Comments by "SmallSpoonBrigade" (@SmallSpoonBrigade) on "Arizona’s Family (3TV / CBS 5) " channel.

They're too big to care.
2
Because it's Chase. They feel that they're above the law and probably are. They let an unauthorized charge be put on my account and refused to reverse it even though it wasn't authorized and nobody could produce paperwork saying it was authorized. I was able to embarrass them enough to get some of the money back, but I will never do business with them again as a result. In general, just avoid them.
2
Yes, and while we're at it, probably just don't do business with nationwide banks in general.
1
@staticbuilds7613 Banks going bust isn't a big deal for the account holders in most cases, just make sure you're below the insured limit and have some source of money for the short period they're closed. The FDIC swoops in and seizes control. The big issue is that you typically wind up with an account at Chase as they're the one that gets to buy most of the banks that fail. That being said, I tend to recommend having 2 credit unions or one credit union and a credit card issued by a different credit union.
1
@Niever TBH, if they're in an area like that, there may not be other local options.
1
@mattmarzula So, how are things going at working for a major bank? Steal any good candy from babies? What you're saying is absolute nonsense. Credit Unions are regulated and insured just like banks. But, unlike banks, there isn't an incentive to cut corners to pay shareholders as the shareholders are the depositors that would have their money stolen in that scenario.
1
That's just how they do business and why people should be outraged by all the banks they're allowed to buy.
1
IKR, but increasingly they're the only option. They're the preferred option for taking over distressed banks that the FDIC seizes and are so large that any time they buy a bank, they need a waiver.
1
@DeanSpence-d9c There could only ever be 3 bullets unless there was a second shooter that was using a suppressor. We know that Oswald didn't have a suppressor as we can hear 3 shots and adding a suppressor for another shot is impossible with a target that's moving that fast. But, if it were a second shooter, then there's a bunch of other issue as in the angle of that other bullet is weird. You would be looking at a shooter using a suppressor and located near where Oswald was shooting from and somehow avoiding being caught when the police rushed the building right after the shooting. It's the usual issue that these sorts of things have, they all are more complicated and have more people and moving parts than are necessary. That doesn't automatically mean that they can't be right, but it's been over 60 years, a good chunk of the eye witnesses are dead and there have still been no leaks of anything that says that there was a definite 2nd shooter.
1
@frankbrzozowski6343 But, the angle of that wouldn't match any of the bullet wounds. There's also the issue of there being no recorded sound of that shot in any of the existing recordings of the assassination.
1
@ILSRWY4 The difference is that she was Jackie O through much of her life, referring to her as Jackie Kennedy wouldn't be any more accurate than using her maiden name after she got married.
1