Dot Com
Nullius in verba
Sanders supporters and activists on the left disagree with this assessment, saying Clinton's financial industry fundraisers and highly paid speeches to Goldman Sachs and others suggest she would be soft on Wall Street as president while Sanders would proactively bust up the big banks, impose much higher taxes on the wealthy and aggressively prosecute white-collar criminals.
They also worry that Clinton would bring Wall Street executives to top regulatory jobs, while Sanders would purge agencies of anyone with a banking background.
“Especially given her multi-hundred thousand dollar speeches to Wall Street executives the burden of proof is higher for her to show voters that she will truly hold Wall Street accountable and make the big picture changes our economy needs,” said Adam Green of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “And continuing to raise big money from some of the more odious actors on Wall Street is not confidence-inducing for voters who want them held accountable.”
Read more: Why Clinton can't stop raising Wall Street cash
Last edited: