~snip~
Somewhere I can agree with you, but in general I disagree. Let me explain why...
To begin with, there is no need to "idealize" the concept of freedom. Freedom is basically everything that is not prohibited by law
And in this regard, the U.S. does absolutely legitimate - you are a U.S. citizen, you must obey the laws and adhere to them. If there are "dodgy citizens" who want to live in a successful country and not pay for it - we will find you and you will pay in full for cheating and actually stealing taxes (deliberate tax evasion, hiding additional income).
The other side is Binance. Yes, it is not a company from the U.S., and there are no claims to it. There is a "strong recommendation", from the U.S. government, not to help unclean hands, U.S. citizens, to do unlawful acts. In general, there are no more problems.
I don't know where you live, but I think your country also signed up to and complies with some of its international obligations, such as anti-money laundering, combating the financing of rogue and terrorist regimes, etc. Although this applies not only to your fellow citizens, but also to companies and people with other citizenship.
This is normal in the age of globalization.
The effects of a leadership change is a multifaceted concern, with its complex nuances, delayed repercussions, and indirect impacts often not visible outright.
Turning to Binance, the U.S. emphasizes more on international collaboration against unlawful deeds, rather than intruding into a private corporation's matters. They're focused on adherence to global regulations tackling money laundering and similar offences.
As for U.S. interference in Binance's relations with Russian citizens, it's a layered issue, entwining geopolitics, financial norms, and global law. In a globalized era, a nation's reach often extends its geographical confines.