Tag Archives: Cole Memo

Fed Bank Approves Cannabis-Associated Colorado Credit Union

Washington, D.C — After years of litigation, the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City has given conditional approval to a Colorado credit union to service cannabis-related businesses. But in order to secure approval, the Fourth Corner Credit Union agreed that it would not serve any business that directly handles funds from cannabis sales or any state-licensed dispensaries.

Fourth Corner Credit Union had originally planned to work with “any legal marijuana enterprise in Colorado,” but modified their plans after being denied by the Fed bank. Now, instead of working directly with dispensaries, the credit union will “focus on individuals and companies that support legalized marijuana” – such as “accountants or landlords,” according to the Wall Street Journal.

Originally, in 2014, the credit union was awarded a charter by the State of Colorado to serve state-legal canna-businesses, but the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City refused to honor Fourth Corner’s request for a master account on grounds that federal law prohibits banks from serving businesses that handle funds related to an illegal substance. Without a master account, which allows access to the banking system, the credit union would not be able to operate.

According to a report from Merry Jane, a cannabis culture site, Fourth Corner dealt with a series of delays and legal woes before finally obtaining approval:

“In response to this challenge, Fourth Corner altered their charter, announcing that they would only open accounts for businesses that indirectly serve or support the cannabis sector, such as legalization advocacy groups, and accountants or lawyers with clients in the industry. Hence, the bank would technically would be operating legally, as long as they’re not handling funds directly related to growing, processing, or selling marijuana. Regardless of the change, the Federal Reserve continued to deny the bank’s request for a master account. Fourth Corner sued the Feds in 2016, and after losing the first round in court, finally won the right to a federal master account last summer in the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Despite the court’s ruling, the Kansas City Fed still had not given the credit union their account by last fall, so the bank filed a civil complaint in the U.S. District Court in Denver. After years of disagreement, this month the Federal Reserve finally granted conditional approval to Fourth Corner.”

To secure the deal, the Fourth Corner Credit Union agreed that it would not “serve any state-licensed dispensaries or business that directly handles cannabis funds.”

In an effort to avoid any perception of setting a precedent, the Federal Reserve Bank noted specifically that “this letter does not express the policy views of” the Federal Reserve Banking System as a whole, “nor does it contain any supervisory, regulatory or enforcement guidance or precedent,” the Wall Street Journal reported.

As Truth in Media previously reported, following Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ decision to revoke the Cole Memo— which gave Obama-era federal guidance for a hands-off policy towards state-legal marijuana— the Trump administration has recently been considering the removal of another Obama-era protocol, one that that permits banks to open accounts for marijuana-related businesses without being considered in violation of law.

Despite that move from Sessions, a bipartisan group of 31 House members recently collaborated on a letter that asked the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) agency to continue this cannabis banking guidance.

“FinCEN’s stated priorities have allowed such businesses to conduct commerce more safely through financial institutions which reduces the use of all cash, improves public safety, and reduces fraud,” the House lawmakers wrote in their letter. “Leaving your guidance unchanged will continue to encourage small companies to make investments by freeing up access to capital. It will also further provide for well regulation and oversight through suspicious activity reports. Rescinding this guidance would inject uncertainty in the financial markets.”

Drew Maloney, the U.S. Treasury Department’s assistant secretary for legislative affairs, wrote in response that his agency is “reviewing the [banking] guidance in light of the Attorney General’s announcement and are consulting with law enforcement.”

In testimony before the U.S. Senate, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Department Sigal Mandelker said that the FinCEN memo remains in effect as the Trump administration examines the possibility of revocation. On Wednesday, Maloney confirmed in his letter that prior guidance “remains in place” for now, adding that Congress would be informed of any policy changes.

Reality Check: GOP Memo and FISA Problems

Should the FISA court be more transparent? Vote in our poll.

Friday, the White House released a controversial memo meant to provide some context to the whole Trump/Russia investigation.

The Nunes memo is four pages long, and it explains many of what seem to be very questionable actions by the Department of Justice and the FBI in how they got their hands on FISA warrants on Trump campaign officials.

But more than just this case, this memo backs up what civil libertarians have been screaming about for years. And begs the question—can the FISA court system actually be trusted?

Let’s give it a Reality Check you won’t get anywhere else.

First, let’s start with the Nunes memo. It was long anticipated. So what did it show?

The memo focuses in part on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants that authorized the surveillance of former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page.

First, The memo claims that, “On Oct. 21, 2016 the DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA probable cause order authorizing electronic surveillance on Page.”

According to the memo, “The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant tareting Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC.”

“…Then-FBI Director James Comey signed three FISA applications on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one.”

The memo also says, “Then-DAG [Deputy Attorney General] Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of the DOJ.”

Now, where things get interesting is when you bring in that infamous Trump dossier.

It was created by former British Spy Christopher Steele on behalf of the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

The memo states that, “Neither the initial application for the warrant in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding of Steele’s efforts.”

That’s despite the fact that we know Steele was paid more than $160,000, and even though the memo states that both the DOJ and the FBI were aware of the Democratic Party funding of the dossier.

The memo claims that in the Carter Page FISA application a Yahoo News article was cited extensively. But the memo states that the article did not corroborate the Steele dossier because “it was derived from information leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News.

In fact, the memo says that the FISA application “incorrectly asses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News. Steele has admitted in British court filings that he met with Yahoo News and several other outlets in September 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS.”

The memo also claims that, “before and after Steele was terminated as a source,” which by the way was, according to the memo, because of unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI, Steele “maintained contact” with the DOJ through then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr.

Ohr, who worked closely with Yates then Rosenstein, eventually spoke with the FBI about his communications with Steele.

In September 2016, Steele apparently told Ohr he was “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president,” according to the memo.

And the memo also notes Ohr’s wife worked for Fusion GPS to help with the opposition research against Trump, something the memo claims was—once again—not disclosed.

The memo also claims that McCabe testified before the House Intelligence Committee in December 2017 “that no surveillance warrant would have been sought” without the Steele dossier information. But there is no direct quote from McCabe’s (behind-closed-doors) testimony.

Finally, the memo ends with information about George Papadopoulos—who has since pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI—and claims the FISA application mentions information about Papadopoulos “triggered the opening of a counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Peter Strzok.”

(Strzok was removed from Mueller’s probe after anti-Trump texts between him and his mistress, former FBI agent Lisa Page, were discovered.)

For her part, Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi told CNN that this memo is all a lie.

On Monday, the Washington Post reported, “FISA court was aware that some of the information underpinning the warrant request was paid for by a political entity, but that the application did not specifically name the Democratic National Committee or the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.”

But there is actually a larger question here. Larger than this memo, larger than the Trump/Russia question. It is a question civil libertarians have been asking for years.

How does anyone in America trust the FISA court system?

What you need to know is that this story is much bigger than just President Trump. If the Nunes memo holds up as true, what does that mean for those who have been charged or arrested under the other 38,000 plus FISA warrants?

The President shouldn’t be above anyone else and if transparency is deserved in his case, shouldn’t transparency be deserved in all FISA cases?

Lets talk about that tonight on Twitter and Facebook.

Treasury Department Considering Removal of Marijuana Banking Protections

Washington, D.C. — The Trump administration is weighing the removal of an Obama-era protocol that permitted banks to open accounts for marijuana-related businesses without being considered in violation of law, according to a recent report by Forbes.

In the wake of Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ move to overturn the Cole Memo, which had previously laid a hands-off federal policy towards state marijuana policy under the Obama administration, federal prosecutors will now be allowed to decide how to prioritize enforcing federal cannabis prohibition in relation to possession, cultivation or distribution in states that have legalized the drug.

With Sessions’ revocation of three Obama-era memos last month, which had provided guidance that allowed banks to provide their services to marijuana businesses without the risk of federal prosecution, the Treasury Department is now “reviewing the [banking] guidance in light of the Attorney General’s announcement and are consulting with law enforcement,” Drew Maloney, the U.S. Treasury Department’s assistant secretary for legislative affairs, wrote in a letter to members of Congress.

The letter from the Treasury Department was in response to an inquiry last month from a  bipartisan group of 31 House members, that included a request for the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) agency to carry on with the cannabis banking guidance.

“FinCEN’s stated priorities have allowed such businesses to conduct commerce more safely through financial institutions which reduces the use of all cash, improves public safety, and reduces fraud,” the House lawmakers wrote in their letter. “Leaving your guidance unchanged will continue to encourage small companies to make investments by freeing up access to capital. It will also further provide for well regulation and oversight through suspicious activity reports. Rescinding this guidance would inject uncertainty in the financial markets.”

According to the report by Forbes:

“The FinCEN document, issued in 2014, laid out a process for how banks can open accounts for marijuana businesses and avoid triggering federal enforcement actions.

The FinCEN policy, which requires financial institutions to regularly file reports on their cannabis customers, was intended to provide clarity and assurances to banks, but many have remained reluctant to work with marijuana businesses because of overarching federal prohibition laws.

Nonetheless, documents released by FinCEN late last year showed that the number of banks willing to work with the marijuana industry has steadily grown over time, though those figures were collected prior to Sessions’s move to revoke the broader Justice Department guidance.”

While cannabis use has been legalized or decriminalized in a majority of U.S. states, it is still considered a Schedule 1 substance— denoting no accepted medical use— under federal law, which has created a conflict between state and federal law.

[RELATED: Truth in Media: Feds Say Cannabis Is Not Medicine While Holding The Patent on Cannabis as Medicine]

According to a report in the Wall Street Journal:

A significant chunk of the financial system—including most credit-card companies and all banks that have access to the Fed’s payments highway—is regulated by the U.S. government, which considers distribution and use of marijuana a crime. As a result, marijuana dispensaries have had to rely mainly on cash, raising security and logistical concerns.

Under the Obama administration, the Justice Department issued legal guidance indicating that its priorities in combating illegal drug trafficking didn’t include the sale and purchase of state-legalized marijuana. It said it would crack down on the marijuana industry only in cases tied to other criminal activities, such as distribution to minors, firearm violence or trafficking of other drugs.

Last month, in testimony before the U.S. Senate, Sigal Mandelker, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Department, said that the FinCEN memo is still in effect while the Trump administration considers its revocation. On Wednesday, Maloney confirmed in his letter that prior guidance “remains in place” for now, and vowed to inform Congress of any policy changes.