Financial Giant USAA Gets Downgraded After Debanking Trump Lawyer, Going Woke
Once a low-cost haven for service members, veterans, and their families, USAA’s troubles suggest a company prioritizing leftist ideology over its mission.Once a low-cost haven for service members, veterans, and their families, USAA’s troubles suggest a company prioritizing leftist ideology over its mission.A brutal wake-up call from America’s most powerful banker
Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase — one of the most powerful financial institutions on earth — issued a warning the other day. But it wasn’t about interest rates, crypto, or monetary policy.
Speaking at the Reagan National Defense Forum in California, Dimon pivoted from economic talking points to something far more urgent: the fragile state of America’s physical preparedness.
We are living in a moment of stunning fragility — culturally, economically, and militarily. It means we can no longer afford to confuse digital distractions with real resilience.
“We shouldn’t be stockpiling Bitcoin,” Dimon said. “We should be stockpiling guns, tanks, planes, drones, and rare earths. We know we need to do it. It’s not a mystery.”
He cited internal Pentagon assessments showing that if war were to break out in the South China Sea, the United States has only enough precision-guided missiles for seven days of sustained conflict.
Seven days — that’s the gap between deterrence and desperation.
This wasn’t a forecast about inflation or a hedge against market volatility. It was a blunt assessment from a man whose words typically move markets.
“America is the global hegemon,” Dimon continued, “and the free world wants us to be strong.” But he warned that Americans have been lulled into “a false sense of security,” made complacent by years of peacetime prosperity, outsourcing, and digital convenience:
We need to build a permanent, long-term, realistic strategy for the future of America — economic growth, fiscal policy, industrial policy, foreign policy. We need to educate our citizens. We need to take control of our economic destiny.
This isn’t a partisan appeal — it’s a sobering wake-up call. Because our economy and military readiness are not separate issues. They are deeply intertwined.
Dimon isn’t alone in raising concerns. Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt has warned that China has already overtaken the U.S. in key defense technologies — hypersonic missiles, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence to mention a few. Retired military leaders continue to highlight our shrinking shipyards and dwindling defense manufacturing base.
Even the dollar, once assumed untouchable, is under pressure as BRICS nations work to undermine its global dominance. Dimon, notably, has said this effort could succeed if the U.S. continues down its current path.
So what does this all mean?
RELATED: Is Fort Knox still secure?
It means we are living in a moment of stunning fragility — culturally, economically, and militarily. It means we can no longer afford to confuse digital distractions with real resilience.
It means the future belongs to nations that understand something we’ve forgotten: Strength isn’t built on slogans or algorithms. It’s built on steel, energy, sovereignty, and trust.
And at the core of that trust is you, the citizen. Not the influencer. Not the bureaucrat. Not the lobbyist. At the core is the ordinary man or woman who understands that freedom, safety, and prosperity require more than passive consumption. They require courage, clarity, and conviction.
We need to stop assuming someone else will fix it. The next crisis — whether military, economic, or cyber — will not politely pause for our political dysfunction to sort itself out. It will demand leadership, unity, and grit.
And that begins with looking reality in the eye. We need to stop talking about things that don’t matter and cut to the chase: The U.S. is in a dangerously fragile position, and it’s time to rebuild and refortify — from the inside out.
Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.
Coinbase employees caught taking bribes for user data — hackers demand $20 million ransom
Coinbase received an extortionary email asking for $20 million in ransom from hackers who said they had obtained private user data.
The cryptocurrency exchange platform said a May 11 message demanded the money in return for not publicly disclosing information that was obtained through Coinbase employees.
'No passwords, private keys, or funds were exposed, and Coinbase Prime accounts are untouched.'
In a press release, Coinbase said "cyber criminals bribed and recruited" "rogue overseas support agents" to steal customer data in order to facilitate social engineering attacks.
Coinbase described the intrusion as only affecting a small subset of customers (less than 1%). However, this could still account for more than 1 million app users, given 2024 estimates that the company had ballooned to 105 million users, according to Business of Apps.
"No passwords, private keys, or funds were exposed, and Coinbase Prime accounts are untouched," Coinbase noted. "We will reimburse customers who were tricked into sending funds to the attacker."
While the company did its best to reassure its customers, a plethora of private information was swept up that users will not be happy about.
RELATED: Senate rejects cryptocurrency bill pushed by Treasury Sec. Bessent
According to Coinbase, hackers were provided with user names, addresses, phone numbers, and emails. The last four digits of Social Security numbers, masked bank account numbers, images of government ID, and more were allegedly stolen as well.
Dean Gefen, CEO of cybersecurity firm NukuDo, told Blaze News that this kind of data breach has long-term effects that most will come to realize.
'That kind of exposure isn't just a privacy issue; it opens the door to phishing, identity theft, and long-term financial vulnerability. Most users won't feel it today, but if that data gets sold or abused, the impact will remain for years."
Gefen explained that the reason crypto account holders are so at risk is because they sit at the intersection of finance and emerging tech. These two sectors often move ahead at light speed and end up leaving security in the rearview mirror, hoping to catch up.
"Any company storing sensitive financial data needs to take this as sign to be on notice. Without the right people, training, and systems in place, this kind of breach is inevitable," Gefen said.
— (@)
When asked if this was just the cost of doing business at this scale, Gefen replied, "[Only] if we accept failure as normal."
"We wouldn’t tolerate this kind of breach in a nuclear facility or defense system, so why would we accept it in our financial infrastructure?"
The cybersecurity expert added that bad actors from China, North Korea, and Russia are among the biggest threats who look at crypto platforms as attractive, decentralized targets.
Coinbase said that is working with "industry partners" and law enforcement to connect the dots, but instead of paying the ransom, it planned to establish a $20 million reward fund for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the attackers.
The crooked insiders were allegedly "fired on the spot" and referred to "U.S. and international law enforcement."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
How Republicans can shut down this overbearing agency once and for all
With accountability and spending restraint more urgent than ever, Congress should shut down the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for good. Eliminating the CFPB would mark a decisive move to protect taxpayers from another bloated, unaccountable government agency. If Republicans, Congress, and President Donald Trump want to keep their promise to rein in Washington’s runaway bureaucracy, they must ensure this agency stays dead — and buried for good.
The CFPB’s unchecked growth and regulatory overreach have raised red flags for years. Born out of the 2008 financial crisis, the agency operates with minimal oversight and has long avoided serious scrutiny. Its expanding budget and vague authority continue to spark legitimate questions about fiscal responsibility and constitutional limits. Closing down the CFPB would end a failed bureaucratic experiment and send a clear message: Every federal agency answers to the taxpayers. No exceptions.
Consumers deserve clear, commonsense policies — especially after years of market confusion driven by the CFPB’s heavy hand.
The CFPB was built to operate independently, beyond the reach of Congress or the president. Lawmakers granted it broad, vague authority — allowing unelected bureaucrats to meddle freely in the U.S. economy. Beyond its track record of economic failure, the CFPB’s structure flatly contradicts the American model of representative government.
President Trump and the Department of Government Efficiency, led by Elon Musk, acted quickly. They made high-impact decisions to show Americans they were serious about cutting waste, reducing overreach, and eliminating redundancy across the federal bureaucracy. When the CFPB came up for its DOGE review, the administration halted its operations and dismissed hundreds of staff.
That move triggered criticism from the usual quarters, but consumers and lawmakers should look deeper. Ending the CFPB isn’t just about cost-cutting. It signaled a broader plan to streamline the federal government and promote efficiency across every agency.
Still, even the DOGE can’t finish the job without Congress. Only Congress can repeal the statute that established the CFPB — and only Congress can shut the agency down for good. Lawmakers must do so.
The CFPB currently controls its own funding, bypassing the regular appropriations process and evading critical checks and balances. Reclaiming those dollars would help reduce the deficit, and redistributing the CFPB’s limited useful functions to other agencies would ensure continued consumer protections under proper oversight.
The Federal Reserve and other agencies already handle key aspects of financial regulation and could easily absorb the CFPB’s remaining duties. Congress must finally draw the line: no more duplicative mandates, no more unchecked authority, and no more mission creep. If consumer protections matter — and they do — then Congress must deliver them through a structure that answers to the people.
RELATED: Congress claps back at Biden’s 'junk fee' crusade
Fortunately, the CFPB has begun scaling back some of its overreach. Earlier this month, the agency dropped its lawsuit against Credit Acceptance Corporation, an auto lender. That move signals a step in the right direction — away from regulatory overreach and toward a more balanced role in the economy.
Every unnecessary enforcement action piles compliance costs on businesses, stifles innovation, and hampers economic growth. Reassessing these missteps marks progress toward a regulatory approach that defends consumers without punishing industry.
Consumers deserve clear, commonsense policies — especially after years of market confusion driven by the CFPB’s heavy hand. They also deserve policies shaped by accountable officials, not by bureaucrats operating in defiance of congressional oversight. Credit access remains essential for Americans seeking financial stability in times of need. Crafting sound regulations — and eliminating those that never made sense — protects both their financial futures and the broader economy.
Consumers also deserve protection they can trust. Creditors need clear, consistent rules to serve their customers without facing unpredictable regulatory entanglements. Any reform bill must address these concerns directly and distribute the CFPB’s remaining legitimate duties across existing, accountable agencies.
As these changes take shape, stakeholders must stay engaged. Reforms should be implemented deliberately and effectively — promoting economic growth while preserving oversight where it’s needed. If President Trump wants to cement his legacy as the president who dismantled the administrative state, he must make sure the CFPB doesn’t just get paused. It must stay gone for good.
New Laws Restrict Indiana Treasurer Who Protects Americans From Debanking
The banking industry is attempting to take programs from Indiana's state treasurer because he works to protect Christians and conservatives.Federal Reserve revokes guidance requiring banks to gain preapproval on cryptocurrency activity
The Federal Reserve has rescinded its guidance for banks related to handling cryptocurrencies and digital assets.
In a recent press release, the Federal Reserve Board said it was removing guidance that forced banks to seek special permission before dealing with digital assets.
According to the release, a 2022 supervisory letter established an expectation that banks would provide advance notification of planned cryptocurrency activities, while updating the Reserve of ongoing ventures.
The justification for the requirements included market instability, money-laundering concerns, and consumer protection.
"Certain types of crypto-assets, such as stablecoins, if adopted at large scale, could also pose risks to financial stability," the expunged letter read.
However, the board now says it will no longer expect banks to provide notification and will instead "monitor banks' crypto-asset activities through the normal supervisory process," the press release explained.
The 2023 letter, since withdrawn, required banks to demonstrate, "to the satisfaction of Federal Reserve supervisors," that the bank had controls in place in order to conduct safe transactions surrounding cryptocurrencies. This was called a "supervisory nonobjection" where banks did not get to engage in an activity and then have it scrutinized, but rather they needed to submit their "proposed activities" to the Federal Reserve in order to move forward.
This was not a form of an approval process either, though, but rather a "nonobjection."
Taking off more reins
The Federal Reserve board also said it would be working with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to determine if additional guidance to support innovation with crypto-asset activities is needed.
According to Crowdfund Insider, the OCC announced in March that it would be making its own changes to its Comptroller's Handbook booklets and guidance. On change from the federal agency, which works within the Treasury Department, was that it would no longer examine institutions for "reputation risk."
"The OCC’s examination process has always been rooted in ensuring appropriate risk management processes for bank activities, not casting judgment on how a particular activity may fare with public opinion," said Acting Comptroller of the Currency Rodney E. Hood.
"The OCC has never used reputation risk as a catch-all justification for supervisory action. Focusing future examination activities on more transparent risk areas improves public confidence in the OCC's supervisory process and makes clear that the OCC has not and does not make business decisions for banks."
President Trump recently signed an executive order aimed at establishing a strategic Bitcoin reserve, which at the same time forbids the acquisition of other digital assets except through forfeiture proceedings.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Bill Targets Indiana Treasurer Who Stops Banks From Canceling Christians, Gun Owners
Indiana's treasurer helped push banks to back down on canceling conservatives, and now a banker-backed bill would strip his office's powers.Congress claps back at Biden’s 'junk fee' crusade
Good news rarely comes out of Capitol Hill, but last week’s Senate vote to reject a Biden-era Consumer Financial Protection Bureau proposal marked a welcome exception. Lawmakers blocked a plan to impose price controls, taking an important step toward reviving the Trump administration’s efforts to rein in the agency. Those efforts included directing CFPB employees to stop developing new regulations.
The House is scheduled to vote on its version of the resolution on Wednesday.
The overdraft cap may be the latest counterproductive mandate from the CFPB, but it’s far from the first. Given its track record, the next step shouldn’t be reform but repeal.
Despite centuries of evidence that price controls often backfire, the Biden administration made them a central part of its economic agenda. From rent regulations to the so-called “war on junk fees,” the White House consistently pushed for caps and mandates.
The CFPB’s rule to limit overdraft fees — finalized just as the Bidens prepared to leave for Delaware — followed that same pattern.
The rule would impose a $5 fee limit on banks’ and credit unions’ overdraft charges. Yet as with most price control schemes, it is the very people it claims to help — lower-income Americans — who stand to lose the most.
The Senate, led by Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), who introduced the resolution, voted to repeal the cap, recognizing it for what it is: a performative policy that distracts from the inflation that has devastated family budgets. Scott noted that the rule changes the conversation, not consumers’ realities.
Whether covering a car repair, rent, or a medical bill, overdraft protection enables people to bridge temporary shortfalls without bouncing checks, defaulting on bills, or incurring additional late fees. It’s used most frequently, not by the reckless, but by responsible people in tight spots.
A flat government-imposed $5 cap on overdraft charges is both economically unworkable and fundamentally unfair. Banks incur actual costs when they provide this service. They must process the transaction, front the money, and take on the risk that the overdraft won’t be repaid.
When those costs can’t be recovered, businesses eliminate the service altogether or pass the costs on to other customers in other ways. In this case, that would mean millions of consumers losing access to a widely used and valued program. And that’s not just theory — previous attempts to regulate overdraft fees have led to similar consequences, including fewer banks offering overdraft coverage or more restrictive account terms.
Lower-income families aren't the only ones who will suffer. Midsized and regional banks, many of which serve rural and working-class populations, would be forced to reassess whether they can afford to offer overdraft protection at all. That’s a problem because many rural communities are lucky to have even one bank.
Add it all up, and it’s clear this rule doesn’t punish Wall Street. It squeezes the very Americans the Biden administration claimed to champion — the forgotten men and women.
The CFPB’s proposed rule would set a troubling precedent. Once price controls take hold in one area of consumer finance, they become easier to expand into others.
History shows what happens when the government imposes arbitrary price limits: supply drops, access declines, and the people most in need — especially those on the margins — suffer the most.
As Milton Friedman put it, “There is no such thing as a free lunch.” A $5 cap on overdraft fees may sound appealing, but it carries real costs.
The House must now follow the Senate’s lead and repeal this flawed regulation. And Congress shouldn’t stop there.
The overdraft cap may be the latest counterproductive mandate from the CFPB, but it’s far from the first. Free-market advocates can’t point to a single action by the agency they support.
Given its track record, the next step shouldn’t be reform but repeal.
Since the Trump administration began reining in the CFPB, several Republican lawmakers have introduced bills to dismantle it entirely. Congress should bring those proposals to a vote and keep the political will to finish the job. This debate is long overdue.
Congress can’t legislate away unintended consequences
Sometimes, bipartisanship is a great meeting of the minds. Other times, it’s a meeting of minds that don’t understand economics. The latter is the case with recently proposed legislation to cap credit card interest rates, introduced by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and her reliably misguided counterpart, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).
Let’s start with common ground. Most people agree that credit card interest rates, which now average well above 20%, are excessive. No one should pay 20% or 30% interest annually unless facing a true emergency, and even then, that debt should be paid off as quickly as possible.
Policies that sound good in theory often fail in practice, and capping credit card interest rates is one of them.
Pricing serves as a signal, providing consumers with critical information. A high interest rate should send a clear message: Avoid carrying a credit card balance. Paying off the full amount each month prevents the burden of excessive interest charges.
However, in typical fashion, lawmakers who put political appeal over economic literacy ignore the unintended consequences of their policies. Proposing a cap on interest rates disrupts this pricing signal and creates a cascade of negative effects.
The most immediate consequence is reduced access to credit. High credit card interest rates exist largely because lenders assume the risk of defaults, including the possibility that borrowers may discharge their debt through bankruptcy. To compensate for this risk, lenders adjust costs accordingly.
Capping credit card interest rates while maintaining the bankruptcy “out” forces lenders to adjust their underwriting process. As a result, many borrowers — including those with poor credit and even some with decent credit — will lose or be denied access to credit from traditional sources. To compensate for lost revenue, lenders will likely introduce additional fees, making borrowing more expensive in other ways.
Predictably, lawmakers like Luna and Ocasio-Cortez will then complain about financial discrimination against low-income borrowers who suddenly find themselves locked out of the credit system.
Without access to traditional credit, many of these individuals will turn to riskier, more expensive alternatives, such as payday lenders or even black-market sources, further exacerbating the problem policymakers claim to be solving.
Ultimately, Congress cannot legislate away unintended consequences. In fact, Congress is typically a source of unintended consequences.
Some may argue that restricting credit access is beneficial for certain individuals, but denying access doesn’t mean people won’t seek credit elsewhere — often from riskier, more expensive sources.
More importantly, what gives the government the authority to regulate financial responsibility? Should Congress also prevent people from buying cars they can’t afford, placing sports bets, purchasing designer clothes, or enjoying steak dinners?
Financial responsibility cannot be legislated, especially in a country with minimal financial literacy education.
And let’s not forget that Congress itself has accumulated $36.5 trillion in national debt. Hardly a role model for fiscal responsibility.
Policies that sound good in theory often fail in practice, and capping credit card interest rates is one of them. Instead of creating more financial hurdles, Congress should focus on fixing its own fiscal mismanagement and addressing affordability issues. People shouldn’t feel forced to borrow at insane rates just to make ends meet.
‘Fair Access’ Bill Would Finally Stop Activist Banks From Discriminating Against Conservatives
Financial institutions don't have authority to silence political or religious individuals or groups with whom they don’t agree.Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com
www.theblaze.com