Al Franken: What was Merrick Garland about?

[longship]

As usual, Al Franken brings things to an important point while questioning Gorsuch.

While addressing the ways corporations use mandatory arbitration clauses to stifle employees and consumers, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., questioned Judge Neil Gorsuch during his Senate hearings today about how arbitration has made it more difficult for people to have their cases heard before a court.

Franken, who noted how mandatory arbitration clauses have prevented people—including soldiers who had their properties unlawfully foreclosed upon while serving overseas and women who want to come forward with accusations of sexual harassment at work—from seeking justice in court, pointed out that the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Roberts has expanded the use of such clauses.

The Minnesota Democrat said that the Roberts Court, frequently in 5-4 decisions where the GOP-appointed justices rule in the majority, has “closed the jury to employees and to customers.”

“That’s why there’s so much at stake here,” he said. “As Sen. [Sheldon] Whitehouse has demonstrated, what we’re worried about is another 5-4 Roberts Court making one decision after another that hurts workers and employees, that hurts consumers. And you said earlier that there are no Democratic judges, there are no Republican judges; if that’s the case, what was Merrick Garland about? That’s what it was about.”

What a great senator!!!

Video at link: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/al-franken-the-roberts-court-has-continually-ruled-in-favor-of-corporations-and-against-workers-and-consumers/

[FSogol]

1. K & R. n/t

[pangaia]

2. I wish CNN or whomever had broadcast Franken's questioning live for the whole world to see..

He is pure genius....

[madokie]

4. As he said

I know absurdity

[BainsBane]

6. I heard it on NPR

[pangaia]

7. Good.

If I saw it up on the big screen at the gym, I would know We had arrived. :&gt ))))

But no, all they had was London, for 90 minutes over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and

CNN and Fucks...

[FakeNoose]

8. Check Youtube

Sometimes you can find clips or excerpts on there.

I believe it was originally on C-SPAN so maybe they'll have a re-broadcast? (not sure)

Personally I can find just about everything on the bit-torrents, but your mileage may vary.

[George II]

3. He says it like it is, and says it in a way that even the person he's questioning has to like him.

[HughBeaumont]

5. Even more ridiculous when one considers that Merrick Garland is a moderate.

How the hyper-cons successfully painted him as a "liberal" (/snarl) is beyond me. It simply doesn't square with the facts.

[MurrayDelph]

13. When you keep moving the goalpost

to the right what used to be just right of center is way to the left.

[NurseJackie]

9. The thing about Al Franken (D) is that his demeanor and statesmanlike manner allow him...

The thing about Al Franken (D) is that his demeanor and statesmanlike manner allow him to thrust and parry without making himself the center of attention, and without being a distraction to the job at hand.

I really like that he doesn't rely on abrupt bluster as a way to cover up or distract... he's never been one to muddy the waters with personal grandstanding. He's always DIRECT, but his friendly and folksy demeanor allow him to be direct without being insulting or obviously threatening.

I must admit, I'd be disappointed if his questioning style was abrupt and abrasive and hostile. If he took approach it wouldn't seem unusual for the person under oath to "clam up" and become hyper-defensive and evasive. To the outsider, that defensive reaction wouldn't seem suspicious or out of the ordinary at all.

But, when Al Franken (D) questions someone who ends up being obviously defensive and evasive... the viewer can see that it's not a provoked reaction. Because they're not reacting to hostility, it's easy to see that they are being deceptive and less that totally forthcoming.

Al Franken is a Democrat who is a MASTER at communication. He's not in it form himself. He avoids bluster and flailing and grandstanding, and we all benefit from his loyalty and dedication to the principles of the Democratic Party.

[MBS]

17. Agree! n/t

[Marthe48]

10. Garland was about

obstructionist incompetents intent on destroying the America because they hold their twisted ideology more sacred than the Constitution of the United Staes of America.

Are you Republican? Or American? Because you can't be both.

[MBS]

18. Perfect

Agree completely, especially with your last line:

Are you Republican? Or American? Because you can't be both.

[orangecrush]

11. K&R

Thanks, Al!

[onecent]

12. We need to make Repubs find this out.... K&R

[NastyRiffraff]

14. Al continues to impress

He doesn't bluster, he doesn't grandstand, he doesn't create faux drama. He simply asks important questions, and asks again, and again, until he gets an answer. Or, if no answer is forthcoming and all he's getting is deflection and talking points, he abruptly waves away the nonsense and moves on. He made Gorsuch look like a bumbling fool more than once.

And he does it with just enough humor to add spice. I love him.

[turbinetree]

15. We must not also forget that John Roberts this U.S. Supreme Court "Chief" Justice

gets to write year end reports for how the "courts" will handle cases, and every year he gets to decide if the public gets a place in the court room, and more and more you and I are being eviscerated and not be able to have that voice at the table in the court room because of Roberts, and if Gorsuch is put in this position just think, it's bad now wait if he gets seated.............. .

Take for example this information from the American Prospect, and just think how the other justices make there opinions and how courts and lawyers work across the country, in most cases it is not for you and me:

http://prospect.org/article/roberts-rules-protecting-corporations



And what gives Roberts this power, go to Page 3 and start reading what is said under the US Code: The Rules Enabling Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2071 et seq

https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/year-end/2015year-endreport.pdf

[Mc Mike]

16. Hammers home their hypocrisy. rec, nt