Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Why would ANYONE want to be doing business with him? 6-times bankrupt, Grifter in Chief. Taking grift and graft to unimaginable heights. Please let me know as soon as he is deceased. Celebratory bottle of wine in the fridge is not getting any tastier than it already is.
At the time this came out, our then property management company was looking at moving to a new bank. The leading candidate was Axos. All I could do was suggest to them that this might not be a bank one wanted to do business with.
"...just days after The Trump Organization’s auditor resigned, saying that 10 years of the company’s financial statements could not be relied upon..." Doesn't that just figure, that the Orange Shamelessness is working with such a "bank."
other notables have blemishes : jpm (dimon) censored criticism of trump's tariff policy in its macro analysis. brookfield rescued a massive kushner NYC property on very generous terms, but is an outsized supporter of the Canadian economy. chubb put up the bond on trump's ~$1b fraud case he lost and when he was near insolvency...up until he won the election.
i dont even want to look at the list of gop donors from the finance sector.
Axos Financial/AX has interesting history of expansion of operations that others discarded - Principal, H&R Block, Nationwide, COR Clearing/Mutual of Omaha, E*Trade Advisors, Signature Bank/FDIC, etc. Looks like a junkyard of finance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axos_Financial
That's why Donnie and his kids jumped headfirst into crypto in 2024 -- as a way to move money without big banks since they were 'debanked' and/or finding it hard to locate banks to work with them. If they were still in the system, I doubt they'd be doing all this crypto-grifting.
Folks this is real, I worked at a small community bank in Iowa and we were pressured by the FDIC under Obama to debank a legitimate company engaged in a legal business that they decided to target to drive them out of business we were a depository only no credit risk at all. I don't care what your political leanings are this is just wrong. You know Daimon claimed that they didn't do that. They are lying and I know they are lying. JP Morgan Chase will settle for billions because they can never allow it to get to discovery.
pressured by the FDIC under Obama to debank a legitimate company engaged in a legal business ... You know Daimon claimed that they didn't do that. They are lying and I know they are lying
How do you know that they are lying about their reasons? Banks, like other businesses, are free to refuse business for any reason or for no reason at all. Except for a few exceptions written into law. So a bank can refuse to do business with a Scorpio because it is superstitious but it can't refuse to do business with a Rastafarian.
AFAIK, Trump has not alleged that the Biden administration pressured JPM to take any action. Unless Trump alleges that (on its own) JPM illegally discriminated against his business, the suit could be thrown out on its pleadings, i.e. before discovery.
On the federal level, a bank was not only free to consider reputational risk, but it seems, required to. At least by the Fed, which only last June removed reputational risk as a factor it considered in evaluating the financial condition of a bank.
This might explain why Trump filed his claim in a Florida court. But does Florida have jurisdiction? This is where we get into conflict of laws. I'm a bit rusty on this, so take the following for what it's worth:
ISTM that Florida's sole claim to jurisdiction is that Trump changed his residency to Florida in Sept 2019. States have a strong interest in protecting their citizens.
Offsetting that are the facts that Trump established the business relationship in New York and conducted all this business in New York, and that Trump was a citizen of New York for decades.
JPM has moved to remove this suit to New York where it would be tried under New York statutes, not Florida’s Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act. In his business agreements with JPM, Trump agreed to sue in New York. That alone would usually (not always) mean game over. Further are the factors I presented above, plus more.
this anecdote has more holes than RFK's brain. first, in a legal fiasco, the gop argued in the cake case that certain biz can discriminate...they just want to leave it open-ended regarding who\when\where.
frankly, given trump's record of supporting violent illegal immigrants (by blocking legal paths and migrant workers...call me skeptical every tunnel is shutdown), and his record of financially funding domestic terrorism (ICE\DHS against citizens), i would say there is KYC case against banking him TODAY.
Comments
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-organization-used-borrow-major-banks-now-look-lending-money-rcna22068
At the time this came out, our then property management company was looking at moving to a new bank. The leading candidate was Axos. All I could do was suggest to them that this might not be a bank one wanted to do business with.
Axos is unambiguously a MAGA-run crony operation.
other notables have blemishes :
jpm (dimon) censored criticism of trump's tariff policy in its macro analysis.
brookfield rescued a massive kushner NYC property on very generous terms, but is an outsized supporter of the Canadian economy.
chubb put up the bond on trump's ~$1b fraud case he lost and when he was near insolvency...up until he won the election.
i dont even want to look at the list of gop donors from the finance sector.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axos_Financial
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/bcreg20260223a.htm
How do you know that they are lying about their reasons? Banks, like other businesses, are free to refuse business for any reason or for no reason at all. Except for a few exceptions written into law. So a bank can refuse to do business with a Scorpio because it is superstitious but it can't refuse to do business with a Rastafarian.
AFAIK, Trump has not alleged that the Biden administration pressured JPM to take any action. Unless Trump alleges that (on its own) JPM illegally discriminated against his business, the suit could be thrown out on its pleadings, i.e. before discovery.
On the federal level, a bank was not only free to consider reputational risk, but it seems, required to. At least by the Fed, which only last June removed reputational risk as a factor it considered in evaluating the financial condition of a bank.
This might explain why Trump filed his claim in a Florida court. But does Florida have jurisdiction? This is where we get into conflict of laws. I'm a bit rusty on this, so take the following for what it's worth:
ISTM that Florida's sole claim to jurisdiction is that Trump changed his residency to Florida in Sept 2019. States have a strong interest in protecting their citizens.
Offsetting that are the facts that Trump established the business relationship in New York and conducted all this business in New York, and that Trump was a citizen of New York for decades.
For how these factors might be weighed, see A Primer on Choice of Law.
JPM has moved to remove this suit to New York where it would be tried under New York statutes, not Florida’s Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act. In his business agreements with JPM, Trump agreed to sue in New York. That alone would usually (not always) mean game over. Further are the factors I presented above, plus more.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/jpmorgan-says-trump-debanking-suit-022547871.html
this anecdote has more holes than RFK's brain.
first, in a legal fiasco, the gop argued in the cake case that certain biz can discriminate...they just want to leave it open-ended regarding who\when\where.
frankly, given trump's record of supporting violent illegal immigrants (by blocking legal paths and migrant workers...call me skeptical every tunnel is shutdown), and his record of financially funding domestic terrorism (ICE\DHS against citizens), i would say there is KYC case against banking him TODAY.