February 22, 2026

"For years, President Trump has complained that his personal and business bank accounts were deliberately closed after the Jan 6., 2021, attack on the Capitol...."

"In a response to a lawsuit filed last month by Mr. Trump and the Trump Organization, JPMorgan, the nation’s largest bank, said for the first time late Friday that it cut off more than 50 Trump accounts in February 2021, shortly after Mr. Trump’s first term ended. The accounts included those for Trump hotels, housing developments and retail shops in Illinois, Florida and New York, as well as Mr. Trump’s personal private banking relationship that handled his inheritance from his father.... In one unsigned note to Mr. Trump, dated Feb. 19, 2021, the bank wrote that he would need to 'find a more suitable institution with which to conduct business.' The letter closed with, 'Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter' — a phrase that Mr. Trump himself is fond of using...."

From "JPMorgan Admits It Shut Trump’s Accounts After Jan. 6 Capitol Attack/Nation’s largest bank, in response to a lawsuit filed by the president, confirmed his longstanding complaint about 'debanking'" (NYT).

98 comments:

Yancey Ward said...

Lots of Trump supporters got debanked following the 2020 election.

Dave Begley said...

JP Morgan is part of the liberal elite who hate Trump.

JP Morgan loves deficit spending as that means more US bonds are issued and traded. The liberal elite also love the CAGW scam as $16T has been spent on nothing.

Trump was/is an existential threat to the liberal elite and their go-along-get-along scheme the Dems and Rinos had going. That’s why Trump had to be jailed and financially destroyed. Also why the Dems keep up their violent rhetoric so that 21-year old lunatics from NC will try to kill Trump.

I’m thrilled that the Epstein files are exposing the moral depravity of the liberal elite, viz, Goldman’s top lawyer, head of Weil Gottschalk, former President of Harvard and Treasury Secretary, head of the Nobel Prize committee, Prince Andrew, etc.

Sebastian said...

"it cut off more than 50 Trump accounts" So now we're past step 1, "it didn't happen." How long before we get to 2. it was no big deal, and 3. it was a good thing, and 4. it's fascist to complain about it? Or will the threat of damages prevent the usual prog procedure?

Peachy said...

Susan Rice (D-Stalin-Hitler-Musoilini ) wants to punish anyone in contact with or who does business with Trump.

rhhardin said...

It's more than a Trump trouble. Lots of organizations got de-banked.

Which ought to be civil rights violation in a monopoly market, or de-facto monopoly market.

Mason G said...

Another "conspiracy theory" proved to be true. How many is that, now?

rehajm said...

…if it can happen to him…

Triangle Man said...

J.P. morgan could not have known that Trump’s insurrection would be endorsed by SCOTUS in July of 2024. They validly assumed that they would face consequences for financial complicity is his various rackets.

GatorNavy said...

First, the Republican legislators that write banking laws will be completely silent about this problem. After all, they didn’t care that the same persecution was done to the NRA. Second, the justice department will do nothing. Third, the useful idiot gang will say this is perfectly fine, much ado about nothing, tempest in a teapot, etc. Lastly, when Trump does do something punitive yet completely legal, a judge will be on hand to issue an injunction.

n.n said...

There was no attack. There was a Pelosi-rrection and a probable Whitmer conspiracy to provoke a riot. There were two deaths at the scene, witout probable cause. There have been witch hunts and warlock trials in its wake, including, but not limited to, President Trump.

imTay said...

"Sorry, Mr President, but the propaganda of your political enemies is too powerful for us to resist, after all, if we keep working with you, they could turn this awe inspiring propaganda machine against us!

Thank you for your attention to this matter."

The thing is that he has capitulated to them, and is now doing their bidding, even as it is very likely to destroy his presidency, and get him impeached and removed if it goes pear shaped.

Aggie said...

"... They validly assumed that they would face consequences for financial complicity...."

Sounds like they need a second opinion, but never fear: The courts stand ready to provide one. The assumptions may prove correct, just not in the way they first thought.....

Leora said...

I want to know if anyone in the Biden administration suggested to Chase that this would be a good thing to do in a Susan Rice kind of way.

gilbar said...

"For years, President Trump has complained that his personal and business bank accounts were deliberately closed after the Jan 6., 2021, attack on the Capitol...."

I'm willing to bet a LOT of money, that President Trump has never even Ever referred to a Jan 6, 2021 "attack on the Capitol"
This is NYTs talk, NOT the President's..

Speaking of which:
.."In a response to a lawsuit filed last month by Mr. Trump.."

Can ANY ONE mention ONE TIME that President Clinton (or President O'Bama (or President Biden)) was EVER referred to as:
Mister? EVER?
I'll wait

Quaestor said...

Sebastian writes, "How long before we get to 2...3...4..."

Twenty minutes.

Evil never sleeps.

imTay said...

If you look at how we use false flags agent provocateurs abroad to change regimes, how difficult is it to believe that they brought these techniques home.

It sure stopped any investigations into the election that time has told, stunk on ice.,

n.n said...

Will no one relieve.... debank this "burden"? Wink. Wink.

Rabel said...

CNBC, Aug, 2025 -

"Trump claimed in a CNBC interview on Tuesday that he personally was discriminated against by banks, asserting without evidence that JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America refused to take his deposits following his first term in office. JPMorgan said on Tuesday it does not close accounts for political reasons."

bagoh20 said...

"...it cut off more than 50 Trump accounts in February 2021, shortly after Mr. Trump’s first term ended. "

That's one way to put it, or you could say shortly after Mr Biden started his term.

Freder Frederson said...

Even if true, so what? I thought the truly conservative position is that a private business can choose who it wants to do business with and who don't, for no reason at all or any reason at all.

Next thing you know you will bitching because a baker refused to make a cake for a gay wedding or a photographer refused to photograph one.

Oh, now I am really confused.

Freder Frederson said...

JP Morgan is part of the liberal elite who hate Trump.

This statement has to be the most unintentionally hilarious sentence ever written on this blog. What kind of clueless idiot would claim that JP Morgan Chase is somehow part of the "liberal elite"?

Quaestor said...

"I thought the truly conservative position is that a private business can choose who it wants to do business with and who don't, for no reason at all or any reason at all."

Freder's thinking is consistently defective. That's why he consistently contributes worthless nonsense.

wendybar said...

Big difference between forcing somebody to do something against their religion, vs hating a man because he is cleaning up the Progressive mess THEY made in America, Freder. Stop being an idiot.

rehajm said...

I’ve been to business school bit never heard anything about fear of financial complicity. It sounds like made up bullshit to justify their bullshit…

n.n said...

NYeT!! Never... mind. WaPout.

Freder Frederson said...

Freder's thinking is consistently defective. That's why he consistently contributes worthless nonsense.

Big difference between forcing somebody to do something against their religion, vs hating a man because he is cleaning up the Progressive mess THEY made in America, Freder.

How about instead of your response being, "you're stupid, so there", you explain what about my contention is wrong?

Amadeus 48 said...

This is old news.

RCOCEAN II said...

Isnt it weird how the NYT's just views this as a "He said, she said" spat? Trump *claimed* for years... and JP Morgan denied. And for 5 years, the NYT's never did any "fact checking" or "Reporting" to see if Trump's "Claim" was true or false.

And in 2021 Trump was the ex-POTUS and had just missed re-election by a few stolen votes. How could JP Morgan claim it was "Suffering a reputuation loss" by letting him keep his $billions there?

Btw, the CEO of Jpmorgan is a democrat, and was in the running for Obama's Sec of treasury.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

So Trump stole his signature sign off from JP Morgan. Sad.

RCOCEAN II said...

This ability to "debank" people for political reasons, stinks to high heaven. People need to have bank accounts, and the banks make money off it. They should be forced - by law - to allow people to have accounts unless they can be shown to be convicted felons or international gangsters involved in money laundering.

As shown by the 2008 financial crisis the Banksters aren't "Free Enterprise". They cant be allowed to fail and they are regulated up the wazooo. So, one more regulation shouldn't be a problem. Unless you're a leftist/liberal Democrat.

rehajm said...

Yah Jamie Dimon is as crooked as lefties come. He stuck his tiny pee pee in the wind when Susan Rice was reelected and went with what he thought was best..

baghdadbob said...

JP Morgan: Sorry Mr. Trump, but Susan Rice made it clear -- on behalf of Mr. Obama -- that if we don't de-bank you, there will be consequences for us.

Rabel said...

JP Morgan's decision to de-bank Trump lines up well with Susan Rice's threats of retribution.

Aggie said...

Maybe if banks were allowed to fail when they make really bad decisions, they wouldn't be prone to keep making really bad decisions. You know, like making big-dollar 'donations' to radical race organizations to avoid potentially embarrassing (phoney) lawsuits, or treating one class of high-rolling customers differently based on their political affiliations, at the behest of their opponents. Consequences have a great way of providing incentives.

Aggie said...

"...In a response to a lawsuit filed last month by Mr. Trump and the Trump Organization, JPMorgan, the nation’s largest bank, said for the first time late Friday that it cut off more than 50 Trump accounts in February 2021, shortly after Mr. Trump’s first term ended...."

Yes, but: Why did JPMorgan respond, and then not respond to follow-up questions? The story doesn't make it clear. Why did they feel it necessary to issue a seemingly informal, non-lawyer-approved comment as a casual giveaway? Why not wait for the suit to play out in court, and avoid handing out such advantages? Seems like an out-of-place gift, no? Are they trying to get on somebody's good side?

Old and slow said...

Convicted felon need bank accounts too. This is not a swipe at Trump at all. I mean this quite sincerely. You cannot function in the modern world without a bank account.

bagoh20 said...

If you thought that this debanking didn't happen because you were told it was "without evidence", and you also fell for the Russia Hoax, and the "good people on both sides" lie, and the Hunter laptop was "Russian disinformation", and on and on, then what the hell are doing arguing with people about anything those same sources tell you? Wouldn't it be wiser to just say: "Yea, you're probably right. I get this stuff wrong most of time."

Ann Althouse said...

Sebastian: “So now we're past step 1, "it didn't happen." How long before we get to 2. it was no big deal….”

Freder: “Even if true, so what?…”

Mason G said...

"Yea, you're probably right. I get this stuff wrong most of time."

Progressives: Often wrong, never in doubt.

Quaestor said...

Freder writes, "...explain what about my contention is wrong?"

We have neither the time nor the space to start you again in nursery school.

Dave Begley said...

FF:
Even in Omaha, Big Business is part of the liberal elite. Omaha billionaire Omani Carson f/k/a Ron Carson of RIA Carson Wealth joined the Omaha Chamber of Commerce in agreeing that UNMC should be allowed to continue with child mutilation.

Today, Big Business is usually quite liberal. Elon Musk is an exception and that’s why he is hated.

narciso said...

Like reagan said 'much of what they thought they knew is wrong'

Levi Starks said...

So, when reporting on Trumps complaints at the time did the MSM happen to use the term “unfounded claims”
As though any actual investigation had occurred?

Dave Begley said...

JP Morgan debanked Trump under their reputational risk policy. That means no banking with people that their liberal clients don’t like.

The Chief Legal Officer at Goldman’s Sachs was in charge of protecting Goldman’s reputation even though she was very friendly with Epstein.

narciso said...

They hadnt even conjured up that bogus case yes

Not Illinois Resident said...

And yet JP Morgan/Chase kept Epstein as a client for years and years and years. No moral compass in these finance guys. Go ask the folks in Wisconsin stuck with a mega AI data center project in their backyard, thanks to Big Finance and the IT Silicon Valley bros.

rehajm said...

To be fair back in that era this was a place where if something wasn’t reported by NYT and/or WaPo it was proof the thing didn’t happen. It was a messed up place at the time…

Rabel said...

"Why did they feel it necessary to issue a seemingly informal, non-lawyer-approved comment as a casual giveaway?"

The response/confession was in a court filing in the case.

Dave Begley said...

Aggie:

Those “voluntary” donations by banks and big corporations to BLM were a complete disgrace and proves my point about how Corporate America is overwhelmingly liberal.

The late race hustler, Jesse Jackson, was probably upset he wasn’t in on it.

Oh, someone asked the Speaker to allow Jackson’s body to lie in state in the Capital and Johnson turned him down. The last hustle. What gall.

imTay said...

"Reputational damage" is how the people who control the news media, Hollywood, the rest of the entertainment media, publishing, implement fascist party control, not government, but party, no, Party control of all both the government and private industry, and the surest sign that it is fascism is that they call all opposition to their control "fascism."

Bob Boyd said...

JP Morgan should de-Dimon the bank.

Bob Boyd said...

due to reputational risk

Captain BillieBob said...

I predict a major financial settlement in someones future.

rehajm said...

The corporate social credit score regime is still in place and still can sting even though the threat and follow through of a lefty controlled government is absent atm…

john mosby said...

Trump and Bessent should just force the pendulum in the other direction and make the banks reject a bunch of lefties. Then when they holler maybe congress or the scotus will eliminate this executive power. Wins all round. CC, JSM

Bob Boyd said...

Trump and Bessent should just force the pendulum in the other direction and make the banks reject a bunch of lefties.

Not a bad idea. Who should they start with?

narciso said...

Anybody that neville singham has used

Enigma said...

Beyond Dimon and JP Morgan, that era was packed with insane, incoherent knee-jerk bullying. Remember Parler? The little social media firm that got cancelled in 2021 because PEOPLE ON FACEBOOK PLANNED THE JAN 6 ACTIONS?

Piggies in power love to be piggies. Dimon and Bloomberg are the king piggies.

Quaestor said...

"I predict a major financial settlement in someone's future."

JPMC probably already has offered to settle, and they will again... and again. However, Trump should refuse and go to trial. He doesn't need the money, and JPMC thoroughly deserves the humiliation. The fact that they will offer to settle knocks that "reputational" argument into a cocked hat.

Debanking is a major blow against democracy. It hands oligarchy to the Constitution's enemies on a silver platter. It's chapter one in The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism. Financial institutions that engage in debanking must be humiliated and dissolved.

imTay said...

Between this, and using mass immigration to import concentrated and cohesive blocs of voters who can be dragged to the polls by their own mafias that come with them, and a lot of seemingly irrational behaviors by politicians can be understood. Why did Starmer stand behind the rapists? Why did Walz stand behind the people who burned down Minneapolis?

James K said...

Banks get all sorts of special privileges in return for subjecting themselves to regulation and scrutiny by the government (and by the Fed). What we've learned over the past 50 years is that "scrutiny" often morphs into pressure and outright coercion to go along with leftist policies like making mortgage loans to "underserved communities" with terrible credit records, stacking their boards and management with DEI hires, and, one suspects, de-banking people Democrats don't like.

So no, Freder, it's not just a private business decision that's no one's business. Just as I'm sure you were livid when ABC suspended Kimmel's show, and no doubt believed ("without evidence") it was done at the behest of the Trump administration.

MadTownGuy said...

That sounds like what Canada did to the trucking protesters, and their GoFundMe accounts. On brand, for sure

Beasts of England said...

’So no, Freder, it's not just a private business decision that's no one's business.’

Fredo apparently doesn’t understand that U.S. banks operate under a Federal charter. Unlike bakeries…

Jersey Fled said...

Damn. Another conspiracy theory confirmed.

Jersey Fled said...

Trump has clear business interests in NJ and can bring suit based on their very strict public accommodation laws.

Dude1394 said...

Someone asked Lara Trump I think why Trump had made so much money in bitcoin. The response stunned me. She asked the questioner what happened after J6, their accounts were closed. Can you imagine how you would operate a very large business without accounts? So they put a lot of bucks in digital currency because of it. They just so happened to also make bank, but the drive for it was the banking democrat socialists.

Vance said...

Remember that leftists did this to regular people too: the leftists in Canada seizing the bank accounts of people who protested against the leftist government there.

Of course Freder had no problems with that, I am sure. And I'm sure that Freder would say that "This Christian church that doesn't ordain gay priests doesn't need a connection to the city supplied water and power and other utilities either!"

Vance said...

Step one: "Businesses don't have to serve you, so that's why Facebook and Twitter and All other places kicked you conservatives off so you are silenced." Step 2: "Now that you built a replacement in Parler and TruthSocial, we will use goverment force prevent you from actually using those sites on iPhones and Android!"

Freder and the rest: "This is absolutely not censorship!"

Mary Beth said...

And because Trump is a fascist dictator, JP Morgan was shut down shortly after he began his second term.

No? Weird. Trump's not very good at that fascist dictator stuff.

n.n said...

Flunking debunking debanking.

n.n said...

Trump is a Republican formerly a Democrat. Apostates are emphatically, critically a "burden"... uh, burden, to party progress (PP) and liberal entendres.

Jersey Fled said...

Actually I think the most likely outcome is a settlement. Chase doesn’t want this in the news every day for months.

Aggie said...

If this administration were to call the same tune on progressive liberal billionaires by de-banking them, the subversive NGO problem would evaporate rather quickly, wouldn't it. We might even get a fair, unclouded midterm election result.

Jim at said...

Oh, now I am really confused.

You're not confused. You're a thug.

Justabill said...

I seem to recall reading that, throughout the American Revolution, George Washington’s bank account in London was untouched.

Beasts of England said...

’The U.S. Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control found that JPMorgan had illegally aided dictatorships in Cuba, Sudan, Liberia and Iran, including transferring 32,000 ounces of gold bullion (valued at approximately $20,560,000) to the benefit of a bank in Iran.’

At least they‘re not mixed up with that Trump guy!!

Goldenpause said...

How long before JPMorgan folds and writes a big check? Its problem is that it probably debarked a lot of others for political reasons, which could be a very big problem for the bank on a lot of levels.

Rustygrommet said...

Freder opined.
"Oh, now I am really confused."

Seems to be a permanent state with you.
Nah. Fergetit. You're too damn dumb to understand.

buwaya said...

"Someone asked Lara Trump I think why Trump had made so much money in bitcoin. The response stunned me. She asked the questioner what happened after J6, their accounts were closed. "

It was on Maher.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l90GRguKd2s

narciso said...

one recalls Signature bank was another, they were the ones who had heavy exposure to FTX crypto, we know what happened to them

Kirk Parker said...

Jersey Fled,

A plaintiff doesn't have to accept any specific settlement, do they? They can insist on going to trial, just by turning down any offer smaller than the full amount they are asking. Can't they?

Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...


Another lawsuit Trump won't win.

Trump might as well have sued them for $10bn. Is the argument that debanking with two months notice caused him $5bn in damages? How is that possible when he claimed he was bankrupt to a NY court back in the early 2020s?

I suspect JPM simply followed basic Anti Money Laundering regulations which would have meant they were not able or allowed to bank Trump due to his record. With Trump you have anti-money laundering concerns, there is a criminal conviction related to his business interests in New York. Trump was also criminally charged in connection with the January 6th insurrection/riots. It was obvious in the immediate aftermath that there was a significant risk associated with his conduct and activity associated with the same.

Discovery should be fun if this makes it to trial!

This is a timely reminder to dig out the book, Dark Towers, by David Enrich. It's an excellent read that documents Trump's past relationships with banks and bankers and explains why the banks have clear cause to debank him.

EuroNole said...

For those who don’t know, Jamie Dimon was one of Barack Obama’s earliest backers when he was a relative unknown running for president. That endorsement led to many more influential people to back him.

After Obama became president, Obama named him head of his council of economic advisors.

Hardly a neutral figure.

Milo Minderbinder said...

I recall Jamie Dimon saying, after Trump's debanking issue arose recently, that we all needed to grow up. What was that about?

RCOCEAN II said...

I think Leftists need to be debanked before anything will be done. Leftist are immoral and want to destroy their so-called "Enemies" which now means 1/2 the country. They'll only stop when they learn that "debanking" works two ways.

Rocco said...

Funny how people who scream that Trump is creating fascism in America have no problem with this actual fascism.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Unlike Colorado bakeries, banks have many additional legal requirements and responsibilities. They can also be involved in direct agreements with the US government. For example, JP Morgan was the recipient of a sweetheart deal by the US government that allowed them to acquire First Republic Bank during the Biden administration. This deal provided a substantial monetary benefit to the bank. Just spitballing here but it seems unwise to appear to be playing politics if you turn around and accept sweetheart deals from public institutions.



Deep State Reformer said...

ROCEAN ll @ 6:21
You are right but R's Cons and libertarians just cant do that. Going full on tit for tat revenge is just a bridge too far for them. I don't know if its because they're cowards or stupid? Knaves or fools? Lefties are "let them hate as long as they fear''. That's why they always win.

David Duffy said...

Freedom of Association. I’m with the bank.

My local bank here in my small town would love to have Trump’s money on deposit. I was treated with great kindness when I opened my business account in addition to my checking and savings accounts. The guys and gals know my name and I greet them at the grocery store.

But there was the civil rights movement so we have to decide if we want freedom of association or civil rights. I like them both but lean on the side of freedom.

Leora said...

Trump wants the trial so he can get discovery on who requested he be debanked.

The Middle Coast said...

We need discovery. We need to know how the decision was made. We need to know whether anyone in the Biden administration -- including banking regulators -- pressured JPM to debank Trump.

The Middle Coast said...

Sorry missed Leora's comment before posting. Spot on.

Ralph L said...

JPMorgan had to pay $290M to Epstein "victims" in 2023 for knowingly giving him banking services for illegal activity, sez Grok. How they were supposed to know he was paying prostitutes isn't explained. They were shook down by Boies and other sharks. Shareholders ought to be angry.

Rustygrommet said...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but JPM has a fiduciary duty to the account holder to act in their best interest. It's not exactly like FNBC vs UOP but the effect is the same.

Butkus51 said...

Commies gotta Commie.

Its who they are.

Tina848 said...

It wasn't just Trump himself, it was his business, his children's business and their personal accounts, his lawyers accounts, everyone surrounding him. They went after people's law licenses and other professional certifications of anyone who worked with him.

Sweetie said...

Nick Fuentes said, in one of the interviews he did in the wake of the Carlson interview, that he is currently de-banked. And Trump's de-banking, per Don Jr in a setting I don't recall, seems government directed given that two big banks called Trump on the same day to give him 30 days to close his accounts.

Josephbleau said...

Banks do this for the same reason that hospitals do nothing about IT security and then want a government bail out when they get a ransomware attack. We are too important to the economy and save lives so we can’t be allowed to fail, we will pay off to the victims, and go back to standard operating procedure. And send us more money fed guys.

Post a Comment

Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.