https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/02/us/politics/elaine-chao-c...
Chao is being investigated by the House [1]. Worst case, we’re talking single-digit millions of suspected malfeasance versus billions in Russia of cut-and-dry graft.
And most importantly, a wrong here doesn’t excuse a wrong there.
[1] https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/24/house-chao-rules-t...
And Revolut is a non-Russian service. Hence the comparison.
(Money laundering has three steps [1]. Dirty Russian money is typically placed with Russian banks. It is then layered between Russian and non-Russian banks before being integrated by a non-Russian bank, thereby masking its origins. Given the amount of dirty money flowing out of Russia, a Russian account tends to gather more scrutiny than e.g. a Danish one in the same way a Colombian account garners more scrutiny than a Miami one.)
There is outsized demand for money laundering from Russia, in large part owing to its endemic and unchecked corruption. This is why most recent European money laundering scandals have involved Russian money [1][2][3].
So when you see an AML deficient operation with multiple Russian ties based out of Lithuania, it raises legitimate questions.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-danske-bank-eu-regulator/...
[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/18/deutsche-bank-shares-slip-am...
[3] https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2019/03/...