Insurrection 2021

[Random Internet Person]

Jack is such a faggot.

But he’s also a future winner for the congressional Medal of Freedom.

 

[big ups liquid richard]

Looks like Twitter is pressing pause on some dissidents voices so as to prevent them from besmirching tomorrow's glorious coronation:

Michelle Malkin on Gab: ''

Michelle Malkin on Gab: 'Locked out of Twitter with no explanation for 12 hours. RSBN Network also locked out on inauguration eve under the same conditions. No coincidence. Glad to have Gab and Telegram to communicate with my fellow patriots. Stay tuned for newest syndicated newspaper column on...

gab.com

LOL the groyper lady with a jewish husband and kids? She's a grifter. This is an attention stunt.

 

[Oats12345]

But he’s also a future winner for the congressional Medal of Freedom.

Could God. Can we pull a Rasputin on him

 

[big ups liquid richard]

https://twitter.com/schizmonkey_/status/1351628338624942086

View attachment 1857718
*dumb and dumber saying theres a chance*

Ahahaha! What a fucking idiot. He's even got the obligatory MAGA toughbro profile picture.

 

[Badungus Kabungus]

If that's what you're waiting for, you better keep the "curb your enthusiasm" theme on constant standby. Nothing will come of this. At most, a few disgruntled former Donaldrones will be assblasted and do something stupid but a coup? Nah. Not seeing it.

Whatever faction of oligarchs or military or whatever that helped create the Trump presidency out of thin air back in 2016 isn't just going to let their investment go to shit now, would they?

 

[Garm]

Curse you Gadget
View attachment 1856832
View attachment 1856833

"How dare you treat us like we treated you?! HOW DARE!"

Short version is boomer old person takes litteraly that wrtten documents count as spoken word .
This could of been aviod if increased the cost for making the cake but, still honor before death

@Null
the trannies found the gold
they after this & guns & Oil for agenda.


View attachment 1857069

Spoiler: update

Regulator finalizes rule forcing banks to serve oil, gun companies
BY SYLVAN LANE - 01/14/21 09:19 AM EST 365
125

Just In...
FTC chairman Simons to step down this month
TECHNOLOGY
— 3M 41S AGO
Biden Intel chief nominee Avril Haines pledges public report on QAnon threat
TECHNOLOGY
— 7M 19S AGO
CNN poll: Melania Trump leaving office as least popular first lady ever
IN THE KNOW
— 15M 21S AGO
Lobbying world
LOBBYING HIRES
— 20M 57S AGO
Biden has historic opportunity with inaugural address to turn the page
OPINION
— 22M 52S AGO
Two Guard members removed from Biden inauguration over ties to far-right groups: report
DEFENSE
— 26M 54S AGO
Texas governor calls FBI vetting of National Guard troops 'offensive'
STATE WATCH
— 31M 1S AGO
Cori Bush dismisses concerns of being 'co-opted' by establishment
HOUSE
— 33M 31S AGO
VIEW ALL
Related News
Nine, including former Michigan governor, charged over Flint water crisis
Nine, including former Michigan governor…
Delta puts customers who harassed Romney, Graham on no-fly list: CEO
Delta puts customers who harassed Romney…
Lawmakers mount pressure on Trump to leave office
Lawmakers mount pressure on Trump to…
Read This Before You Renew Amazon Prime Again
Read This Before You Renew Amazon Prime…
Sponsored | Capital One Shopping
by

Regulator finalizes rule forcing banks to serve oil, gun companies
© iStock
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) on Thursday finalized a controversial rule banning large banks from rejecting businesses based on their industry.

The move comes less than two months after the agency first proposed the regulations.

The rule makes it illegal for any bank regulated by the OCC with more than $100 billion in assets to reject a customer for reasons other than financial risk. Supporters and critics of the rule both say it is intended to prevent more banks from joining those who’ve stopped serving firearm companies and financing oil and gas drilling projects.

“As Comptrollers and staff in previous administrations have made clear in speeches, guidance, and testimony, banks should not terminate services to entire categories of customers without conducting individual risk assessments,” said Acting Comptroller Brian Brooks, who announced Wednesday he will leave the agency on Thursday.

“It is inconsistent with basic principles of prudent risk management to make decisions based solely on conclusory or categorical assertions of risk without actual analysis. Moreover, elected officials should determine what is legal and illegal in our country,” he said.

The OCC first proposed its fair access rule on Nov. 19 to praise from Republicans, who’ve fiercely criticized several major banks that dropped clients in the firearm industry or pledged to stop funding Arctic drilling projects. Those banks include Citibank, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and JPMorgan Chase.

"Fairness matters. Discrimination is not allowed in our society and big banks should not be an exception. No matter how important their services are, they do not have the right to create de-facto bans on legal businesses like energy producers and gun manufacturers," said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), a member of the Senate Banking Committee whose state is one of the biggest U.S. producers of oil and natural gas.

The agency argued that the rule upholds the OCC’s obligation “to ensure fair access to financial services, and fair treatment of customers” by banks under the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law.

Democrats, however, argue that the Dodd-Frank fair access principles are meant to protect people of color and low income communities who’ve faced decades of banking discrimination — not powerful corporations with ample financial sector options.

Bank industry groups have also condemned the OCC rule as an unnecessary intrusion into decisions made by private businesses.

"The rule lacks both logic and legal basis, it ignores basic facts about how banking works, and it will undermine the safety and soundness of the banks to which it applies," said Greg Baer, president and CEO of the Bank Policy Institute, a research and advocacy group for big U.S. banks.

Critics of the rule have also ripped the OCC for seeking to approve it quickly before President-elect Joe Biden takes office and appoints a new comptroller, who could have stopped the rule from being finalized. The OCC finalized the rule just ten days after the legally mandated comment period ended and less than two months after it was first proposed, a remarkably fast turnaround for a federal rule.

"Its substantive problems are outweighed only by the egregious procedural failings of the rulemaking process, and for these reasons it is unlikely to withstand scrutiny," Baer said.

The only difference between the final rule and the proposal is the removal of a provision that would have made banks offer a service to a business if rejecting it would have prevented the firm from entering or competing in a market or would have helped another customer of the bank, the OCC said.

The fair access rule is set to take effect April 1, but the Biden administration likely has several options to prevent that from happening.

Court strikes down Trump coal power plant rule
15 former Defense officials back waiver for Austin to serve as...
Biden is expected to appoint a new acting comptroller on Jan. 20 while his nominee to lead the OCC awaits Senate confirmation. A new acting comptroller can likely delay when the rule takes effect so the OCC can revise it or scrap it altogether.

Biden and Congress can also try to revoke the rule through the Congressional Review Act (CRA), which allows both chambers to pass a bill repealing a new regulation and preventing the agency from releasing a similar rule.

--Updated at 9:53 a.m

Democrats Pledge To Fight Trump Rule Ensuring Banks Won’t Refuse Service To Conservatives​

Banks have a duty to provide proportionate access to financial services, even for clients involved in legal but politically controversial industries.

By John Hirschauer
JANUARY 19, 2021

In its final days, the Trump administration is seeking to disrupt the way progressive activists increasingly impose their will on big business: through banks controlling the loan lifelines to the economy.
A regulation just finalized (update) aims to prevent lenders from blackballing businesses in industries opposed by the left by requiring banks to demonstrate that their loan decisions are “based on quantitative, impartial risk-based standards,” rather than political or reputational concerns.

The proposed Fair Access to Financial Services Rule (FAFSR) is a response to successful pressure campaigns waged by environmental groups and congressional Democrats, which culminated in every major American bank refusing to finance drilling projects in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), despite such drilling being authorized by President Trump in 2017.
Bryan Hubbard, a spokesman for the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, told RealClearInvestigations that the rule codifies longstanding OCC guidance on banks’s obligation to provide equitable access to their services, and will ensure that banks are not “terminating entire categories of customers.”
The rule has been published in the Federal Register, but it may be short-lived with the end of Trump’s term. Many Democrats oppose the measure and they will have 60 legislative days to disapprove the rule by a simple majority vote, as provided under the Congressional Review Act.
Nevertheless, the Arctic drilling conflict highlights the power of progressive groups to intimidate, cajole, and partner with corporate powerhouses to advance their agenda – often beyond the confines of the legislature. Through boycotts and other pressure campaigns, progressives have sought to push corporations to adopt their social and cultural values on issues ranging from climate-change policy to gun control.

The Debate Over Arctic Drilling Continues​

Firearms dealers, oil producers, payday lenders, and workers in other controversial industries have had their access to capital stunted by these campaigns, which are often aimed at the circulatory system of the economy – the banking industry. Oil companies spent decades working through traditional Washington channels – engaging in full-press lobbying, writing white papers, and, of course, offering generous campaign contributions to sympathetic legislators – to obtain permission to drill in ANWR.
The debate over drilling in the refuge, the nation’s largest wildlife reserve, has raged since portions of the 19-million-acre area were first set aside under President Dwight Eisenhower in 1960. Twenty years later, President Jimmy Carter signed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, which expanded the size of the reserve but opened up a coastal plain (the so-called “1002 Area”) to oil exploration, subject to prior congressional approval.
That authorization has proven elusive, as preserving ANWR became a cause célèbre among environmentalists. In December 2017, however, President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which included a provision written by Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski authorizing oil exploration in the 1002 Area. The language opened a relatively small portion of the reserve – 2,000 of the area’s 1.57 million acres – to surface development.
The Republican lawmaker speculated that the project could generate “$60 billion in royalties for [Alaska] alone.” As the required environmental review process moved forward, opponents took action.

Applying Pressure on Banks​

In January 2020, a group of Senate Democrats sent a letter to all of the major American banks, requesting that they “stop financing … oil and gas drilling and exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge” in order to better “prepar[e] the U.S. economy to weather the growing impacts of the climate crisis.” The letter echoed themes found in later pressure campaigns waged by such environmental advocacy groups as the Sierra Club and Greater Good.
The banks fell quickly in line. In February, Wells Fargo announced that it would not “directly finance oil and gas projects in the Arctic region, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).” UBS pledged that it would “no longer provide financing where the stated use of proceeds is for new offshore oil projects in the Arctic.” Citigroup declared that it would “not provide project-related financing for oil and gas exploration and production in the Arctic Circle.”
By Dec. 1, every major American bank had announced its refusal to finance drilling in the region, despite it having been authorized for development by Congress.
In response, Murkowski and Alaska’s other members of Congress sent a joint letter to Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell in June, urging him to take action. The delegation highlighted how the banks in question were using “reputation risk” — the risks associated with reputational disfavor brought by financing politically and morally controversial projects — as a justification to unilaterally deny Arctic drillers access to capital.

“By denying financing under the guise of reputation risk,” the lawmakers wrote, “these [banks] are discriminating against America’s interests, our economic recovery, and our workers, all while utilizing significant federal support and benefits.”
The regulation proposed by the OCC aims to end not only this standoff but to ensure that other businesses “involved in politically controversial but lawful” industries are not excluded from capital markets.
The rule’s public-comment period closed on Jan. 4. Commenters across several industries wrote to the OCC in favor of the pending regulation. Richard Brower, the vice-chairman of the New York City Fire Department Pension Fund and a board member of the Institute for Pension Fund Integrity, described what he perceived as disturbing parallels between the politicization of pension-fund management and the politicization of lending decisions.
“Just as with the management of these pension funds,” Brower wrote, “banks have also [succumbed] to pressure to terminate contractual lending relationships not based on business decisions, but rather from activist pressure. Unfortunately, there seems to be a trend of major lending institutions shirking their fiduciary obligations, citing ‘reputational risk’ and concerns over political repercussions in their decision making.”

‘The Privilege of a National License’​

Richard Lipsey, the chairman of Lipsey LLC, the largest firearms distributor in the United States, told the OCC that corporate activism and the fallout of Operation Choke Point — the since-abandoned Obama-era effort to cut off members of “high risk” industries, including firearms dealers, from access to the banking system — have made it difficult for firms in his industry to do business.
“Unfortunately, while [Operation Choke Point] is no longer in place under President Trump,” Lipsey wrote, “the financial institutions continue to discriminate against [firearms dealers] and systemically attempt to pick and choose the types of legal products they will tolerate their customers’s manufacturing and selling to law-abiding Americans. “Operation Choke Point has effectively been privatized, away from the purview of elected officials and the voters they represent.”
Congressional Democrats bristled at the pending rule. A group of 23 House Democrats wrote a letter to the OCC indicating that discrimination of the sort described by Brower and Lipsey is a necessary step toward creating a safer society.
“The quantitative-only risk analysis that would be required by the [FAFSR],” the congressmen wrote, “discounts other material risks, including public safety, to the extent financial institutions voluntarily chose to adopt a decision-making framework intended to reduce gun violence when determining who and how they serve potential customers.” The delegation also noted that the proposed rule “would do nothing to ensure communities of color are better served by the banking system.”
The proposal drew the ire of leading officials in the banking industry, who contend that FAFSR poses an unnecessary burden to lenders. Greg Baer of the Bank Policy Institute, a group that represents several of the nation’s leading banks, wrote a letter to the OCC taking issue with the “sweeping practical implications of [FAFSR]” and “the faulty legal reasoning underpinning it.”
“Under [FAFSR], national banks could no longer consider the range of factors they have traditionally taken into account,” Baer wrote, “both in the context of applying their own sound risk management practices and meeting the OCC’s supervisory expectations when deciding whether and how to provide a customer with financial services.”
It is unclear, however, whether the banks in question are merely applying “their own sound risk management practices” when they refuse to play ball with certain politically controversial borrowers. An OCC investigation revealed that, far from limiting their discrimination to the realm of lending, “certain banks … were also terminating advisory and other services [to would-be Arctic drillers] that are unconnected to credit or operational risk.”
Hubbard of OCC emphasized that banks receive federal deposit insurance and are given “the privilege of a national license to operate,” a license that he claims imposes on banks certain obligations. Banks have a duty, Hubbard said, to provide proportionate access to financial services, even for clients involved in legal but politically controversial industries.
Republished from RealClearInvestigations, with permission.

Doesn't the American economy rely upon credit to keep moving? That if everyone stopped getting loans and paid off their debts, the economy would just collapse under its own weight? Seems like shutting off loan access to people by political beliefs is just that meme of someone jamming a stick in their own spokes.

Has it ever occurred to you that maybe people getting annoyed with you aren't that way because of your political takes or Trump and more to do with the fact that you've been saying the exact same thing over and over and it's getting boring?

Spoiler: Don't believe me?

View attachment 1857182View attachment 1857184View attachment 1857185View attachment 1857186

Oh good. I still have him on "ignore." And nothing of value was lost.

So, what are the bets on a Happening tomorrow?

I heard a theory (fourth hand so I do not know all the details) but a podcast somewhere claimed Trump was going to arrest Biden at the inauguration using evidence from Pelosi's laptop to prove the election was stolen.

I doubt that will happen but then again, Congress being taken over by hill folk should have been impossible also.

Also a "Manchurian Candidate" (1960's one) where someone... well... Angela Lansbury can explain it better.

Or Biden shits his pants at the podium.

All bets are off in 2021!

 

[All becomes gunt]

So anything happened or is everything still boring ? Is Mossad still on standby ?

 

[RomanesEuntDomus]

Whatever faction of oligarchs or military or whatever that helped create the Trump presidency out of thin air back in 2016 isn't just going to let their investment go to shit now, would they?

Why should they bank on a lame duck like Trump is at the moment?
Whoever helped propping him up will just move on. They don't push people, they push ideas and agendas - mostly concerning wars and arms deals. Chances are, they back both horses to some extend anyway.

 

[Oats12345]

I'm just upset Biden wants to get raid of pro-life legislation for a suppose catholic. He sucks

 

[Jeremy Corbyn]

It's pretty much the same as it was 4 years ago, just with the sides flipped

Republicans will probably win back the WH in 4 years anyway, and if they don't you could plausibly blame it on Trump. Are you tired of winning?

 

[Oats12345]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-reveals-day-one-executive-orders

 

[Badungus Kabungus]

Why should they bank on a lame duck like Trump is at the moment?
Whoever helped propping him up will just move on. They don't push people, they push ideas and agendas - mostly concerning wars and arms deals. Chances are, they back both horses to some extend anyway.

That's why I said the idea of a no Trump/no Biden scenario is still possible, whoever behind it will dump Trump due to his toxic rep with the normies but continue the same agendas with a different figurehead. Only way to keep Americans from genociding each other right now, really.

 

[Inventor of the Telephone]

Most jewish presidential admin in history. Almost completely transparent about being ruled from/by Israel. China did this.

The effort to corral the normies back into retarded conservative pens will focus on China, at least in large part, it seems.

Whatever faction of oligarchs or military or whatever that helped create the Trump presidency out of thin air back in 2016 isn't just going to let their investment go to shit now, would they?

Trump has become the perfect avatar for everything that they hate and are against. For generations his name never be far from the lips of the propagandists and politicians.

 

[big ups liquid richard]

What's this about killing the elderly now? Did they finally find the famous death camps? Q was right!?

 

[Jeremy Corbyn]

"The first day of Biden’s presidency will also mark the beginning of the “100 Day Masking Challenge,” with a mask mandate taking effect for people traveling between states and visiting federal property. "

I wasn't going to wear a mask, but now our totally radical Prez Joey B called it the "100 Day Masking Challenge" I'm masking up!

 

[Terrifik]

Long story short samething as james o keeth FBi/CIA Database

Spoiler: if you care

For years, Big Tech has used me as Patient Zero in their test case in mass de-platforming by eliminating my ability to reach the public because of my political views.

Being forced to use alternative social media sites, I know I’ve been a little “offline” since I ran for Congress in President Trump’s home district, Florida-21 a few months ago. But I feel compelled to reach out to you to share a shocking story about something that happened to me and is relevant to all of us. It might have seemed implausible a few years ago, but things are rapidly changing here in America, our rights are in danger, and our Republic is in a fragile place.

The new bans on President Trump and Conservative voices around the nation over the last two weeks are what I’ve been dealing with and actively fighting against for years.

My speech on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram have been banned and eliminated.

My ability to conduct business on PayPal, Venmo, GoFundMe and other financial institutions has been banned.

Chase Bank once shut down my online banking.

Comcast blocked my congressional campaign from sending texts and emails to voters while they donated to my opponent.

Even my ability to travel has all been restricted, as I am permanently banned on Uber and Lyft.

I can’t even have a sandwich delivered because I’ve been banned on UberEats.

What I haven’t shared with you is that last year, I found out my 2nd Amendment rights have also been stripped without warning or explanation.

That’s right, I – a young woman who faces constant death threats – cannot own or possess a firearm for my own personal protection. My 2nd Amendment right has been BANNED.

While I have NEVER been convicted of a felony, domestic violence, and I’ve never been adjudicated mentally unfit by a judge, my name was placed in the Federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) and I have been prohibited from ever owning or even touching a firearm.


It’s called “Red Flagging”.

The only people who have the ability to put you in the NICS database is the FBI.

I learned during my campaign for Congress that despite the fact that I have never been charged or convicted of any crime whatsoever, my name had been placed on a secret Federal “no buy” list maintained by the FBI, which prohibited me from my legal right to buy a firearm.

My name landed on this secret “no buy” list shortly after I questioned the former FBI director James Comey at his first book signing event about a number of lies in his published memoir. I was acting entirely legally in my role as an investigative journalist and as an attendee of the event.

As a result, I’ve lost my rights to protect myself and my home.

But, with your help I WILL be getting my rights restored.

I’ve been sitting on this news for months while others helped me investigate and find out why I’ve been Red Flagged.

I’ve had the deepest background checks run against me . . . and I don’t even have a speeding ticket.

We’ve concluded the obvious . . . I had my 2nd Amendment Rights stripped due to my political views and activism.

Given that the FBI is the only organization that can put you in the NICS database, I have reason to believe that I’ve been targeted by the FBI.

This has been extremely troubling to me because as a young woman and a public figure, I often get death threats, and I have had to call the police numerous times as well as the FBI because I have been targeted by ANTIFA, Islamic terrorists, and members of the radical left have even come to my home and vandalized my car. I have no way to protect myself except for private security, which is costly.

Just as conservative Americans are being banned from social media, banned from banking, and placed on No-Fly lists across the country right now, the next step is to designate them as “domestic terrorists” and strip them of their gun rights.

Tomorrow, on January 20th, 2021, with the inauguration of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, the police state is about to take unfettered power in America. Shockingly I had the first taste of what is to come for all Conservative Americans when I was detained at the Miami airport last week while flying back into the country from a brief post election trip to El Salvador where I was working on my upcoming book, LOOMERED: How I Became The Most Banned Woman In The World.

Pre-order my book here.

I was singled out with no explanation and subjected to a thorough search, I was not allowed to grab my own suitcases from baggage claim, and I was detained for several hours while different federal officials from Department of Homeland Security interrogated me about my Wikipedia page, which states that I am a right-wing extremist and was an official Republican nominee for Congress, endorsed by President Trump. DHS officers also asked me about the events that occurred on January 6th in Washington DC. Needless to say, I was not in the country at the time, and know nothing about the protest at the US capitol.


That’s why it’s so important to challenge this now, because I’m confident that I can have the Red Flag removed and publish the information and document the process so that others who will soon be targeted by the Democrat Party for their conservative political views can do the same when this happens to them.

To cover legal expenses, and retain a top 2nd Amendment Attorney to restore my gun rights and prevent this from happening to you through a national Second Amendment issue advocacy campaign, I need your help to raise $20,000.

Can you chip in and help cover the costs?

I didn’t want to have to release this information, because it has made me fear for my life.

I have no other option but to go public about this for the sake of warning every American of what’s to come, and I have no other option but to sue the federal government over this abridgment of my 2nd Amendment rights.

We are under attack.

They have taken the 1st Amendment away from us. If they take the 2nd Amendment away from us, we will NEVER regain the 1st.

Respectfully,

Laura Loomer

 

[big ups liquid richard]

Oh yeah, that's Laura Loomer, famous lolcow and skitzo.

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/laura-loomer-looms93.33336/

 

[Oats12345]

‘A Statement Of Unity’: Garth Brooks To Perform At Biden Inauguration

The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a member.

www.dailywire.com

This guy is a disgrace to country music

 

[RomanesEuntDomus]

That's why I said the idea of a no Trump/no Biden scenario is still possible, whoever behind it will dump Trump due to his toxic rep with the normies but continue the same agendas with a different figurehead. Only way to keep Americans from genociding each other right now, really.

Absolutely not. They'll just go with Biden for the next couple years and make do. Trump's supposed radically anti-establishment attitude was never anything but a thin veneer to appeal to a certain crowd. Whoever backed him will not have any issues with Biden - at worst they'll have to bid their time until they can get a new guy into the WH. There is no need to smash the gameboard and no money to be had that way. Again: If you genuinely wait for a coup, you will be let down.

 

[big ups liquid richard]

‘A Statement Of Unity’: Garth Brooks To Perform At Biden Inauguration

The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a member.

www.dailywire.com

This guy is a disgrace to country music

Your Biden Derangement Syndrome is really coming in full swing. Its a gig.