Dem
47
GOP
53
We mentioned this as a Political Byte earlier this week, but the story has developed to the point that it's worth taking a closer look. In 2021, Capitol One Bank closed 385 bank accounts owned by Donald Trump and his companies. When Trump sued the bank, the bank responded that it did this to comply with laws banning money laundering, although the bank was careful not to directly accuse Trump of anything. Instead, the bank said: "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." In other words, the accounts were being used for money laundering, but the bank couldn't pinpoint who was using Trump's accounts. Maybe it was a hacker or the money laundering fairy.
For what it is worth, Donald Trump Jr. once said: "In terms of high-end product influx into the US, Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets." It is well known that Russian oligarchs skim money from the companies they control and move billions through banks in tax havens like Cyprus, the British Virgin Islands, and the Cayman Islands. Shell companies then use these funds to buy luxury real estate, sometimes in actual cash. A standard briefcase can easily hold $1 million in benjamins. A large suitcase can hold 50,000 bills worth $5 million total. U.S. currency weighs exactly 1 gram per bill, so such a suitcase would weigh 50 kg (110 pounds). Flying with four such suitcases would not work at all on commercial airlines, so it is better to use your own plane when transporting $20 million in cold, hard cash. Once an oligarch owns a fancy condo, he can sell it openly and deposit the proceeds in a normal bank account. Then the money can be used for other purposes and if anyone asks where the money came from, the answer is: "I sold my luxury condo."
Why did Capitol One close Trump's accounts? Maybe it related to the bank being fined $390 million just months earlier for not having effective anti-money laundering detection and enforcement. That might have been the trigger to start looking very carefully at accounts with unusual transactions involving large amounts of money. The bank did not disclose that it had closed Trump's accounts until Trump sued the bank. Then it had to respond in court. If Trump hadn't sued, only he and the bank would have known about this and not the general public (and a future Democratic AG). JPMorgan Chase also closed Trump's accounts and he sued it as well, so they also disclosed the closures in court.
Both banks deny the closures were for political reasons. They say they do this for legal reasons or to protect their reputations when necessary, but not for political reasons.
On August 7, 2025, Trump signed an XO 14331 whining about how conservatives have been debanked. It goes on to ban banks from debanking someone due to "reputational risks." In other words, a bank can now close someone's account only when it has hard evidence that the account was used to commit a crime. For example, if a bank's software flags an account because massive amounts of cash are being deposited regularly (a common sign of money laundering) the bank can no longer defend itself by saying keeping this account would hurt its reputation. After all, a well-run hamburger stand in a good location might take in millions in cash every week. The XO goes on to say that the bank regulators are instructed to examine cases where someone has been debanked, and if it was due to political reasons, to fine or otherwise discipline the banks. In a narrow sense, this is a legitimate XO: It gives instructions to federal bureaucrats how to interpret some regulation(s). In contrast, XOs cannot order state election officials to do anything or contradict the U.S. Constitution. (V)