Project Veritas has come forward with assertions that Chase Bank selectively closes accounts depending on the clients' political affiliations. The probe was triggered when Enrique Tarrio discovered his accounts with Chase were disabled without any apparent reason. Tarrio operates an online outlet selling sells contentious merchandise endorsing conservative ideologies.
The issue seems to extend beyond big tech and social media companies. engaging in censorship Could cryptocurrencies be a haven not only for the unbanked but also for those sidelined by traditional banks?
The Skinny on Project Veritas
Under James O’Keefe's leadership, Project Veritas frequently makes waves with their distinctive clandestine investigative style that has insiders revealing unethical practices.
Some examples include a recent investigation into Twitter employees confessed to engaging in banned practices like ideological account closures, shadow prohibitions, and reduced distribution. Following this, Twitter officials denied this and claimed that those filmed did not truly represent the company's stance.
Project Veritas often divides public opinion, with their focus typically on those against conservative views and free expression. Let's dive into their most recent investigation.
Chase Official Allegedly Claims Exclusion of Certain Groups from Business Deals
In a YouTube release, Project Veritas reported contacting the Chase Bank’s Corporate Global Media Relations. They indicated speaking to someone named dude , allegedly part of their team.
In the guise of corporate representatives, Project Veritas inquired if Chase engages with MAGA groups, Steve Bannon, or alt-right entities.
While direct names were avoided, the representative suggested through careful wording that Chase Bank refrains from dealings with anyone holding such political beliefs.
Specifically the rep said:
…Chase distances itself from any associations with alt-right affiliations. I can’t precisely name people, but it’s generally our policy to avoid involvement in such matters…
The rep later added:
…any business or persons deemed lacking moral integrity are not typically within our business interests.
Chase Attempts Damage Control: Clarification on Policies
Following the reporting, Project Veritas received a response heard from Chase Spokesperson Patricia Wexler, contesting the accuracy of the initial claims. Wexler specified that closures aren't politically motivated.
Yet, Project Veritas points out that their conversation wasn’t with an authentic representative of the intended department.
James O’Keefe from Project Veritas stated that the dialed number was indeed the appropriate contact for Corporate Global Media Relations, verifying it with a mobile screenshot of the call made to the number found on the website.
The Bottom Line, and Why We Need Crypto
This scenario lacks a clear resolution. Thus, with the Chase rep’s candid remarks to Project Veritas, the possibilities of the company choosing not to interact with accounts they don’t ideologically align with remain.
Why is this significant in the context of cryptocurrencies? Banks operate as private institutions. Hence, there's no obligation for them to serve everyone. Meaning our existing global financial system leans heavily, even relies on private banks, granting them the capability to exclude anyone for any reason. Halting this is out of our hands.
This is where digital currencies enter the fray. Blockchain technology, cryptocurrencies by design, does not require permissions. There is no need for anyone to obtain consent to utilize a public blockchain (such as Bitcoin , Ethereum and others). They operate free from centralized approvals, eschewing any institutionally imposed restrictions based on ideological grounds.
Should we be asking ourselves, what if we faced being de-banked? Imagine the day when all your banking arrangements cease, leaving you to fend with only tangible cash. Consider the absence of any banking service willing to cooperate purely due to political beliefs.
It’s a chilling thought.
