The hypothesis is that CitiCorp owns our political system. CitiCorp might argue in the alternative it just a servitor of the mortgage like CitiMortgage with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and that the real owner is the Fed.
The test is whether or not the language Elizabeth Warren objects to that puts us on the hook for CitiCorps failures while leaving all the profits to it remains in the bill.
CitiCorp would probably want to argue that in any case it has a judicial lien on our government and that if it doesn't since it owns all the judges that's just a remedial procedural deficiency in the decision making process.
CitiCorp requires it be paid regardless of how its risky bets on derivatives turn out because its banks and bankers have been investing in the ownershiip of our government with campaign contributions since before the Articles of Confederation were signed and the gleam in the eye of the Federalist Society saw to it that its dream of CitiCorp as a special corporate entity became a person.
If it does it seems apparent we are underwater in this government and should just walk away if not run..
The Assets and Liabilities of Commercial Banks in the United States (Weekly) - H.8 are mind shattering.
Think for a moment how the redistribution of our wealth upwards in neglect of our Civil Rights including our post Citizens United right to vote, our general Economy, Education, Alternative Energy, Climate Change, Health Care, and the Environment, has been influenced by the greed of these wall street bankers and their monopoly on our money.
In the last year the assets of the banks have gone up about 745 Billion from 10,047.9 Billion in November of 2013 to 10,792.7 Billion in the week ending December 3, 2014.
If that roughly eleven trillion were distributed equally to our 115,610,216 households our median net worth would be over $95,147. Instead we have 492 Billionaires and all the rest of us living hand to mouth.
The Board of Governors of the Federal reserve System gives the seasonally adjusted value of the currency in circulation as rising from 26.7 Billion in 1947 to 1239 Billion as of November 1 of this year so roughly 10% of our banks net worth is out there in circulation working for them.
In November of 2008 it was listed as 806.3 Billion (2008-11-01 806.3)
and as of November 1st of this year it was 1239 Billion (2014-11-01 1239.0)
The conclusion I would reach looking at that is that Obama and his administration have not been unfriendly to the banks, but perhaps more importantly we might ask how much of that increase in wealth was taken as profit by the bankers and their wall street investor class at the expense of us peons and serfs and our "entitlements".
There are 27 countries with 10 or more Billionaires for a total of 1645 with 492 of them living in the US. Theoretically the much reviled Koch brothers are just the tip of the iceberg when you include the undisclosed foreign investment in US campaign contributions.
An interesting fact about their net worth is that from 2008 to 2009 it dropped from $4.4 trillion to $2.4 trillion and their numbers in the US from 470 to 359.
It wasn't till 2013 that Bill Gates got back his number one spot from Carlos Slim the Mexican Telcom giant. It took six years for the Obama administration to get our Billionaires back to where they were before the Bush administrations voodoo economics collapsed.
What if there was a livable minimum wage for all Americans instead of more money than they know what to do with except buy elections for a few billionaires?
In 2014, over 600 economists signed a letter in support of a $10.10 minimum wage increase citing research that suggests an increase would have a small stimulative effect on the economy as low-wage workers spend their additional earnings, raising demand and job growth.[113][114] Seven recipients of the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences were among 75 economists endorsing an increase in the minimum wage for U.S. workers and said “the weight” of economic research shows higher pay doesn’t lead to fewer jobs. The group of economists also said that past increases in hourly pay have had “little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum wage workers, even during times of weakness in the labor market."[117]