First let me give you the ad.
Hillary Clinton decries this as a negative ad. Her name never comes up in the ad. So what does Hillary think is negative?
Is she saying the following excerpt refers to her?
There are two democratic visions for regulating Wall Street. One says it’s okay to take millions from big banks and then tell them what to do.
Wouldn’t she have to be telling us that she is the one taking millions from big banks to claim this ad is about her? Is that the message she wants to give us? Is this campaign starting to drive her around the bend?
Next is an excerpt from the expert’s letter.
In our view, Sen. Bernie Sanders’ plan for comprehensive financial reform is critical for avoiding another “too-big-to-fail” financial crisis. The Senator is correct that the biggest banks must be broken up and that a new 21st Century Glass-Steagall Act, separating investment from commercial banking, must be enacted.
You can use the following link to read the letter that the experts wrote.
Ever since Hillary made the claim that her proposal was better, I have been waiting for exactly this rebuttal from Bernie. I have been posting on my blog this explanation of why his plan is far superior to the Clinton plan. In the debate, he could have asked her if the experts who told her that her plan was better were the same ones that were such a disaster in her husband’s and in the Obama administrations.