There are banking regulations. Film at 11.

The money's in the bank; that said he paid or will have to pay taxes on any interest (0.01% ?)and he needs some of it for personal reasons. The personal reasons would be his; the government has no fucking interest in him until somebody makes a complaint or he doesn't pay the taxes he owes on the interest. The bank WILL tell the government what he made in interest. So will his stock brokers. The real thieves own all three branches of government and most of the media, so they are invulnerable and this is really pointless.

"But it will aid in catching crimes!" See the previous sentence and we didn't really need a 4'th Amendment anyway... This being related to "well he was paying off a blackmailer and we have a right to know what's going on". You can't trawl for anybody some administrative bluenose thinks might be "icky". There's a crinkly old document which is hard to read because it has been used as toilet paper for at least the last thirty years, but I'm pretty sure it says they're not supposed to be doing this...

Post #402,113 by Another Scott 5/28/15 9:55:00 PM Reply	There are banking regulations. Film at 11. Bank Secrecy Act of 1970. HTH. Cheers, Scott.
Post #402,115 by boxley 5/28/15 10:00:07 PM Reply	government will steal yer stuff, film at 11 Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
Post #402,117 by Another Scott 5/28/15 10:09:05 PM Reply	If you don't want to follow banking rules, then don't use a bank. Problem solved.
Post #402,128 by boxley 5/29/15 10:19:36 AM Reply	he wasnt using a bank, he was removing his stuff from a bank now if he was moving it to the caymans I would be cheering this on. He was not evading any tax, just paying his blackmail. Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
Post #402,131 by Another Scott 5/29/15 10:57:26 AM Reply	Um, having money in a bank and withdrawing it is using a bank.
Post #402,153 by hnick 5/29/15 1:36:11 PM Reply	Curiously,I'm with Box on this The money's in the bank; that said he paid or will have to pay taxes on any interest (0.01% ?)and he needs some of it for personal reasons. The personal reasons would be his; the government has no fucking interest in him until somebody makes a complaint or he doesn't pay the taxes he owes on the interest. The bank WILL tell the government what he made in interest. So will his stock brokers. The real thieves own all three branches of government and most of the media, so they are invulnerable and this is really pointless. "But it will aid in catching crimes!" See the previous sentence and we didn't really need a 4'th Amendment anyway... This being related to "well he was paying off a blackmailer and we have a right to know what's going on". You can't trawl for anybody some administrative bluenose thinks might be "icky". There's a crinkly old document which is hard to read because it has been used as toilet paper for at least the last thirty years, but I'm pretty sure it says they're not supposed to be doing this... "Religion, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable." ~ AMBROSE BIERCE (1842-1914)
Post #402,174 by Another Scott 5/29/15 4:09:17 PM Reply	Meh. I can't find a reason to be upset about these reporting requirements. Preventing money laundering is a good thing. Now, if the topic was "civil forfeiture" laws, well, I think we'd all be in a drum circle singing Kumbaya. Cheers, Scott.
Post #402,176 by boxley 5/29/15 5:39:20 PM Reply	no money laundering here, so because "law" not "crime" Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
Post #402,177 by crazy 5/29/15 5:47:54 PM Reply	oh bs Track it on the way in to check for "laundering". Once "in" it is none of their business.
Post #402,179 by crazy 5/29/15 6:02:57 PM Reply	on the other hand Nyah nyah http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/dennis-hasterts-secret-gay-misconduct-is-even-worse-given-his-terrible-voting-record-on-gay-rights/
Post #402,182 by boxley 5/29/15 6:51:14 PM Reply	well the comments are fun This is nothing. Wait to you see who Lindsey Graham has been buggering. Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
Post #402,184 by crazy 5/29/15 7:35:39 PM Reply	a bit more detail http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/05/30/us/politics/hastert-indictment.html?referrer= Bottom line: you don't pay 3.5 million to keep someone quiet when you are innocent.

Welcome to IWETHEY!