Trump bank accounts closed due to money laundering concerns, Capital One…

Capital One Discloses Anti-Money Laundering Review Behind 2021 Closure of Trump Accounts

Bank accounts held by President Donald Trump were closed by Capital One in 2021 after it flagged financial activity that had characteristics of money laundering, the bank disclosed in a court filing over the weekend. “The closures were the result of months of analysis and a careful review by Capital One’s AML team in accordance with bank policies and regulatory guidance,” the bank said in the court filing.

The court filing is tied to a lawsuit filed against Capital One by one of Trump’s financial holding companies shortly after he was sworn into office a second time. Trump alleges that Capital One illegally closed his accounts for political reasons, following the Jan. 6 attacks on the U.S. Capitol. Prior to the closures, Trump had more than 300 bank accounts with Capital One for a variety of Trump-branded businesses, ranging from a golf course to a winery, and had banked with Capital One for more than a decade.

Capital One said in the court filing that it had no reason to make a political statement with the closure of Trump’s accounts in 2021 and noted that it “never publicized the termination decision nor its confidential internal process giving rise to the closure, and it permitted Plaintiffs several months (and granted several extensions) to find new banking services, which they did.” Both Capital One and JPMorgan Chase have denied they severed their relationships with the president, his sons, and other related businesses for political reasons. A spokesperson for Trump’s legal team dismissed the bank's claims, stating, “Capital One, along with other major banks, de-banked President Trump, his family, and his businesses for blatantly political reasons.”

States Challenge Federal Access to Low-Income Benefit Records

More than 20 states and the District of Columbia sued the Trump administration on Monday to block it from getting wide access to the personal information of millions of recipients of a benefits program for low-income families. The coalition of states sued in federal court in Washington to stop the agency that controls the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program from moving ahead with a rule that would allow it to share recipients’ immigration status, Social Security numbers and additional personal information with other parts of government or potentially with private entities, according to the lawsuit.

“Instead of helping families struggling with the rising cost of living, this administration is trying to turn antipoverty programs against the people they’re supposed to serve,” New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. The federal Administration for Children and Families declined to comment.

Todd Blanche Confirms Modification of Tax Agreement to Clear Confirmation Path

In negotiations with Republican senators whose support he needs to be confirmed as attorney general, Todd Blanche formally rescinded a $1.8 billion fund meant to compensate President Donald Trump’s political allies. However, a sweeping audit immunity plan conferred on the president, his sons Eric and Donald Jr., and the Trump Organization remains in place — given new parameters to appease the senators but still with the potential to wipe away millions of dollars of Trump’s back taxes.

In a document Blanche sent to lawmakers Sunday, he said the audit immunity would not protect the president from the examination of future tax filings, noting instead that it “applies by its terms only retroactively” to claims open at the time of the lawsuit’s settlement. For holdout GOP lawmakers, those assurances cleared the way for Blanche’s confirmation, though legal experts and lawmakers continue to question the lawfulness of the protections.

House Ethics Panel Recommends Censure for Representative Chuck Edwards

The House Ethics Committee recommended Monday that Rep. Chuck Edwards, R-N.C., be censured after finding that he engaged in persistent unprofessional and inappropriate conduct toward two young female aides in his congressional office. The panel highlighted numerous examples of actions it considered improper, including providing the young women with lavish gifts such as jewelry totaling more than $1,000, designer purses, guns, shoes, flowers, a laptop, and a cell phone, as well as making comments regarding their appearance and dress, inviting them to intimate dinners and vacations, and sending notes regarding his affection.

The Ethics panel found no evidence Edwards explicitly propositioned any person under his employ or engaged in any sexual activity with them, but said he failed to adhere to “the spirit of rules prohibiting sexual harassment of and unwanted advances to House staffers.” In a 15-page response, Edwards’ attorneys argued that the findings “exonerate” the congressman and called the censure recommendation an “extraordinarily harsh and infrequent punishment.” The full House will have to vote before any censure would occur.