TD Bank freezes 2 personal accounts that had $1.1 million paid into them to support Canadian trucker

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

protests

Toronto-Dominion (TD) Bank has frozen two personal bank accounts that had $1.1 million paid into them to support trucker protests in Canada, Reuters reported.

The protests have been ongoing since January 22, with members of the Freedom Convoy gathering across Canada in opposition to the country's vaccine mandates for cross-border drivers.

Early on Friday, a judge ordered protesters to end a blockade at the Ambassador Bridge over the border between the US and Canada.

According to a spokesperson, TD Bank appealed to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to take the funds, with the intention of returning them to the donors "who have requested refunds but whose entitlement to a refund cannot be determined by TD," per Reuters.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/td-bank-freezes-2-personal-accounts-that-had-dollar11-million-paid-into-them-to-support-canadian-trucker-protests/ar-AATNjuo

[I_UndergroundPanther]

1. Get thee to the greatest page

KnR

More banks need to do this
.
Maybe Bidens suspicious bank transation stuff is paying off !

[ForgedCrank]

5. Joe Biden is not Canadian

and his efforts have no influence over law or banks in Canada.
Secondly, no matter how much we may disagree with this trucker movement, I find it very disturbing that in one breath we are calling out the tyrants on the right, and in the next breath we are cheering that government is seizing money in private bank accounts of people who broke no laws other than traffic infractions.
Very disturbing indeed.

[Escurumbele]

9. What I read is the money is in bank accounts of truckers, and the money is to support the protests

I could be missing something, but the reason the money is being held is because it was deposited to support the truckers protest.

How does that make it "government is seizing money in private bank accounts of people who broke no laws other than traffic infractions"?

The protests are causing lots of losses, and it is political, nothing else.

[Eyeball_Kid]

13. I'm not sure what to think.

The protests drained billions from commerce... for... what reason? Freedom??? What?

Vaccines have been mandatory for longer than a half century. They've saved countless lives and prevented permanent disabilities for countless others. And NOW we're concerned that getting a vaccine impinges upon our FREEDOM???

Somebody's constipated. And it's not me.

[ForgedCrank]

36. On all of your points,

I see nothing to disagree with. Not a single thing.
My motives here have been assumed, and they are all incorrect.
My response to it is nothing more than an attempt to get others to think about what they are supporting in this, and the focus isn't on the content of these truckers demands, it is the response to it and the methods used to crush free speech and organized labor efforts.
No matter how stupid or wrong someone else may be, they have the same rights that I do. Period. And I'll stick to that til my dying breath, no matter how many times I get insulted (not by you).
I've said it before, I am a Democrat, not just someone who votes that way. I will not waver in my convictions, no matter how much it hurts sometimes.

[Escurumbele]

56. I am all for protesting peacefully, not causing damage, or loses to anyone, but when you engage

on a protest where people are going hungry because they cannot buy the food the truckers were supposed to deliver, where millions of dollars are being lost, then at that point I feel the full weight of the law must be placed on those people. The other thing is that they are being subsidized by rich people who are interested in destroying the Democracy of this country, it is political, they also want Biden, Trudeau, and some of them I am sure don't even know why they are doing it.

Nope, there is not Democracy when you are hurting other people to make a point. Make the point, but don't hurt anyone. I believe the goal with these truckers is to cause pain.

[wnylib]

60. They are blocking infrastructure

and halting international commerce.

They have laid siege to the nation's Capitol, blocking the prime minister's access to his place of work and halting all business in the center of the Capitol. They are making threats to citizens who live in the area that they have taken over. They are blocking emergency vehicles from getting through to the neighborhood under siege.

They can do this because they are being paid by funds that come from foreign sources. One of those sources funded the attempted coup in DC on Jan 6. This is not a peaceful assembly. It is foreign interference with the government and economy of Canada.

Even in the US, people who block highways and city streets in civil disobedience get arrested and they know that they will. But the nature of the siege of the capital and bridge crossings with huge trucks makes that nearly impossible. It makes towing impossible.

So siezing the funds that keep the siege going by paying the truckers to be out of work is the safest and non violent way of breaking up the siege.

[ForgedCrank]

14. I am of the opinion that

we can justify anything we want in our own minds if we really want to, but that won't necessarily make our opinions just. I rely on my convictions alone, and I won't change those for anyone, ever.
I believe that these idiot truckers, no matter how misguided, have a fundamental right to organize and fight for what they want (peacefully). I held the same position for Occupy Wall Street and several others, and those movements weren't even organized labor.
If you wish to classify it as political, I can't stop you, but at it's root, personal health issues should not be labelled as political. Even if these guys were flat-earth idiots fighting for their right to say stupid stuff, I would hold the exact same position.
Protests and strikes utilize putting pressures on the systems, that is the entire point, and the primary tool of organized labor strikes as well as issue protests.
I believe we should all be cheerleaders for the ideological left and for the Democratic party, but not at the expense of our own convictions. I see this as one of those moments.

[Escurumbele]

57. "I rely on my convictions alone, and I won't change those for anyone, ever.", we need to be open

minded. We need to recognize when we are wrong...I am not saying you are wrong, I am just trying to elaborate on your statement that, to me, seems a bit rigid.

I have my convictions as well, but if I find that I am convinced of something that is wrong, that is the end of my conviction.

The truckers ARE hurting people, they are hurting the economy, that is not peaceful protest, and I said it before, they are being manipulated by money people, there is nothing pure about what they are doing.

[gab13by13]

12. The money is going to be refunded to the donors,

if they reveal their names. The harm that I see is that maybe these fake protesters won't get paid for protesting. Maybe they should get a real job.

[ForgedCrank]

16. The harm is that a

government coerced a banking system to intercept private money, all obtained legally, and to interrupt that without leveraging any law.
Is this really the way you want any given party that is currently in charge to behave?
This is dangerous to a level I shouldn't have to describe in detail. And I won't even get started on just how bad of a look this is. The message is horrific.

[gab13by13]

22. Yes, dark money is legal,

Democrats like Sheldon Whitehouse have tried to pass the Disclose Act where donors merely have to be open about donating to causes that are intended to destroy democracy. Every Republican votes against it. That is a really bad look too, isn't it? A handful of billionaires can game the system to shut down a big chunk of the economy. If these donors are so righteous, why don't they want anyone to know who they are?

This wasn't a trucker protest. I really feel sorry for a handful of anti-government protesters who aren't getting paid, just like the auto workers and other workers who have real jobs aren't getting paid. The bad look to me is how a couple of anonymous billionaires can shut down the economy.

Who donated the money? Was it from a foreign country? Was it from an American oligarch?

Pass the Disclose Act.

[ForgedCrank]

24. It will be interesting to see

how many who are cheering about this will still be cheering when a conservative government starts doing the same to causes that we support. Pick just about any largely public go-fund-me movement in the past few years.
I for one, see a problem here and I won't sacrifice my convictions for it.

[BumRushDaShow]

49. "when a conservative government starts doing the same to causes that we support"

See ACORN... or did that become the latest DU amnesia event.

This is the reality of "politics" and was fomented by the same RW loons who are fomenting the crap going on in Canada. They don't have to be "in power" to do it but certainly the government of Ontario Province IS "conservative" and their actions (or lack thereof until now) are telling.

How The ACORN Scandal Seeded Today's Nightmare Politics


By Zachary D. Carter and Arthur Delaney
05/05/2018 08:01am EDT | Updated May 5, 2018

It did not occur to Bertha Lewis to be afraid. She was watching the final presidential debate of 2008, and John McCain had just said something insane. “We need to know the full extent of Senator Obama’s relationship with ACORN, who is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy,” the Arizona Republican proclaimed. Lewis had been leading ACORN ― the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now ― for about five months. ACORN advocated for the poor. In addition to helping families navigate federal aid programs, the group ran campaigns to improve city sanitation, protested against predatory lenders and registered people to vote.

(snip)

ACORN had survived for more than 40 years. Its sudden collapse was a defining moment in 21st century American politics. The explosive cocktail of racism, dishonesty, incompetence and cowardice that brought down the organization reveals as much about Washington Democrats as it does about the conservative movement. It marked the Republican Party’s full transition from the coded winks and nods of Richard Nixon’s “Southern strategy” to the bellicose white nativism that defines Donald Trump, and it exposed a Democratic Party establishment unprepared for dirty tricks in the Digital Age and unwilling to defend many of the black voters and activists it claimed to represent.

(snip)

A crime may well have been committed at the ACORN offices ― by O’Keefe. California state law prohibits non-consensual recordings of confidential conversations. The state granted him immunity from potential charges in exchange for access to his complete recordings, but it didn’t wipe out his liability in civil lawsuits. O’Keefe eventually agreed to pay a $100,000 settlement to a former ACORN employee who had actually contacted the police after O’Keefe’s visit but was portrayed in the video as a willing collaborator. As part of the settlement, O’Keefe said he regretted “any pain” he caused the man.

But Washington didn’t wait around for the facts to come out. On Sept. 14, 2009, the Democratic-controlled Senate voted 83 to 7 to block some federal grants to ACORN. Government funding typically accounted for 10 to 15 percent of ACORN’s annual funding. The group received $48.4 million from the federal government from 2005 to 2009 ― most of it, including a $25 million grant in 2008, for housing counseling and foreclosure mitigation. On Sept. 17, the House followed suit, with 172 Democrats joining 173 Republicans in voting to defund ACORN, including some of the most progressive voices in the party, such as Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) and John Conyers (D-Mich.).

(snip)

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/2009-acorn-scandal_n_5ae23fa6e4b02baed1b86696

[TrollBuster9090]

59. "Cheering when a conservative government starts doing the same to a cause that we support."

For what it's worth, the Emergency Powers Act that Trudeau is invoking was actually passed in 1988 by a Conservative Party government.

Protesting is legal. Civil disobedience isn't legal, but it's a common practice that's often used by left wing protests. Example: left wing protesters chaining their necks to gates to logging roads to prevent logging of old growth forests. That happens all the time. The locks are cut, they're arrested, they get a day of TV news coverage, and that's it.

This is different in that it shut half the Canadian supply chain down, costs hundreds of millions in wages; and (worst of all) is foreign funded. A typical Canadian federal election costs about $500 million. That means, all the people in Canada, reaching into their pockets to donate to political parties raises about $500 million. It's absolutely unheard of for Canadians to raise $14 million for a protest. Most of this money is coming from foreign, professional shit disturbers. Since most of the money comes from foreign interference, I don't have a problem with freezing those particular accounts. If a left wing cause was ever supported that way in Canada, I like to think I'd oppose that, too.

If I ever cheer for a BLM protest occupying Ottawa with $14 million in funds from U.S. agent provocateurs, please feel free to call me a hypocrite.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

40. Would you be concerned if Iranian money flowed across your BORDER to Roger Stone on Jan 7, 2021?

[ancianita]

44. Your questions are about Canadian law about which our opinions aren't relevant. The same

would have been done here, if it were legal. But the same hasn't been done, or we'd know who the funders of Jan 6 were.

[IronLionZion]

15. A lot of their funding comes from the US

and they are blocking border crossings to restrict trade between the 2 countries. Of course US financial law enforcement coordinates with their counterparts in allied nations.

[NJCher]

17. that's not the case and that is not what the story says

Here is what the story says:

snip

According to a spokesperson, TD Bank appealed to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to take the funds, with the intention of returning them to the donors "who have requested refunds but whose entitlement to a refund cannot be determined by TD," per Reuters.

snip

Here is what you say:

government is seizing money in private bank accounts of people who broke no laws other than traffic infractions.

It is not the government seizing, it is the bank. The bank is going to the government for some means of returning the donor's money.

You stand corrected.

[ForgedCrank]

20. No, I don't "stand corrected".

Tell us why that money was frozen in the first place.
I'll wait.

[NJCher]

33. poor thing

You obviously have a reading comprehension problem.

On top of that, you read information into the article that isn't there. Nice, but this isn't a fiction forum, it's a political discussion forum and you need to stick to the facts that are provided. If you have other information, fine. State it and source it. Don't expect others to buy into your imaginative scenario, and what's worse, take a judgmental position on others and tell us all about how you won't compromise your standards.

You make assumptions that are in no way supported by what the article tells us.

So no, I'm not going to tell you why the money was frozen in the first place because all I know is what the article states, which is covered above in my post where I quote both the article and you.

You stand corrected.

[ForgedCrank]

34. Being condescending towards

me won't shake my belief system, but you are free to try it on others, maybe you'll have more success.

[NJCher]

35. I don't have a problem with others

Just you making sh@$#t up.

[ForgedCrank]

37. I welcome your opinion,

just like anyone else who wishes to insult me.
Have an awesome day.

[NJCher]

39. pure speculation here

But do you think this is what might have happened:

With the way the tide is turning, it can be seen that this trucker protest doesn't have legs.

The evidence for this is that the police have cleared the truckers out. See this WSJ article posted at around 8 p.m. today that states:

Police began making arrests and towing vehicles shortly after 8 a.m. ET Sunday on a main street that leads to access to the bridge, over which hundreds of millions of dollars of goods are transported by trucks into the U.S. and Canada each day. Hours later, protesters gathered in another location near an intersection that leads to the bridge, where police said further arrests were made.

Windsor Police Chief Pamela Mizuno said late Sunday afternoon that police had arrested between 25 and 30 protesters and towed about a dozen vehicles. She said there may be a “cat and mouse” situation in the area for a while, as groups of protesters retreat and then appear again in different locations near the bridge.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/canadian-police-begin-to-clear-protesters-disrupting-cross-border-bridge-traffic-11644759497

Earlier in this article, it tells how measures were being taken even earlier than Friday, so the writing was on the wall.

This is my speculation: The donors--some of them, at least--saw this was throwing good money after bad. Circumstances have changed. The government was removing the most bothersome part of the protests, which is the blockage caused by the trucks. Therefore, the protest was breaking up.

Get me my money back, is what they must have been thinking.

So again, surmising, the big donors asked for their money back. Since some money was going back, that presented a problem with the smaller donors. The bank didn't want to get involved with all that, so they went to the court.

Just a working theory. We'll see how this plays out.

[Demsrule86]

63. Well done Cher!

[Demsrule86]

62. One's beliefs should always be supported by the facts.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

43. Why? 400 trucks, 125 arrests, 1775 tickets, arson, vandalism, intimidation, massive disruption

It's a criminal enterprise.

Pay attention. If your "Tell us why" actually is not ignorance, then don't excuse blockers, occupiers, siegers, domestic terrorists, and thugs with feigned ignorance.

[Demsrule86]

64. +10000

[smb]

18. Impounding Money Used To Finance Illegal Activites Is Well-Established Law nt

[Steven Maurer]

19. This is more than just "traffic infractions"

...among other things, transferring millions of dollars secretly runs afoul of all sorts of financial fraud and money laundering statutes, some of them even felonies.

Oh, and the money hasn't been seized. The Canadian banks are trying to return it.

[gab13by13]

23. Bwahaha, yeah,

but the billionaire donor doesn't want his name revealed and we are supposed to feel sorry for him/her.

Good on the bank. That billionaire can afford to lose a million, give it to a real charity.

[ForgedCrank]

25. "Secretly" ?

I'm not sure how the anyone could ever call this a secret in any way, shape or form. There is absolutely no way to "secretly transferring millions of dollars" through a banking system.
It's only a violation if you do your taxes and fail to report. And I'm speaking from a US perceptive here, not Canadian which is at least relatively similar in intent.
Semantics are just that. Use whatever word you want, the money was taken from private and legal transactions through a previously trusted banking system. There is serious damage being done here. If this were in the US, some people would be in really deep shit over it.
But hey, let's use whatever method we can to crush the rights of dumb or stupid people, the ends justifies the means. I mean, they are stupid, so they don't matter.

[paleotn]

29. What are they using the funding for?

A bit to fund " parade of the fucking morons" perhaps, but where's the rest going? Could fraud...GASP!...being involved in this separation of the deluded and propagandized from their cash? Hmmm? Calling it donations. Interesting SEMANTICS don't you think?

[ForgedCrank]

30. The funds were used for

nothing, absolutely nothing at all. They were frozen and seized from the recipients account.

[paleotn]

32. Why were they there in the first place? Seems to have been adjudicated...

by the Canadian legal system, an advanced legal system I might add. I'd say they had a good reason or reasons to allow the funds to be frozen. And where are the custodians or owners of said account(s)? Did they not argue their case? Or was their case based on fundraising to fund illegal activities, which is itself illegal. Fraud perhaps? Maybe they really don't want the Canadian government or the public to know where the funds are coming from. Who knows? The Canadian judge knows. Take it up with them.

[luvtheGWN]

42. Remember the lady in Missouri whose FB account was hacked?

The authorities traced the vast majority of donations to her account, which had been hacked by internet trolls from all over the globe, including the United Arab Emirates.

Good for TD impounding the donations. This is just the face of a few countries' desires to create chaos and bring an end to democracy in the west.

And is it just a coincidence that this protest movement in Canada is happening at the same time as Putin trying to move into and take over Ukraine? My, what a convenient distraction....

[Bernardo de La Paz]

52. The funds are clearly intended for the criminal enterprise and were correctly frozen

The details will come out in court, probably, but you can be sure that TD has proper grounds and probably even a legal obligation to freeze them. They may have been particularly alerted to this case.

This is not some $9,990 transaction randomly picked out of a flow.

[paleotn]

27. Astroturf. Look it up.

[ForgedCrank]

28. I can take the bashing,

and I will still stand firm in my beliefs regarding the rights of everyone, not just people I agree with.

[paleotn]

31. how about the rights of those in places like Ottawa

....not involved in "parade of the fucking morons" to actually lead their lives normally? You know, like go to the store or to work without being accosted, threatened or blocked? Guess you forgot about their rights. Or do their rights even fucking count in your calculus? Seems it's only the rights of morons and the rights of those probably skimming cash off said moron's donations. Some of which is used in a futile and incredibly stupid attempt to force governments to relax pandemic regs that keep us ALL safe by ILLEGALLY blocking highways. And don't even get me started on the "rights" of jackass mother fuckers to spread disease to innocent people, thus violating their goddamn rights and possibly claiming their lives.

Ironic how the "rights crowd" always seem to forget that their goddamn rights end PRECISELY where everyone else's rights begin.

[babylonsister]

38. Thank you! nt

[3auld6phart]

45. Ditto.

Paleton Well stated . Thank you. As these truckers put their rigs
in harms way can’t their insurers get involved. Refuse to insure
the trucks and truckers??

[Meowmee]

48. This

Obviously does not care about people being murdered by these fascists, or any of the other crimes they have committed.

[Spazito]

54. Well said!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

51. Falsely equating criminal sieges with "traffic infractions" is not a belief worth standing firm on.

Abandon such nonsense.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

41. 400 trucks, 125 arrests, 1775 tickets, arson, vandalism. NOT traffic infractions

A billion dollars in cross-border trade held up.
Contracts missed.
Workers laid off.
Doctors prevented from commuting from Canada to Detroit TO SAVE USA American HEALTH, maybe lives.


Get real.

It's very disturbing that you call all of that "traffic infractions".

ARSON

[ForgedCrank]

47. Cmon let's get real here.

Anytime you have thousands of people in volatile conditions like that, there are ALWAYS going to be a few assholes. And as expected, those assholes are now in jail where they belong. The fact that a small number got arrested for criminal acts does nothing to negate what I have been trying to get across. Ignore the point if you wish, that is your choice.
I've even see someone trying to equate this to Jan 6th riots all while completely ignoring the point I was trying to make. I'm not sure if this is some sort of veiled insinuation, or if the conversation has gotten that far off track.
I could come up with parallels here with all sorts of other protests. The only real difference is that I am consistent in my position on all of them, others aren't so much. And pay attention to the key words, one in particular being protest, not riot. Rioters belong in jail. Just to be clear I'll say it again, rioters belong in jail.
And yes, the vast majority of them were cited with traffic infractions. None of these points change anything about what I said, and I stand by it.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

50. 400 trucks laying siege to a city is NOT a traffic violation.

Giving traffic tickets is a good way to get them into the database and put them on notice. Great things have small beginnings.

What is your reference for "vast majority" being traffic tickets? "Vast majority" implies something north of 90%.



You can insist all you want, foolishly, but blocking a city and an international bridge is not a simple infraction in the same way it is not free speech.

[Hiawatha Pete]

46. Trucks are not protesters

They are businesses. They can be sued.

If you want to protest, you do it on your own two feet without a 10 ton weapon / compensating toy to make your so-called "protest" look bigger than it is.

And:
- threatening to sexually assault a woman,
-Attacking a guy in a wheelchair ,
-being assaulted by so-called freedom fighters for taking pictures,
-Mobs forcing people to remove masks to get on the LRT,
-Mobs assaulting/tearing mask off seniors at bus stop,
-Mobs throwing rocks at ambulances and shouting racist slurs,
-Women at a local emergency shelter terrorized by the constant honking and angry men outside
-Staff and volunteers at a downtown shelter were threatened until they provided food to mob instead of homeless people,
-assaults on homeless people,
-racial slurs at Black personal support workers,
-Noise torture by constant horn blowing
and attempting a coup of our democratically elected parliament is not protesting.

It's domestic terrorism. Period.

Link to tweet

[Bernardo de La Paz]

53. On edit: Fine, you didn't bring up Biden. You are still wrong to equate terrorism with traffic infra

Last edited Mon Feb 14, 2022, 04:47 PM - Edit history (1)

... infractions.

I apologize for the Biden claim.

[ForgedCrank]

55. For some

reason, you are swirling around me trying to find a reason to discount what I said, I'm not sure why, but I'm going to make one last post on this thread.

1) I never brought up Joe Biden, but I'm glad you agree with me that he has nothing to do with this.
2) I never responded to the OP. I responded to a comment that brought up Joe Biden. Each comment shows what has been responded to, including the username of the person responded to. That's why they are often called threads. It would serve you better to pay closer attention to those available tools before attacking someone.
3) I never said Joe Biden was in any way mentioned in the OP linked article or the posted excerpt, I said the exact opposite of that. There is no "red herring", my comment wasn't for "unknown reasons", nor was it "inexplicable". It also wasn't MY "first go-to". In addition, it's not "where I started" either. Again, refer to the conversation thread. I mean hell, it's the very first comment.

I get it. You disagree with me. I have no issue with that whatsoever. Really almost the only time I ever post is if I disagree with something so I get this from time to time. But you appear to have some level of dislike for me being the dissenter here, and I can tell you that based on private communication, I'm not the only one thinking this way. What is sad is that others are afraid to voice their opinion in the open, and now I can see very clearly why they don't. I try to give others something different to think about, not to tell them they are somehow shamefully wrong. That's not my gig.

Ok, now I'm done with this thread.

[Demsrule86]

61. That is not true...the president has all sorts of influence...and as for your worry about seiziing

private funds. This is a different world. I have no doubt some nefarious types are behind the protests. This is not about wages or benefits. This is throwing a temper tantrum that is being financed by shady characters...many who are anonymous.

[democrattotheend]

66. I agree with you

This isn't the first time I've seen people on DU cheer the same kind of government overreach they found appalling during the Bush administration, and I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who feels that way.

[Cha]

2. KR TY!

[wnylib]

3. More of this!

[SheltieLover]

4. Outstanding! You watching this, Vlad?

[Old Crank]

6. Perhaps

We will find out who these international criminals are.

[COL Mustard]

7. I wish I'd thought of that.....

I could retire and afford that new yacht! And when I got arrested and the cops asked me what I did with the money, I could say:

I gambled with some, I kept company with beautiful women, I ate and drank lavishly, and oh yeah, some I guess I just wasted!

[William769]

8. K&R.

[orangecrush]

10. GOOD

[niyad]

11. Excellent. Close off the money spigot.

[Historic NY]

21. Seize the funds the bank can't even refund the money...

individuals should be made to identify and prove the contributed.

[FakeNoose]

26. Reported by Reuters on Saturday

(link) https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/td-bank-freezes-two-accounts-that-received-funds-support-canada-protests-2022-02-12/

One of the bank accounts received a lump sum of C$1 million through GoFundMe, while the rest was sent to the second account through multiple bank e-transfers, the TD spokesperson said. TD does not know where the GoFundMe payment originated, they said.

GoFundMe took down the protest convoy's donation page on Feb. 4 after it reached $10 million, prompting most of the protesters to turn to Boston-based GiveSendGo. GoFundMe has said it will refund the donations.

The Ontario Superior Court on Thursday ordered GiveSendGo to freeze all funds sent in aid of the protest. The crowdfunding platform defied that order in a tweet on Thursday.

- more at link -

[TrollBuster9090]

58. BOOM! That was fast!

That was the banking equivalent of the Paris Police doing THIS!

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

65. Don't return the money to the donors, use the money to cover the financial losses

of the non-agitators who suffered economic loss due to the actions of the anti-democracy agitators.

For example, workers who lost wages due to being prevented from getting to work, and businesses who lost revenue, because of the blockade.

Once the primary funders and planners of the attack on democracy are identified, they should be heavily fined for their attack on democracy, and the fines could also be used as reparations to innocent folks who sustained financial losses due to the actions of the fascists.

The most effective way to stop fascism is to kill it before it multiplies.