Fox News host Tucker Carlson claimed Thursday that Bank of America has been working with the federal government to “actively, but secretly” hunt extremists by sharing private information “without the knowledge or the consent of its customers.”
Carlson said on his broadcast of “Tucker Carlson Tonight” that he exclusively obtained the evidence of Bank of America’s activities and described how the bank was assisting federal investigators in their investigation following the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. (RELATED: ‘What The Hell?’: Tucker Carlson Responds To Democratic Rep’s ‘Grotesque’ Comments On Racial, Gender Makeup Of National Guard)
“This show has obtained, exclusively, evidence that Bank of America, the second largest bank in the country with more than 60 million customers, is actively, but secretly, engaged in the hunt for extremists in cooperation with the government,” Carlson said. “Bank of America is, without the knowledge or the consent of its customers, sharing private information with federal law enforcement agencies. Bank of America, effectively, is acting as an intelligence agency. But they are not telling you about it.”
Carlson went on to detail the transaction data requests from the federal investigators and noted that the profile was “remarkably broad,” but that the bank identified 211 customers who fit all of the data points. He then stated that the bank turned over the transaction data of those customers without notifying them. “Federal investigators then interviewed at least one of these unsuspecting people. And that person, we learned, hadn’t done anything wrong and in the end was cleared,” he said.
“Imagine if you were that person? The FBI hauls you in for questioning in a terror investigation. Not because you have done anything suspicious. You haven’t,” Carlson continued. “You bought plane tickets and visited your country’s capital. You thought you could do that. You thought it was your country. Now they are sweating you because your bank, which you trust with your most private information, information of everything you buy, has ratted you out to the feds without telling you, without your knowledge.”
Carlson then stated that his team asked Bank of America about the actions and said “they confirmed it actually happened by not denying it.” He read the bank’s statement in full, which claimed that they had “responsibilities under federal law to cooperate with law enforcement inquiries in full compliance with the law.”
“But that’s not true. Bank of America did have a choice. The bank could have resisted turning over information on its innocent customers to federal investigators. But Bank of America did not do that,” Carlson claimed.
He went on to say that his team spoke to “a number of lawyers” who said that what the bank allegedly did might not be legal and could be challenged in court.
“The question is, legally, what constitutes information that may be relevant to a possible crime? Buying a muffin in Washington, D.C. on January 5th? Does that make you a potential domestic extremist? According to Bank of America, yes, yes, it does,” Carlson concluded.
