CITI

Am I the only one asking why CITI bank was able to contribute $5000 to the Coakley campaign, yet they took $46 billion in taxpayer TARP funds that, just today, they say they are having a tough time repaying because of $7.6 billion in losses in the last quarter?

If I were on welfare, as CITI is, and if I were losing $7.6 billion, as CITI is, I'm not sure I would be giving contributions to anyone. Essentially, since CITI is working off taxpayer funds (welfare), the money they contributed was from taxpayer funds. Is that why we gave them the money? That's a lot like the welfare recipient, upon getting his welfare check, uses it to support the local drug dealer.

/