchased hotel, Airbnb, or airline travel during a specific date range. Bank of America reportedly did all of this without requesting a warrant. This raises concerns about privacy and the ethicality of such actions.
In response to these allegations, Bank of America claims that they were acting on instructions from the Treasury Department. However, this entire affair appears to be a self-supporting investigation, where each entity involved justifies their actions based on the instructions they received. The lack of transparency and potentially unethical or even illegal actions make this situation even more troubling.
The FBI has declined to comment on these allegations, which only adds to the growing concerns. It is evident that these actions have ramifications for individuals who may disagree with the current administration and its policies. The use of surveillance and the targeting of individuals based on their political affiliation is a significant threat to personal freedoms and privacy rights. In light of these revelations, it may be necessary for individuals to be cautious and adopt measures to protect their privacy, such as using cash for transactions and being mindful of their actions and affiliations.
