Sniveling BlueAnon for banking pressure orgs didnt wait ONE DAY to prove critics right about them

Well, that didn’t take long.

Earlier this month, Washington Examiner’s Taylor Millard warned about a brazen new willingness on the left to just say the quiet part out loud about using government red tape as unwritten law. And lo and behold, Millard was immediately proved right when … well, when left wing groups said the quiet part out loud about it. Bragging about using regulatory strangulation to prevent what they couldn’t use the law to prevent.

See, we’ve all known forever that left wing activists masquerading as do-gooders have “backdoors” in government to prevent or interfere with what doesn’t fit their warped world view. In the specific here and now, it’s their way of keeping financial companies they don’t like out of the banking system. And it’s exactly what we always say they do.

They flood federal regulators with coordinated opposition, manufacture the appearance of overwhelming public resistance, and make the approval process such a pain in the butt that companies eventually just give up under the weight of it.

Millard wrote:

Left-leaning advocacy groups have found a backdoor way to kill banking access for millions of Americans: burying federal regulators in coordinated, astroturfed comment campaigns.

A collection of progressive nonprofit groups appears to have found a formula beyond traditional lobbying to achieve their policy goals: hijacking federal regulatory comment periods. In an effort to block approvals they view as nefarious, these groups have launched coordinated campaigns that astroturf comments to regulators and build a talking-points echo chamber designed to grind approvals for novel banking providers, known as “fintechs,” to a halt. The financial consequences for hundreds of thousands of Americans could be dire.

That was written on September 14.

And right quick, one of the specific companies Millard warned was in the crosshairs has had to give up under that weight. Enova International withdrew its applications to acquire Grasshopper Bank because of months of screeching opposition from progressive pressure groups. Groups that took a victory lap.

THE VERY NEXT DAY AFTER MILLARD’S ARTICLE.

Yeah.

That’s the National Community Reinvestment Coalition bragging openly on X that they, and the Woodstock Institute wore everyone down with their incessant liberal whining and nagging.

Gotta love the euphemistic “submitted opposition letters and coordinated with state AGs and consumer advocates” description of the process. How mundane they make it sound.

From Millard:

But breaking into banking isn’t simple. Prospective banks need approval from the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, a process that includes a public comment period. Federal rules require the OCC to allow 30 days for comment on expedited charter reviews, then 15 more days before deciding; standard charters get 120 days total. Regulators can extend that timeline if commenters show they need more time, or if legal, policy, or compliance issues surface. But the OCC is also required to keep an expedited review on track if it finds that objections are frivolous or filed simply to cause delay.

That’s the crack consumer groups have learned to exploit. Grassroots-aligned coalitions appear to be aggressively working the process, largely from the premise that for many Americans, no credit is better than credit they consider too expensive.

Millard also noted that government regulators have “so far seemed shockingly willing to entertain what one critic of the tactic called ‘BlueAnon, but for banking.’”

Didn’t we hear a bunch of stuff about deregulation during the last election year? Cause I’d sure like to hear more about it in the here and now.