Your linked source does not support the claim, but rather talks about efforts to restore Glass-Steagall in some form and their failure, which is not a loosening of regulations, but a continuation of the status quo. I do acknowledge that the repeal of Glass-Steagall itself was a loosening of regulation, but that was 25 years ago.

The link was 'Cf', meaning it gives background on the part of financial regulation I talk about, rather than being a direct source. It talks about the rationale for not adopting Glass-Steagall-strength measures during the Obama years. During the Trump years, most US banks were exempted from Dodd-Frank in 2018 via the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act.

Anyone in finance would tell you that Dodd Frank drastically changed how banks are run. Glass–Steagall was never reinstated because it had very little to do with the financial crisis. Many of the bigger players of the mortgage crisis never did anything related to commercial banking (e.g. Lehman Brothers, AIG).

Dodd Frank was not gutted by Trump. They lifted the asset cap so that the onerous regulatory requirements only applied to banks with $250B+ in assets, rather than banks with $50B+ in assets, as it was previously.

This was a great thing for consumers and banking competition. There is no reason a small bank with $50B in assets should have the same regulatory requirements as JP Morgan.