So this morning I was treated to a Tucker Carlson clip that discussed Bank of America sifting through it's customers transactions for persons who used their bank cards in DC around the time of Jan 6 up through the Jan 21. They then passed this information onto the Feds. At least one person was then interviewed by the Feds on the basis of this information. That person was "cleared". There are a number of things about this I want to discuss.
Firstly is that anyone who understands what actual Fascism is, understands that the US is fast becoming, if not already a Fascist state. Fascism is where the government and business cooperate for national ends. Business becomes the private enforcers of the state. We have that in the US now. That we have the capital surrounded and inhabited by the military though there is no specific military threat should burn off the scales on people's eyes so they can see clearly. Yes, the Fascism that various lefties told the populance was what Trump was doing is now in effect and they got YOU, the Biden voters, to vote it in.
Congrats.
The second thing is the bank reporting. As someone who frequents casinos I am familiar with the paperwork casinos are required to have you fill out when large sums of money are transacted. In particular is the suspicious activity report. If you transact something over $10k they need to fill out this form. This is supposed to be a means of thwarting things like money laundering. So that customer transactions are recorded and reported is not new to me or surprising. These are required by law.
The third thing is who owns the data. One of the controversies of this new digital age is where ownership lies. For example, is this blog mine or the property of Google? Yes, I wrote the posts. Yes, the posts represent the work of my intellect, but they are ON Google's servers. Google owns the servers and presumably everything on them unless they state otherwise.
Another example: I had a dispute regarding someone who lived with me. I had access to their e-mail which was stored on my property. That person attempted to get me fired by saying that I hacked the e-mail. I informed the inquisitors that the e-mail in question was stored on MY property and had traversed MY network which was also MY property. Hence since I did not connect to or otherwise access any of the institutions servers or network there was no way I could have broken any laws or policies. Hence they had no case.
Pro-tip. Never use someone else's property to store or access YOUR data. Once it hits their machine they are free to access it unless you have a written contract stating otherwise.
So. in terms of the actions of Bank Of America, Are they YOUR records or are they BOA's records. If they are BOA's records then you have no say in what they do with it. They can choose to volunteer to provide that information to the feds or they can demand a warrant. You'd think that a company. with the name "Bank Of America", emphasis on America (as in the US, not the geographic location), would demand a warrant in keeping with the 4th Amendment but we, well I, do not know whether they got a warrant. Which brings us to point four.
Was BOA served with a warrant or did they do this on their own. If they did the latter, I think BOA customers should seriously consider other banking services. The rub here is that we do not know how many other banks have engaged in the same behavior. It may be the case that BOA simply got "caught".
In terms of warrants, they have to be about a specific person and a specific crime you think that person committed and what specifically you're looking for. Since going to DC on any day of the week is not a crime, that could not be the basis of a warrant. That would be like the police coming to your door because you were on the same street that someone got murdered on. That's not how the system is supposed to work.
Similarly, purchasing a firearm is a legal activity. So that could not be the basis of a warrant as there is no crime.
In essence, unless the police had a picture of someone IN the capitol building they had no reasonable suspicion to get a warrant or "interview" anyone since unless you trespassed the capitol, there was no crime committed.
So I don't think any warrant was issued. I could be wrong but I don't see the reasonable suspicion requirement being met. So with that assumption, I think the feds approached BOA on some "there was an insurrection, be a patriot..." type shit and BOA not understanding that the patriotic thing to do would be to ask for a warrant, went "Sir! Yes sir!" They did their but of fascism willingly and I don't think Chase, Capital One, M&T or any other bank has or would do any different.