well, or so we hope. it would be really bad if it came out that the CFPB provided employees with the funds to make said donations in their own name.

it does not appear that the coal industry endorsed a presidential candidate but spent money in local elections.

"Rep. Sean Duffy, R-Wisc., a frequent critic of the agency, said that it is no surprise that the agency would contribute to the Democratic campaign.

The agency didn't contribute, the employees did. I fail to see the relevance of this story. Individual can give to whoever they wish. Does it really make a difference as to who they work for??? I have yet to see the stats on members of the Coal Miner's Union"

I didn't read the article but if 100% of the CFPB employees donated only to one party I would be extremely suspicious of that activity and might even file a SAR

But seriously, if it truly is 100% that is a huge red flag, almost a statistical impossibility.

What percentage of management-level bankers do you think voted Democratic in the presidential election? Is that a statistical impossibility?

The CFPB had 1443 employees at the end of fiscal year 2014 - I am sure there are more now.

Agency employees made more than 300 donations during the campaign to either Hillary or Bernie totaling under $50,000.

Still not much a story in my mind. Employees of any company or agency are free to donate to whoever they want. It wasn't like they were going to sway an election with those numbers. If your bread and butter came from the CFPB - who would you have supported???

I am thinking on the Coal issue that not many donations (individual member level) went either way as a vast majority of the workers have no disposable income.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00013342&cycle=2016

United Mine Workers of America

House
Total to Democrats: $177,500
Total to Republicans: $134,000

Senate
Total to Democrats: $24,000
Total to Republicans: $18,500

The debate does not focus on whether Rasputin might be killed, only on the methodology:

Bloomberg

Los Angeles Times

The recent court decision rendered Corday subject to removal...that's the most likely starting point. Geeze, will Warren squeal about that.

Very interesting article at Nationalreview.com titled The tragic downfall of CFPB. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443227/ One thing that jumped out to me out of everything is the hostility of CFPB towards banks (not that it was not obvious, this just points to it being more blunt) and this quote “never give them what they ask for.” Has been used in the field many times. When ever a question is asked for clarification or request from banks to lighten the burden. The answer is never given directly or your comments will be taken under advisement, but nothing ever gets changed and they continue on with the original plan.

As both a consumer and a banker CFPB does have a place as an advocate for consumer rights and Reg implementation. To take googles motto "Do no evil" CFPB seems to have swung to the other end of the spectrum.

I read the article in the National Review as well. VERY disturbing! Good read.

That is a very good read, sad to say I am not surprised though.