Venture capitalist and pharma kingpin Mark Cuban, Fox broadcasting founder Barry Diller, LinkedIn chief Reid Hoffman, and others on Wall Street all agree: Khan has got to go.

If Donald Trump retakes the White House on Nov. 5, they’ll probably get their wish. Though Trump running mate J.D. Vance has mused about how it might be good if Khan breaks up the tech monopolies that stifle his benefactors in the start-up capital space like Peter Thiel, mainstream GOP opinion is that Khan is the enemy and should be canned as quickly as possible.

Cuban alleges that Khan puts American capitalism’s competitiveness at “risk” and jeopardizes the country’s chances for “global dominance.” Diller, whose company is reportedly facing multiple FTC investigations, told business network CNBC that Khan is “a dope.” Hoffman calls her “a person that is not helping America” and said she’s “waging a war on American business.”

Their accusations are all reminiscent of the language Trump has used to describe women who’ve politically opposed him—Hillary Clinton, AOC, Ilhan Omar, Harris, and the list goes on.

But here’s the kicker: Cuban, Diller, and Hoffman are all major Democratic donors. Cuban is the big power behind “Business Leaders for Harris” and appears on television regularly on the vice president’s behalf. Hoffman, a notable among the Silicon Valley crowd, has given at least $10 million to the various arms of the Democratic machine this election cycle. Diller, meanwhile, has ponied up hundreds of thousands of dollars and appeared on countless news programs to bolster the Democratic campaign.

All three have chastised their ruling class buddies for backing Trump, but they worry that if Kamala Harris wins, she might keep Khan in the top spot at the FTC. That’s why they’re going all out to lobby the Democratic nominee to dump Khan, launching a media onslaught aimed at undermining the public’s view of her and raising questions about her fitness for the job.

They hope their status as “liberal billionaires” gives them leverage to bend the Harris campaign to their will. It’s a classic case of pay-to-play that seeks to leave those of us without deep pockets standing on the outside with no influence.

But what is it about Khan that has the leading lights of the capitalist class so agitated? For years, the agency she heads, the FTC, has rarely raised much controversy. Charged with enforcing consumer protection and antitrust laws, it mostly kept its head down after being nearly dismantled in 1980 for waging war on the big tobacco companies and the sugary food industry.

All that changed when President Joe Biden appointed Khan to helm the agency in 2021. Under her leadership, the FTC has once more become an anti-monopoly juggernaut, taking on some of the biggest names in Corporate America.

Progressive economists took notice of Khan after she wrote a prize-winning article as a Yale law student in 2017 titled “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox.” It set off a bomb in U.S. business and legal circles with its argument that U.S. anti-monopoly law was too narrowly focused on simply keeping consumer prices down.

The criterion for triggering antitrust enforcement has long been price-gouging, but Khan argued that the harm of monopoly was far bigger. Using Amazon as her example, she wrote that platform-based business models allow and encourage the kind of anti-competitive practices that end up giving major corporations a stranglehold on the market and set the stage for consumer and worker abuse.

As FTC chair, she has revolutionized the regulatory front in the struggle against monopoly capitalism. :All these measures have made Khan unpopular to the Wall Street big honchos. Companies are jittery that FTC under Khan is trying to close the door on revenue stream with super profits.

The public, however, loves the new rule. According to recent polling carried out by Data for Progress, 83% of Americans—including 80% of Republicans—endorse click-to-cancel. Similar margins back FTC efforts like banning junk fees such as “convenience” charges, stopping corporations from monetizing children’s social media data, and cracking down on AI companies that knowingly allow their platforms to be used to harm consumers.

These actions are the real reason why capitalists like Cuban, Hoffman, and Diller are reaching for their media megaphones to try to discredit Khan and sway Harris to follow their diktats.“When Big Tech and Big Business billionaires attack Lina Khan and the FTC, they are attacking common-sense consumer protections,” Emily Peterson-Cassin, director of the corporate power portfolio at Demand Progress Education Fund, said in a statement sent to People’s World.

Referring to the click-to-cancel rule as an example, Peterson-Cassin said, “On one side, you have Lina Khan and the FTC taking action to stop companies from harassing and confusing consumers into paying for subscriptions they don’t want. On the other side, you have billionaire CEOs trying to stop the FTC’s work to empower consumers.”

Together with the Revolving Door Project, the group recently launched an educational website, “Billionaires Against Khan,” aimed at exposing the anti-worker, anti-consumer, and anti-job efforts of some of the country’s richest individuals.

So far, Vice President Harris has been silent when it comes to whether she’d keep Khan in place should she win the White House. But progressive leaders in Congress are stating boldly what they think a Harris administration should do.

“Let me make this clear, since billionaires have been trying to play footsie with the ticket: Anyone goes near Lina Khan and there will be an out and out brawl,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., vowed in a post to X (Twitter). “And that is a promise. She proves this admin fights for working people. It would be terrible leadership to remove her.”

Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders declared that Khan is “the best FTC chair in modern history.” He said that “by taking on corporate greed and illegal monopolies,” Khan “is doing an exceptional job preventing large corporations from ripping-off consumers and exploiting workers.”

Protecting the anti-monopoly FTC from being cut off at the knees requires first of all blocking a MAGA takeover of the White House and the Senate. Only by preserving Democratic control of both the executive branch and the upper house of Congress do workers and consumers have a chance of keeping someone like Khan in place.

But even with a Harris victory, there will still be a fight to stop the billionaires who use their dollars to try to control the Democratic Party from imposing their will and putting Khan on the chopping block.

Mobilization is key, both now and after November .5—because the class struggle carries on long after the ballots are counted on Election Day. (People’s World — IPA Service)