Then the tellers would be just as guilty.
But it’s not that the accounts have been frozen and tellers just won’t hand it out, they’re seizing the money from the people so the accounts are zero and nothing to give.
Like potentially with the patriot act? Sort of like the removal of Glass- Stiegal Act?
I don’t understand the question.
Their Supreme Court ordered the banks to seize the protestors asserts which would mean their accounts are at either zero or frozen and the bank tellers can’t do anything even if they wanted to.
If the money was still in their accounts or not frozen and the tellers were just not giving it to these protestors because “they were just following orders” they’d be just as guilty as their Supreme Court and bank executives.
You can’t cooperate with tyranny and then not be guilty.
Well said.
(post is archived)