Why Merrick Garland Is Terrible


PRESIDENT OBAMA AND HIS
SUPPORTERS, WHICH ARE ALMOST ALL DEMOCRATIC SENATORS AND
PROGRESSIVE GROUPS IN WASHINGTON TELL US THEY SHOULD ALL GO ALONG
WITH MERRICK GARLAND. I THOUGHT THE WHOLE POINT OF A DEMOCRATIC
PRESIDENT WAS TO MAKE SURE WE HAD A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE WHO
DIDN’T AGREE WITH THE REPUBLICANS. I DON’T FIND IT TO
BE CLEVER AND INTERESTING. THERE HAS BEEN SO MUCH PRESS AROUND
THAT NOW THAT THE REPUBLICANS ARE BACKPEDALING BECAUSE THEY
HAVE TO. ORRIN HATCH HAD SAID HE IS THE BEST NOMINEE THAT THE
REPUBLICANS COULD HOPE FOR FROM A DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT. THAT IS
PRETTY STRONG LANGUAGE. NOW ORRIN HATCH IS SAYING WE WON’T
EVEN GIVE HIM A HEARING. I KNOW THAT IS THE OBAMA STRATEGY, WE
WILL MAKE THE REPUBLICANS LOOK BAD. BUT WHAT IF THEY CALL YOUR
BLUFF AND THEY SAY THANKS FOR GIVING US A LARGELY CONSERVATIVE
SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, WE WILL TAKE IT? FOR THE MOMENT THEY ARE
NOT DOING THAT, AND I WILL SHOW YOU HOW CONSERVATIVE GARLAND IS
IN A MINUTE. BUT MITCH MCCONNELL SAYS — OH, WOULD HE? THEY ASKED JOHN
KASICH, A REPUBLICAN RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, WHETHER HE WOULD NOT
ONLY MEET WITH GARLAND IF HE WAS A SENATOR BUT WOULD HE NOMINATE
HIM? HE’S A REPUBLICAN, HE’S NOT GOING TO NOMINATE OBAMA’S PICK.
OR IS HE? ON THE SUPREME COURT PICK,
MERRICK GARLAND, SHOULD THE SENATE AT LEAST HOLD HEARINGS? THE FACT IS I NEVER THOUGHT
THE PRESIDENT SHOULD HAVE SENT IT UP, I THINK THEY CAN GO AHEAD
AND HAVE A MEETING WITH HIM. DISSENTERS CAN MEET WITH THIS
GENTLEMAN, AND MAYBE ULTIMATELY IF I’M PRESIDENT, WHICH I THINK
WE HAVE A GOOD SHOT AT BEING, MAYBE HE WILL BE UNDER
CONSIDERATION FOR THE SUPREME COURT. HE RECEIVED OVERWHELMING SUPPORT
I THINK EVEN FROM SENATOR HATCH, SO OF COURSE WE WOULD
THINK ABOUT IT. HE SAYS HE WOULD THINK ABOUT
IT IF HE WERE PRESIDENT. HE JUST SAID IT TWICE THIS SUNDAY ON THE
TALK SHOWS, THAT HE WOULD CONSIDER NOMINATING HIM. A
REPUBLICAN RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT WOULD CONSIDER THE SAME GUY AS
OBAMA. IS THERE ANY CHANCE HE WOULD HAVE SAID THAT IF GARLAND
WAS ACTUALLY PROGRESSIVE? ACTUALLY A LIBERAL? 0% CHANCE.
EVEN SO, THEY HAVE ONE POSITION OF GARLAND’S THAT IS
PROGRESSIVE, HE ONCE RULED AGAINST THE NRA. SO JOHN KASICH
HAD TO BACKPEDAL TODAY, WALK THOSE COMMENTS BACK. BUT WHEN
YOU CAN ONLY FIND ONE PROGRESSIVE POSITION, THAT IS A
BIT OF A PROBLEM IF THE PRESIDENT IS STILL PRETENDING TO
BE PROGRESSIVE. LET’S GET YOU THE DETAILS OF HIS CONSERVATIVE
POSITIONS, AND THERE ARE MANY. I JUST PICKED THREE HERE RANGING
IN SEVERITY. THE FIRST ONE IS THE LEAST OFFENSIVE, IT IS HIS
VIEW OF MARIJUANA. MERRICK GARLAND, AS REASON.COM EXPLAINS
— — THIS WAS OBVIOUSLY WRITTEN
A LITTLE WHILE AGO — HE
THINKS MARIJUANA SHOULD BE
A SCHEDULE ONE DRUG. TO BE FAIR, HE DOESN’T. HE THINKS DEA HAS
THE RIGHT TO DECLARE THAT. SO THEY EXPLAIN — THIS IS ONE OF THE MANY CASES
HE WINDS UP ON THE SIDE OF CONSERVATIVES, BUT THEY DO HAVE
A GOOD CASE THAT WE DON’T KNOW WHERE HE STANDS ON MARIJUANA,
HE’S JUST SAYING THE GOVERNMENT HAS ENOUGH DISCRETION THAT THEY
CAN CLAIM THAT MARIJUANA HAS NO MEDICAL PURPOSE AT ALL, AND IT
SHOULD BE THE MOST SEVERELY REGULATED DRUG. SO WE ARE JUST
WARMING UP. NOW THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE, CITIZENS
UNITED, UNLIMITED MONEY IN POLITICS. BERNIE SANDERS SAYS IT
WOULD BE A LITMUS TEST FOR HIM, APPARENTLY IT ISN’T FOR BARACK
OBAMA. WE WILL HAVE A DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT WHO PICKS A SUPREME
COURT NOMINEE WHO WILL ALLOW MORE MONEY INTO POLITICS?
APPARENTLY THE ANSWER IS YES. SO ON BILLMOYERS.COM, JOHN LIGHT
WROTE THIS — — JOY — SO AGREE WITH CITIZENS UNITED
AND HE ACTUALLY PUT IT ON STEROIDS A LITTLE BIT BY SAYING
YOU CAN GIVE UNLIMITED MONEY TO SUPER PACS. AND THE APOLOGISTS
COME IN AND GO HE SEEMS TO HAVE VOTED HORRIFICALLY IN THAT CASE
BUT HE HAD NO CHOICE. CITIZENS UNITED WAS ALREADY DECIDED IN
2010, HE HAD TO FOLLOW PRECEDENT. BY THE WAY, IF HE IS
ON THE COURT, HOW DO YOU KNOW HE WON’T USE THE SAME EXACT
ARGUMENT? I HAVE TO FOLLOW PRECEDENT, THAT’S WHAT I’VE
ALWAYS DONE. IN FACT, YOU GUYS SAID THAT I FOLLOW PRECEDENT,
I’M DOING IT HERE, I WILL FOLLOW CITIZENS UNITED. HOW DO YOU KNOW
HE’S NOT GOING TO DO THAT? HE’S LIKELY TO, BASED ON HIS RECORD.
BUT THEY SAID HE HAD NO CHOICE. REALLY? WAS THERE NO OTHER SIDE
TO THIS CASE? DID THE GOVERNMENT NOT PRESENT A CASE? I LOOKED
INTO IT, IT TURNS OUT THEY DID. AND HERE WE GO TO DAMON ROOT AT
REASON.COM, HE SAYS — SO IN CITIZENS UNITED THEY
SAID HEY, THESE PACS CAN SPEND AS MUCH AS THEY LIKE. THEY
DIDN’T SAY THEY COULD RAISE AS MUCH AS THEY LIKED. IN
SPEECHNOW, GARLAND VOTES, NO, THEY CAN ALSO RAISE AS MUCH
MONEY AS THEY WANT. SO WHEN THEY GO TO SHELDON ADELSON OR THE
KOCH BROTHERS OR GEORGE SOROS OR ANYONE, THEY DON’T HAVE TO SAY I
CAN ONLY TAKE 5000 OR 10,000 FROM YOU. THEY CAN SAY I CAN
TAKE AN UNLIMITED AMOUNT OF MONEY. THAT IN SOME WAYS IS MORE
PROBLEMATIC. IT’S NOT LIKE HE DIDN’T HAVE A CHOICE, HE COULD
HAVE MADE THAT DISTINCTION. HE CHOSE NOT TO. HE APPARENTLY
AGREES THERE ARE NO LIMITS TO MONEY IN POLITICS. THIS IS THE
GUY THAT LIBERALS WANT ON THE SUPREME COURT? MY ANSWER TO THAT
IS, HELL NO. DO I SUPPORT GARLAND BECAUSE OBAMA PICKED
HIM? NO. SHOULD YOU SUPPORT HIM? UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD
YOU SUPPORT HIM. IF THE REPUBLICANS WANT TO DO LIBERALS
A FAVOR AND BLOCK HIM, GREAT. BLOCK HIM. FANTASTIC, I’M HAPPY
TO HAVE THAT. IF THIS GUY MAKES IT ONTO THE COURT, AND THERE IS
AN EXCELLENT CHANCE HE WILL, HE WILL VOTE WITH THE
CONSERVATIVES, AND THEY WILL SAY NOBODY COULD HAVE SEEN THIS
COMING. AND AM I GOING TO SHOVE THIS PARTICULAR VIDEO DOWN THEIR
THROAT? GODDAMN RIGHT I AM. NOW A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE MAKING THE
EXCUSE, IT IS ALL STRATEGY. YOU WOULDN’T UNDERSTAND, CENK, HE IS
PLAYING THREE-DIMENSIONAL CHESS, OBAMA. IT IS JUST FOR POLITICS.
REALLY? THEN WHY DID OBAMA HAVE HIM ON THE SHORTLIST OF WAY BACK
IN 2010. I THOUGHT THIS WAS JUST BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE REPUBLICANS HOLDING THE SENATE AND THIS IS
THE ELECTION YEAR. NO, OBAMA HAS ALWAYS LIKED THIS GUY. PEOPLE
CAN’T FIGURE IT OUT — IS OBAMA DUMB? IS HE WEAK? NO, HE AGREES
WITH GARLAND. NOW EVEN THOUGH CITIZENS UNITED IS THE MOST
IMPORTANT ISSUE TO THE CONTRARY, THERE IS ONE DECISION THAT IS
EVEN MORE OFFENSIVE. HOW COULD IT BE MORE OFFENSIVE? I WILL
SHOW YOU. FIRST, CHARLIE SAVAGE WRITES IN THE NEW YORK TIMES
GENERALLY — IT IS REALLY HARD TO FIND THE
CASES WHERE HE DID NOT DEFER TO THE GOVERNMENT. YOU MIGHT THINK
OKAY, HE WAS A PROSECUTOR, HE DEFERS TO THE GOVERNMENT, NOT A
BIG DEAL. BUT WHEN YOU GET INTO THE DETAILS YOU REALIZE IT IS A
GIANT DEAL. LET ME EXPLAIN. THAT WE GO TO JUST SECURITY — SO THERE WAS SOME LEGALESE IN
THERE, LET ME BREAK IT DOWN. THE OTHER DEMOCRATIC APPOINTEES SAID
YOU AREN’T ALLOWED TO TRANSFER THE DETAINEES TO A PLACE WHERE
THEY COULD BE TORTURED. GARLAND DISAGREES, HE SAYS GO AHEAD,
TRANSFER THEM TO A PLACE WHERE THEY MIGHT BE TORTURED. WHAT DO
I CARE? THAT IS HIS RULING. APOLOGISTS ARE LIKE, HE HAD NO
CHOICE. HE HAD ALL THE CHOICE OF THE WORLD, ALL THE OTHER
DEMOCRATIC APPOINTEES VOTED THE OTHER WAY. HE BROKE WITH OTHER
DEMOCRATIC APPOINTEES TO SAY THE GOVERNMENT IS ALLOWED TO DO
WHATEVER THEY WANT. YOU WANT TO TRANSFER HIM TO HAVE THAT GUY
GET HIS, YOU KNOW, ARMS — WHATEVER, THERE ARE 1000
DIFFERENT TORTURE TACTICS. GO AHEAD, HAVE AT IT, HOSS. WE ARE
NOT AT THE WORST ONE YET. HABEAS CORPUS, THAT IS A PHILOSOPHY
THAT GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE MAGNA CARTA. YOU HAVE TO PRESENT
THE BODY, THAT IS WHAT IT MEANS. IF THE GOVERNMENT HAS SOMEONE,
THEY HAVE TO ACTUALLY TRY HIM, BRING HIM BEFORE A JUDGE. THEY
CAN’T JUST MAKE THEM DISAPPEAR, BECAUSE IF YOU ALLOW THE
GOVERNMENT TO DO THAT, THAT IS AS TYRANNICAL AS IT GETS. HABEAS
CORPUS IS THE CORE OF WHAT PEOPLE CALL WESTERN
CIVILIZATION, WHAT I CALL ANY CIVILIZATION. HE IS NOT AGAINST
HABEAS CORPUS, IS HE? LET’S FIND OUT. AGAIN, DAMON ROOT AT
REASON.COM — THE SUPREME COURT, WHICH IS
FUNDAMENTALLY CONSERVATIVE, IS MORE LIBERAL THAN GARLAND IS.
KENNEDY FLIPPED IN THAT DECISION, IT WAS A 5-4 DECISION,
BUT THEY SAID TO THE DETAINEES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
NO MATTER WHERE THEY ARE, HAVE HABEAS CORPUS RIGHTS? OF COURSE
THEY DO. YOU CAN’T MAKE PEOPLE DISAPPEAR. THAT IS TYRANNY.
GARLAND DISAGREED, AND AGAIN, THERE WERE PEOPLE WHO VOTED ON
THE OTHER SIDE. HE CHOSE NOT TO JOIN HIM. HE DECIDED THE U.S.
GOVERNMENT IF IT WANTS TO CAN MAKE ANYBODY DISAPPEAR. THEY DO
NOT HAVE HABEAS CORPUS RIGHTS. AND I’M SUPPOSED TO SUPPORT THIS
GUY BECAUSE SOMEBODY WITH A “D” NEXT TO THEIR NAME SAID THAT WAS
THE PARTY LINE? HELL NO IS NOT STRONG ENOUGH. IF HE WAS
PROPOSED BY A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT I WOULD WANT TO
FILIBUSTER HIM. HE DOESN’T BELIEVE IN HABEAS CORPUS RIGHTS,
HE IS FOR MORE MONEY IN POLITICS, AND YOU CAN HARDLY
FIND A LIBERAL POSITION HE HAS, BUT OBAMA APPOINTED HIM.
DEMOCRATS IN WASHINGTON WANT HIM APPROVED. FUCK NO. FUCK NO, VOTE
NO. ANY REAL LIBERAL OR PROGRESSIVE WOULDN’T WANT THIS
GUY WALKING BY THE SUPREME COURT, LET ALONE BEING IN THE
SUPREME COURT. YOUNG TURKS.

Maurice Vega

100 Responses

  1. So many assumptions based on almost no facts. Cenk assumes the worst of everyone and engages in black and white thinking. Though I think there are probably better choices than Garland, I don't share the view that an extremely qualified moderate would be a "terrible" choice.

  2. Let's not forget that Kasich lives in a Fantasy Land – he actually believes that after winning (1) lonely state out of 22 primaries, he can become president?? He'd have to win over 120% of the remaining delegates to do so, and that dog won't hunt. His fantasy life also seems to affect his judgment as well.

  3. If Obama and Clinton support Liberal policies- why do they continue Right wing policies in Latin America. In 2009 Honduras had a coup over throwing the democratic president- 4 of the 6 generals were trained at a US military Base in Georgia. Remember those children fleeing last year? The media called them diseased criminals- shameful- never did they mention the coup- oh no- this would point out the Right wing position of destroying democracy and freedom.

  4. the more I watch Cenk, the more I understand why people compare Bernie Sanders supporters with trump supporters.

  5. In this case, Democrats and Republicans in the House of Congress and the Senate, agreeing on this man, can be compared historically, to Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany agreeing that they are going to brutally divide Poland between them. The American people, and the Middle class, are Poland in this scenario. It didn't go well for Poland in the Second World War, as we remember.

  6. Can you guys PLEASE stop posting 10 recommended videos every video? It can't be disabled on mobile and there's a constant banner over the screen for all of your videos. It's driving me insane.

  7. What? Obama has no balls? noooooo way! He always stands up for what is rig…nah I can't even write that shit, lol

  8. Merrick is a terrible choice, and the Democrats and "liberals" defending him just proves the point of the #BernieOrBust crowd who points out that when a Democrat does bad things, Democrats will just back them due to their partisanship. Moderate Democrats hurt the entirety of the progressive movement, and more the country more to the right.

  9. Holy shit a Democrat that doesnt just think with a Democratic agenda!? Its hard to pick between hypocrisy and absurdity when dealing with Democrats and Republicans…

  10. So corporations get to enjoy habeas corpus, yet actual people don't, according to the establishment wing of the democratic party.
    And yet a huge chunk of the base wants to continue to go with the establishment. Freaking idiots.

  11. The strike on Libya was France and Lebanon's idea they were the ones that proposed the resolution to the U.N. even the Arab League of Nations supported it and Obama only joined in. Why don't TYT talk about them instead of putting it all on President Obama. I am also fed up with TYT's "All or nothing attitude" knowing that lazy Americans, particularly Democrats, didn't vote in the 2010 midterms. Why don't you Arab Muslims talk smack about the Arab League of Nations intervening in Libya?!! The goal wasn't to stop a dictator and do a regime change that is a lie. The dictator in Libya lied to the U.N. promising to stop their assault and advancement on the town. The dictator agreed, but the rapes and killing of innocent people continued and that's when the U.N acted. If the U.N. isn't allowed to step in during an assault like that, THEN WHAT THE HECK ARE THEY USED FOR THEN?!!!! Obama is no more guilty than the Arab Leauge of nations joining in.

    It was the Muslims that started the mass commercial slave trade of Africans in which the Americans got 13 million slaves and Arab nations got 20 million and the fact is Saudi Arabia and other Muslim nations even now in 2016 are currently enslaving millions of black people. Proof, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ropm9TObjg SPREAD IT AROUND Scroll down in the links I provided to see Racist Arabs Rant as they thumbs each other up. Scroll down through this Saudi Arabia video posted on youtube and check out the comments section as racist Arabs drob N Word like crazy proof, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqvnkTk4nlc

    The Jews were kicked out of Israel by the Romans as a punishment from God for their disobedience but he promised too return them to their land once their punishment is up.and then the Palestinians moved in. It was never Palestinian land to begin with. Even the name "Palestine" came from the Romans.

  12. I think Obama dose not agree with Merrick Garland but he may have been happy with the way the Supreme Court liberal/conservative balance during Antonin Scalia’s time. he may be right if the Supreme Court is very lopsided it will lose its influence in the political system.

  13. "Obama can't be conservative cuz he is in the democratic party and black….DUR DUR DUR DURRRRR"

    – 99 percent of america.

  14. Jeeze, now I'm hoping they hold off and Hillary picks someone better. She said she wanted to overturn Citizens United….publicly. Oh right, it's Hillary so it's all lies anyway.

  15. Republicans are falling into a trap. Obama is so smart, he knows that this guy will not get
    a hearing but puts a conservative for republican hyenas to tear apart. Like
    they are cannibalizing each other.

  16. I remember when I read about all three hopeful candidates, I was hoping Obama would not pick this guy. Surprise surprise, he picks the one guy I didn't want him to pick.

  17. I keep hearing that Obama isn't anti-guns….

    ….yet he nominates a justice who goes against everything liberals stand for EXCEPT for his stance on guns.

    #SeemsLegit

  18. guy dedicates his life to the law, Cenk disagrees with his interpretation on the constitution, he calls him 'terrible'

  19. Well, the fact is I'd have to read the opinions. There are various reasons why a judge would do a certain thing. Again, it could back to what Garland–and the majority–saw as a reading of precedent. You're a Columbia trained lawyer; you can do better. I don't think President Obama is playing games with anyone. I think he stands behind Garland and wants him confirmed. And he is about the best the left is going to get if (1) a Republican President is elected or (2) the Republicans retain control of the Senate or (3) both of the preceding, in which case we are really screwed. When I say us, I mean traditional liberals–not the regressive left.

  20. Thanks for that info. I questioned the decision but had a feeling the Republicans were pulling the wool over our eyes. But I could not find the answers of why. Kudos, glad I did not sign that petition.

  21. Why do the Republicans hate Obama? He IS a Republican. In Democrats' clothing. Well, yes, I am overstating that. He's very wily. If he was actually a Republican he'd be stoopider. Maybe that's why they don't like him. (Or maybe his complexion has something to do with it.)

  22. Any justice should follow precedence on similar rulings. Justices interperate laws, they don't manipulate their understanding of them to meet their ajenda.
    If we don't like our laws we need to elect new congressmen to re-write those laws.

  23. Wow, for once I actually agree with you guys. I am conservative and this pick for the supreme court offends me. I don't like Obama at all, but this makes no sense on his part.

  24. Journalism at it's best. Who else is bringing this up besides Cenk? And these issue are not just liberal, bust also libertarian & independant….They're American!

  25. LOL. Obama's been trolling Republicans for the last year. He gives them a viable, qualified centrist candidate but because they said no matter what they wouldn't call for a vote for it now the pressure is on them.

  26. I believe all of Obama's picks have been varied in their voting directions, not voting "liberal" or "conservative" per se. Republicans should be happy with his picks, this one especially seems more in-line with their general agenda. I think Obama's trying to extend the olive branch by planting an olive tree. I wish the Supreme Court was not a life-time appointment. It seems hard to think of now, but we still have people appointed by Reagan. Not saying they're bad at their job, or anything about the Presidents. But I feel so much changes in 30 years, and at least with local courts you can say that you feel that a Judge needs to recuse themselves based on prior views/biases or even their attachment to the matter. But S.C. we just expect them to be unbiased. Yet here we're having the argument that we know people's politics when they're appointed, and those don't change because you're a Judge. I'm sure the Judges work together, but I'm sure there's some lines between political views too, that don't even fully account for the matter addressed.

  27. Obama shure as shit is playing the great game. Republicans are never gonna vote on a supreme court judge. Thus picking a candidate republicans should like, just makes them look more crazy

  28. I keep watching this channel's youtube videos in hopes that it will be somewhat objective. However, this is by far one of the most bias channels ever. Literally the FoxNews for liberals and Cenk Uygur is its Bill O'reilly. We need to stop being divided by political parties and understand that conservatives and liberals each have valid points to their views on the issues and so we need to be able to create compromise. Merrick Garland is not terrible because he is moderate and doesn't rule with democrats all the time. I'm sorry Uygur but Democrats aren't right about everything just like Republicans aren't either.

  29. Obama, like Hillary, is a sociopath, plain and simple. And what passes for the 'left' in the US still can't face the reality of the damage his administration has done. Which s largely why we are stuck where we are.

  30. missing the point TYT. Merrick's appointment is a strong political move. The republicans have made it clear they'll block any appointment of Obama, for him to present the most beige centrist he could find and STILL have it rejected only shows the Republicans up to be increasingly delusional. Congressional public support is at an all time low for a reason. It would only be a worry if the Republicans call Obama's bluff but I can't see that happening. The likelihood of a majority Democrat congress is only made likelier by this

  31. Obama doesn't even want Garland. He's just doing this to make the Republicans look bad. He knows they won't appoint him. Smart move if you ask me

  32. Marijuana is in the same classification group as meth and heroin!?!?

    WTF people?

    I thought it was accepted, general knowledge that the movie, "Reefer Madness" was SO ridiculous and over- exaggerated that it has become a cult classic favorite – simply because it was so NON-BELIEVABLE as to be hilariously hysterical!

    Perhaps they should do a modern re-make of it – leaving everything the same EXCEPT the drug. PCP comes to mind as an excellent substitution!

  33. Cenk you yourself agreed yourself with the citizens united interpretation that there was no cap on the decision now you are disagreeing with yourself just to castigate this supreme court judge.

  34. Iam sorry but if you truly want the Supreme Court to not be a political institution you have to pick a nominee for the merit not wether they agree with you or not

  35. Also the importance of replacing the missing justice is much more important than wether or not you agree with the justice's opinions

  36. I'm hoping that if the Democrats win in November that President Obama withdraws Merrick's nomination and lets Bernie put a liberal on the court as a kick in the balls to Mitch McConnell and his 8 years of trying to block everything the President does.
    Oh I'm sorry did I suggest McConnell had balls?

  37. Should start a petition…. No to Garland…. AND more important to get a Liberal judge then filling the seat quickly especially since how long they serve. AND OFCOURSE THE COURT IS POLITICLY INFLUENCED

  38. Obama can appoint a judge during a 3 day recess if he chooses. Bush did this more than once. Thanks for the info

  39. Obama has failed everyone here. If we do not separate corporate power from the power of state now, we may never be able to. Supreme court appointments should only have a five year lifespan to avoid corruption within our legal system – a system designed as a safeguard to protect us against the establishment of greed and control that we now face. If you haven't seen it take a look at 'The Big Short', an eye opening film; Hollywood actually has used its power very cleverly here.

  40. If he's nominated, we can hope on his age.
    Assuming Bernie becomes the president, he'll be replaced by a judge more progressive and a lot younger.

  41. Obama has been a disappointment to liberals like myself who thought the world of him at first. The best thing he did was shove horrible insurance down our throats. 6000 deductible BEFORE the insurance will cover anything besides some immunizations? That's in addition to ridiculous premiums on plans we are forced to buy. That's not insurance. That's what the mafia used to do to small business owners on their turf.

  42. Mr. Uygur, I know you are an expert in these matters; but Sheldon Adelson's last name begins like "ad," not like "aid."

  43. Here's my letter to my two US Senators:

    Please vote against the confirmation of Judge Merrick Garland to SCOTUS. He is opposed to Habeus Corpus for "enemy combatants", and the whole point of Habeus Corpus, going back the Magna Carta, is protect all persons from being denied their rights in government detention.

    Under Habeus Corpus, of course even accused terrorists or "enemy combatants" must have the right to counsel, to know the charges against them, to have a fair trial. This is a vital, immutable, and inseparable part of the fundamentals of any civilized society.

    Habeus Corpus is as basic as it gets. Judge Garland decided, no, it isn't, the government can decide who gets this right by slapping a label on them. We must not have judges on SCOTUS who side with noblesse oblige over the rights of the people.

    Again, please reject the nomination of Judge Garland to SCOTUS.

  44. Garland is in favor of destroying the 2nd Amendment, and instituting gun bans. He is a liberal fascist destroyer of Liberty. If he or someone like him, replaces Justice Scalia, we will have to resist the tyranny of gun grabs, and unconstitutional gun control. Tyranny is closer to home than ever before.

  45. He is against habeus corpus rights for detained foreign combattents and does not expand that to everybody as Cenk claims here. It still doesn't make it right but I believe you have a resposibility to report accurately and not with embellishments.

  46. John K. come on man you can't pick and choose which person is afforded h.c., or the government can just use that to put away people. We brought those guys to gitmo and we have to make sure we don't abuse their rights. And who really knows they were "combattents" anyway. I swear people in america don't even try to understand the middle east.

  47. I have no trust and no system the political, judicial, and financial institutions. all the 9 Supreme Court Justices are nothing but mouthpieces for the corporate elite.

  48. And yet to this day he's still not appointed because the Republicans don't want him despite being right-winged. This was political bait and they ate it up without thinking.

  49. Merrick yet another Jewish man who have now in 2016 almost taken over the entire all US Governing bodies most of these these individual's hold dual citizenship ! when is the US going to wake up and take their country back ????????

  50. Can anyone explain to me why the American justice system utilises judges with overtly polarised political views, which in almost every case sees these judges vote along partisan lines, rather than having them be impartial and at least attempt to operate without political bias? The whole concept baffles me.

  51. Shut up you talk bullshit , it's even worse if the republicans block this nomination. It's better if Obama is able to get Garland nomination passed. I respect your opinion but seriously don't waste your time making this video. A liberal judge won't get the necessary majority to become a Supreme Court justices.
    You're saying Obama must nominate a liberal judge and you are being ignorant because that's not going to be possible at all given the current situation with the republicans

  52. A Judge.. a Jewish judge… known to be Republican close.. Obama prepared by the immigration process USA become a no-blast napalm bomb. Obama played Lenin.. Both the Republicans and the Democrats could not find a better balance point on a judiciary axing. He so very probably be a historical choice fro any coming-forth US civil war to be postponed. I think US should thank to Mr. Joe Biden!

  53. zionists perfect nominee for the supreme court. zionists are taking over this country with their neoconservative policies.

  54. So how does this resolve with the other TYT video condemning Republicans for resistng the nomination??? TYT cognitive dissonance has jumped the shark.

  55. Cenk's logic; Republicans have respect for him so therefore he must secretly be evil and conservative. Anybody replacing Scalia moves the court dramatically to the left. In Garlands career the circuit he served on did not rule on social issues at all. He didn't rule against the NRA he was just one of the absent judges who voted to rehear the case. Republicans respect Garland because he is extremly qualified, shows judicial restraint, and put Timothy Mcveigh down, not because he is secretly a closet conservative. Stop spreading BS Cenk

  56. This commentary is absolutely inane. He's mocking a Circuit Court judge for following the precedent of the Supreme Court

  57. Obama is wrong picking Merrick Garland. If Hillary is following in Obama's footsteps then I will not vote for her. It looks like things are not getting better but worse. I voted for Obama and am disappointed that he is more Republican then Democrat.

  58. Can't believe I agree with TYT. I also don't want garland appointed. An anti 2a, anti weed, pro citizens united, pro PATRIOT act, and just in general anti liberty candidate.

  59. Why is Cenk acting like "money in politics" is a republican thing and not a democratic thing.. Have you looked at how much money democrats spend on elections compared to republicans?

  60. Maybe the GOP should just tell Obama who they want and we could see how that flies. Obama should have stuck with the people who elected him instead of pandering to Republicans. In his defense, Ben Nelson, was the only DEM who signed the GOP Americans for Tax Reform Pledge (not to raise taxes on the rich) but Obama could have communicated with the public when the Corn Husker's Kick back was eliminated. Once the DEMs lost the House, we had an obstructionist government. Of course, then the DEMs lost the Senate during the mid-terms over the gun control agenda.

  61. Honestly, Cenk is a complete loon. Many statistical analyses have shown that Garland aligns more with Sotomayor and Ginsburg than even the more moderate liberals Breyer and Kagan. Garland is more liberal than Kagan. Cent, your an idiot.

  62. Cenk: "How dare these dang judges read the constitution? How can they not re-read it for progressivism?" Fat Shit.

  63. I usually vibe with Cenk but thus far I am not impressed. By move it to the left all Mitch McConnell meant Garland wouldn't put up with Voter Supression

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post comment