Search This Blog

Translate

Blog Archive

Middleboro Review 2

NEW CONTENT MOVED TO MIDDLEBORO REVIEW 2

Toyota

Since the Dilly, Dally, Delay & Stall Law Firms are adding their billable hours, the Toyota U.S.A. and Route 44 Toyota posts have been separated here:

Route 44 Toyota Sold Me A Lemon



Showing posts with label Merrick Garland. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Merrick Garland. Show all posts

Saturday, June 8, 2019

Let’s Ditch Mitch





Opinion

Let’s Ditch Mitch

The Senate majority leader comes out of his shell.



O.K., throwing this one at you without warning:

What’s your opinion of Mitch McConnell?

A) Spawn of Satan.

B) Sort of pitiful, what with having Donald Trump on his back.

C) Can we talk about how he looks like a turtle?

Definitely not the last one. It’s true that many Americans think of McConnell as turtle-like, due to his lack of anything resembling a chin.

But this is wrong on two counts. First, you shouldn’t tackle people you disagree with by making fun of their looks.

Second, it gives turtles a bad name. Turtles are great for the environment and everybody likes them. They sing to their children. You are never going to see a turtle killing gun control legislation.

Mitch, on the other hand, has a longstanding alliance with the National Rifle Association, which has shown its affection to the tune of about $1.3 million in support. Anything the N.R.A. dislikes never gets the chance to come up for a Senate vote. Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act is moldering away in a corner because the N.R.A. doesn’t want authorities taking guns away from domestic abusers.

It’s been another terrible year of mass shooting violence. One simple, very popular response would be to improve the background checks for gun purchases.

It would at least show our elected officials care about the crisis.

Such a bill passed the House of Representatives and went to the Senate where it’s, um, lying around somewhere. “There’s a whole bunch of Republican support, but he won’t let it move to the floor,” said minority leader Chuck Schumer.

This goes on a lot. McConnell, who has near total control over what comes up for a vote, sits on things he doesn’t like until they smother. Farewell, immigration reform, Paycheck Fairness Act, legislation protecting Americans with pre-existing conditions, lowering prescription drug prices, protecting election security, restoring net neutrality.

You can, of course, just presume that McConnell is following Trump’s orders. But it’s hard to believe the president even knows what’s going on. This week, when he was in Europe, Trump twittered congratulations to the House on the passage of a huge disaster aid package, adding, “Great, now we will get it done in the Senate!” Helpful readers noted that the Senate had approved said bill two weeks before.

There are well over 100 House-passed bills sitting around gathering mildew in Mitch’s limbo. What do you think that place looks like? A very depressing bus station waiting room? A hospital ward packed with comatose patients? Or maybe just a dimly lit storage bin where little bills sit around drinking juice and playing video games until the end of time?

All of them in the thrall of Mitch McConnell. Before we move on, can we mention that McConnell’s wife, Elaine Chao, is the nation’s secretary of transportation, and possibly on her way to serious contention for Worst Cabinet Member?

Check out the Times story by Michael Forsythe and Eric Lipton that detailed how Chao, during the performance of her duties promoting the American maritime industry, has also been lending a helping hand to her own family’s very extensive shipping business, which builds most of its fleet in China. Her family has made more than $1 million in campaign contributions to the senator. Which is generous, but not quite as impressive as the somewhere between $5 million and $25 million that Chao’s father has given his daughter and son-in-law as a flat-out gift.

So McConnell has been doing very well indeed — family money, Senate majority and no irritating votes on stuff he doesn’t like. To be fair, he’s not the first leader who’s pulled that disappearing bill trick. (Possibly the first who enjoys referring to himself as “The Grim Reaper,” but that’s just part of his colorful personality.) His predecessor, Democrat Harry Reid, did the same thing, although Schumer claims not nearly so much. “There was not a total blanket on anything coming to the floor,” Schumer said in a phone interview. “I’ve never seen anything quite like this.”

Well, there’s one thing coming to the floor. McConnell is obsessed with cramming the federal judiciary with men and women of a conservative bent.

When President Barack Obama was in his second term, McConnell slowed the confirmation process to a mini-crawl, so he was able to gift Trump with more than 100 vacancies to fill.

Most spectacularly of all, when Antonin Scalia died in February of 2016, McConnell completely ignored Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland as his successor.

“Not even holding a hearing on the Garland nomination has to be an absolute landmark in Senate process,” said Joshua Huder of the Government Affairs Institute at Georgetown University.

A man who has never gotten a single vote from anyone living outside the state of Kentucky decreed that a man twice elected president of the United States had no right to have his nominee for Supreme Court considered in the Senate.

McConnell told Charles Homans of The Times it was “the most consequential thing” he’d ever done. He was extremely proud.

McConnell’s argument was that Obama was too close to the end of his term to make a lifetime appointment to the nation’s highest court. But now he’s saying that if there’s a vacancy before the 2020 election, he’ll of course get Trump’s choice for a successor a confirmation vote. “Oh, we’d fill it,” the senator chortled at a Chamber of Commerce lunch back home in Kentucky.

I know you’re not surprised, but isn’t it sort of awful that McConnell’s so proud of himself? You’d hope that, at least in public, he’d murmur something vague and look a tad sheepish.

No self-respecting turtle would ever behave like that.


Gail Collins is an Op-Ed columnist and a former member of the editorial board, and was the first woman to serve as the Times editorial page editor, from 2001 to 2007. 

LINK



Thursday, October 4, 2018

FOCUS: Michael Moore | Merrick Garland's High School Yearbook Page




Reader Supported News
03 October 18
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News

FOCUS: Michael Moore | Merrick Garland's High School Yearbook Page 
Michael Moore. (photo: unknown)
Michael Moore, Michael Moore's Facebook Page
Moore writes: "Merrick Garland's high school yearbook page, 1970, Niles West H.S., Skokie, IL. Just awful! No brewskis! Where was Tobin's dad?"
READ MORE

Become a Fan of RSN on Facebook and Twitter



Thursday, March 16, 2017

One Year Ago Today - President Obama Supreme Court Nomination Announcement - March 16, 2016



One Year Ago Today - President Obama Supreme Court Nomination Announcement - March 16, 2016

President Obama announced U.S. Court of Appeals of D.C. Chief Judge Merrick Garland as his nominee to fill the Supreme Court seat left vacant after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. He urged the Senate to give Judge Merrick a fair confirmation hearing and a vote.









Thursday, February 2, 2017

RSN: Robert Reich | Someone Should Follow Mitch McConnell Around With a Sign That Says "Merrick Garland"




It's Live on the HomePage Now: 
Reader Supported News

FOCUS: Robert Reich | Someone Should Follow Mitch McConnell Around With a Sign That Says "Merrick Garland" 
Robert Reich. (photo: Steve Russell/Toronto Star) 
Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Facebook Page 
Reich writes: "When Mitch McConnell says a president is entitled to have his Cabinet appointments considered, you know we're beyond hypocrisy." 
READ MORE

Contribute to RSN
Become a Fan of RSN on Facebook and Twitter



Monday, May 9, 2016

Progressive Breakfast: Clinton Commits: No TPP, Fundamentally Rethink Trade Policies



Who believes Killary Clinton? 

Who is listening to the moronic comments of Donald Trump? 



MORNING MESSAGE

Dave Johnson
Clinton Commits: No TPP, Fundamentally Rethink Trade Policies
...Clinton replied to a questionnaire from the Oregon Fair Trade Campaign, which consists of more than 25 labor, environmental and human rights organizations. When asked, “If elected President, would you oppose holding a vote on the TPP during the ‘lame duck’ session before you take office?” she replied, “I have said I oppose the TPP agreement — and that means before and after the election.” ... This clear statement of position shows the value of the Sanders campaign. His clear opposition to TPP and our current trade regime finally forced Clinton to go on the record with a clear commitment opposing TPP and a solid criticism of our country’s trade policies.

BURNING ISSUES: BUYING WEAPONS THAT DON'T WORK

The F-35 fighter place is a textbook example of how tax dollars are wasted on Pentagon weaponry, Mandy Smithberger, director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Project on Government Oversight, explains in this Burning Issues video.

TRUMP TOYS WITH AMERICA'S CREDIT RATING

Trump shrugs off criticism of his proposal to squeeze creditors. Politico quotes:“…you never have to default because you print the money … I’m the king of debt. I understand debt probably better than anybody. I know how to deal with debt very well. I love debt …”
Experts incredulous. AP:“Nations usually print their own money and service their debt through taxes, unlike corporations that can sell off assets and equity stakes to manage debt or close up shop. Interest rates would spike if a government refused to pay what it owed as investors priced in the risk of default and became resistant toward lending.”
Trump rejects federal minimum wage increase. W. Post quotes:“I don’t know how people make it on $7.25 … With that being said, I would like to see an increase of some magnitude, but I’d rather leave it to the states. Let the states decide.”
Trump says he’s flexible on his tax cut proposal, on Meet The Press:“I have to negotiate now with senators and congressmen … the fact that I put in a plan, it really is a floor … we lower the taxes on everybody, very substantially. But I have no illusions. I don’t think that’s going to be the final plan … we’re giving a massive business tax cut [although] they might have to pay a little bit more than my proposal.”
Trump-Ryan rift widens. NYT:“…Trump refused to rule out blocking Paul D. Ryan, the speaker of the House, from serving as the convention’s chairman … ‘I’m a conservative, but don’t forget, this is called the Republican Party. It’s not called the Conservative Party.’ … Conservative activists have called on Mr. Trump to identify before he arrives in Cleveland people he would appoint as cabinet members, Supreme Court justices or even vice president…”
Bernie rallies NJ. USA Today quotes:“We are not in the minority. Our vision is the future of America … Every idea, virtually every one, had the support of the majority of the American people. We are doing well because, we are doing something unusual — we are telling people the truth.”

REPUBLICANS MAY EMBRACE GARLAND

Republicans may approve Garland nomination in lame duck. The Hill:“‘If we come to a point, I’ve said all along, where we’re going to lose the election, or we lose the election in November, then we ought to approve him quickly,’ [Sen. Jeff] Flake said on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press.'”
Dems pressure Sen. Chuck Grassley. NYT:“Those efforts will include the release of a report critical of the work of the Judiciary Committee under Mr. Grassley. On Wednesday, Senate Democrats will host a news conference with a group of former Grassley supporters brought in from Iowa who have changed their views on the senator. They will also highlight polls showing that Mr. Grassley … has been hurt more than other Republicans by his position on Judge Garland…”

FED NOT WORRIED ABOUT ECONOMY

Key Fed member sanguine. NYT:“William C. Dudley, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York president … said he foresaw continued growth despite bumps in the early months of the year — enough growth for the Fed to get back to slowly raising its benchmark interest rate. And if growth should falter, he said, there is plenty of medicine in the Fed’s chest.”
“Rising U.S. Rents Squeeze the Middle Class” reports WSJ:“A study set to be released on Monday shows that a far bigger proportion of middle-class renters in New York were squeezed by rising rents than were the lowest-income renters … In Boston, median asking rents have increased at an annual rate of 13.2% since 2010, far outstripping the 2.4% average annual increase in income … Even in Atlanta, historically one of the most affordable cities for middle-class families, a rapid rise in rents has taken its toll on those families.”
Progressive Breakfast is a daily morning email highlighting news stories of interest to activists. Progressive Breakfast is a project of the Campaign for America's Future.more »

Thursday, April 28, 2016

Merrick, Mitch, and the NRA



There are so many significant issues with which SCOTUS will be confronted....and now the NRA is dictating terms? 

This is what Bernie Sanders said about Corporate Control: 



Koch Acolyte Mitch McConnell [R-KY] defends the opposition of the NRA instead of doing his job? 

Please sign and SHARE the petition below! 
Isn't it time for government to work for Americans?



“I can’t imagine that a Republican majority in the United States Senate would want to confirm, in a lame-duck session, a nominee opposed by the National Rifle Association...”  -Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), New York Times, 3/20/16


In this circus of an election year, some Republicans are coming right out and admitting ugly truths that we’ve known about for a long time.

When Senator McConnell told the New York Times that his caucus would never confirm a Supreme Court nominee opposed by the National Rifle Association, he meant it. The NRA has long been one of the wealthy special interest groups pulling the strings in today’s Republican Party. We ought to take Senator McConnell at his word.

Mitch McConnell seems to think he works for the NRA. We’re here to remind him that he works for the American people -- and that highly qualified Supreme Court nominees like Merrick Garland shouldn’t be vetoed by special interests. Click here to sign.

All of Senator McConnell’s talk about the American people deserving a voice in who is confirmed as the next Supreme Court justice has now proven to be just that -- talk.

The American people already made their voice known when they elected -- and then re-elected -- Barack Obama as our President. President Obama has fulfilled his constitutional duty by nominating Merrick Garland to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court. It’s now up to the Senate to do its job and bring his nominee up for consideration.

Add your name to my petition, and remind Senator McConnell that the American people deserve a fully functioning Supreme Court -- no matter how angry that makes the NRA.

Thanks,

Ed
Paid for by The Markey Committee




Thursday, April 7, 2016

PROGRESSIVE BREAKFAST: Democrats hit Wisconsin congressman for boasting about voter suppression. The Hill:





MORNING MESSAGE

Terrance Heath
Paul Ryan Is Not The One To Save The GOP From Donald Trump
One anonymous Republican insider told Politico that there’s a 60 percent of convention deadlock, an 90 percent chance that the delegates will unite around Ryan, and a 54 percent chance that Ryan will end up the party’s nominee. Here’s a reality check: Paul Ryan won’t save the Republican party from what having Donald Trump as its nominee would do to the party. Beneath his cool, less orange exterior, Ryan isn’t all that different from Trump.

BURNING ISSUES: KEEPING THE TERROR THREAT IN CONTEXT

RHETORIC INTENSIFIES IN NY

Clinton campaign rips Sanders as shallow. Reuters:“The two-pronged attack … focused on Sanders’ wide-ranging and policy-heavy interview with the New York Daily News. The Super PAC, Correct the Record, circulated a mash-up of television pundits criticizing Sanders’ perceived missteps … In an email to supporters, a senior Clinton campaign aide said ‘even on his signature issue of breaking up the banks’ Sanders had been ‘unable to answer basic questions’ … ‘If you are going to be a single-issue candidate, at least know your single issue,’ Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said on Twitter.”
Sanders argues Clinton “not qualified” to be president. Bloomberg:“‘She has been saying lately that she thinks I am not quote unquote qualified to be president,’ Sanders told a [Philadelphia] crowd of approximately 9,000. ‘Let me just say in response to Secretary Clinton: I don’t believe that she is qualified if she is, through her super-PAC, taking tens of millions of dollars in special interests funds.’ … [Earlier on MSNBC] Clinton was asked if she believed Sanders was qualified to be president … Clinton said it seemed like Sanders ‘hadn’t done his homework’ but declined to directly answer the question, saying it was up to voters…”
Battle for upstate NY. NYT:“…16 years later, Mrs. Clinton is again promising to bring jobs back to the region as she courts the people who helped secure her first election victory … critics say that she failed to deliver on the centerpiece of her 2000 push — a promise to bring 200,000 jobs to New York … Unlike voters in other primary states, many people in upstate New York have met Mrs. Clinton.”
Democrats hit Wisconsin congressman for boasting about voter suppression. The Hill:“‘I think Hillary Clinton is about the weakest candidate the Democrats have ever put up,’ Grothman told an NBC affiliate in Milwaukee. ‘And now we have photo ID, and I think photo ID is going to make a little bit of a difference as well.’ The Democrats pounced, with [Wisconsin Democratic Party chair Martha] Laning saying Grothman ‘slipped up last night and accidentally told the truth.'”

CRUZ GETS RUDE NY WELCOME

“Bronx residents blast Ted Cruz” reports NY Daily News:“Cruz was crucified during a stop in the Bronx, where residents and elected leaders derided him for insulting the city and the borough, only to come crawling back begging for money and votes … ‘You’re running on an anti-immigrant platform, and you’re speaking in the Bronx,’ Rodrigo Venegas told Cruz. ‘You should not be here.'”
Arrests at Long Island Trump rally. NY Daily News:“Several elderly supporters were taken from the packed event on stretchers and at least two people were arrested when a fight broke out inside the hall, police said.
More Republicans think Trump will be blocked at the convention. The Hill:“If Trump doesn’t win on the first ballot, a growing number say, he’s likely to lose the nomination to Cruz or someone else … More than 90 percent of the delegates at the convention will be bound to various candidates — largely based on their performances in the primaries and caucuses —but more than 50 percent become unbound and will be free to vote for whomever they support on a second ballot. About 80 percent of the delegates would become unbound on a third ballot.”
Trump faces myriad of convention challenges. Politico:“Every aspect of the Republican National Convention is a potential tripwire … from major processes to invalidate whole slates of delegates to minor inconveniences, like seating arrangements for delegates inside the arena, which could complicate negotiations if the convention becomes a free-for-all.”
Trump seeks to beef up staff. W. Post:“Donald Trump’s campaign will soon announce the hiring of several ‘seasoned operatives’ and ‘well-known, established names’ to help the Republican front-runner quickly grow his operation and prepare for a likely contested convention, his campaign manager said Wednesday.”
Rubio allies hesitate to back Cruz. W. Post:“While Cruz has won the support of five former candidates, Rubio has held out. So have many of the donors and elected officials who backed him … in a chamber where Cruz has irked his colleagues, the firebrand Texan is proving to be a hard sell.”

OBAMA STUMPS FOR GARLAND

Obama to make the case for his SCOTUS nom in Chicago today. NYT:“…he will return to the law school for the first time as president, using the backdrop of his academic life to underscore his demand that Republicans follow the letter of the law by agreeing to hold a hearing and a vote on his nominee…”
WH plans for lame-duck fight to confirm Garland. Politico:“Administration officials and Obama supporters hope they can capitalize on the president’s climbing poll numbers and their success among Democrats and independents in portraying the Republican blockade of Garland as an insult to the president … Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett and her staff have stepped up White House meetings with liberal activist groups to keep them engaged…”
No “dirt” finds Mother Jones:“Conservative groups have hired teams of opposition researchers to rifle through Garland’s past. But the dirt-diggers—and most media outlets, too—are coming up dry.”

Monday, March 21, 2016

RSN: Obama's Nomination of Merrick Garland Is a Lot More Ruthless Than It Looks




It's Live on the HomePage Now: 
Reader Supported News

FOCUS: Obama's Nomination of Merrick Garland Is a Lot More Ruthless Than It Looks 
President Obama's Supreme Court nominee spoke at the White House on Wednesday. (photo: AP) 
Elias Isquith, Salon 
Isquith writes: "The first and most important thing to say about President Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court is that it might not work. Not in the sense that Garland won't receive the Republican-controlled Senate's approval - that goes without saying, at least until November - but in the sense that Obama's 'Godfather' move might not be the political checkmate that the White House hopes it will be." 
READ MORE

The president's nomination of an alleged moderate has some liberals scratching their heads. They shouldn't

he first and most important thing to say about President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court is that it might not work.
Not in the sense that Garland won’t receive the Republican-controlled Senate’s approval — that goes without saying, at least until November — but in the sense that Obama’s “Godfather” move might not be the political checkmate that the White House hopes it will be.
It’s possible that less-engaged #NeverTrump Republicans, right-leaning independents, and establishment media centrist pundits will see the GOP’s refusal to even go through the motions with Garland as yet more proof that the party is unserious. And it’s possible that they’ll be so disgusted with Republican obstructionism that they’ll either vote for Hillary Clinton or skip 2016 altogether. That could happen, for sure.
But it’s just as likely that the political ramifications of Garland’s snubbing will be minimal, and that the president’s efforts to cast himself as The Only Adult in the Room will, once again, fail for succeeding. He and his proxy, Hillary Clinton, will be seen as stolid and reasonable — and as a result they’ll gain roughly zero votes that they didn’t have already. This could be a lesser repeat of the Grand Bargain fiasco of 2011, it’s true.
Either way, though, it would be a mistake to interpret the president’s nominating Garland — rather than a more unapologetically liberal or demographically atypical candidate — as a sign that Obama still can’t recognize the GOP’s bad faith. He recognizes it plenty. It’s the main reason, in fact, that Obama is trying to camouflage his offer as an open hand when it’s really more of an iron fist.
“Iron fist” is a bit much, I admit. Even at his most ruthless, that’s not really Obama’s style. As a former National Security Council official once said, the president is a “gambler”; and like any good gambler, he prefers to make bets that are as close as possible to a win-win. Garland fits that mold, because even if Republicans do accept Obama’s offer, Garland still propels the median vote of the Supreme Court well to the left of where it was just a few months ago.
But if Senate Republicans still refuse to even hold hearings for Garland, much less give him an up-or-down vote, then the steeliness that undergirds Obama’s plan will start to become more obvious. According to the New York Times, for example, the White House has reassembled much of the team that helped Obama win in 2008 and 2012. And they’re planning one last national campaign to punish GOP intransigence.
The Times piece is vague with regard to how hard-hitting this mini-campaign will be, but there’s no doubt that a significant portion of its funding, at the very least, will be devoted to attacking Republicans. IfObama’s speech announcing Garland’s nomination is anything to go by, it doesn’t seem like all of those attacks will be from the left, either. And this is where Garland’s reputation for “moderation” comes in handy.
[Garland’s] sterling record as a prosecutor led him to the Justice Department, where he oversaw some of the most significant prosecutions in the 1990s, including overseeing every aspect of the federal response to the Oklahoma City bombing. In the aftermath of that act of terror, when 168 people, many of them small children, were murdered, Merrick had one evening to say goodbye to his own young daughters before he boarded a plane to Oklahoma City, and he would remain there for weeks. He worked side by side with first responders, rescue workers, local and federal law enforcement. He led the investigation and supervised the prosecution that brought Timothy McVeigh to justice.
But perhaps most important is the way he did it. Throughout the process, Merrick took pains to do everything by the book. When people offered to turn over evidence voluntarily, he refused, taking the harder route of obtaining the proper subpoenas instead, because Merrick would take no chances that someone who murdered innocent Americans might go free on a technicality.
Such “law and order” rhetoric makes lefties nervous (MSNBC’s Chris Hayes described it as “reactionary garbage”); but it makes conservatives — the smart ones, at least — downright scared. Why? Not just because they think it’ll make stopping Garland harder, but because they know a wedge issue when they see one. And they know that Obama will answer their obstruction by driving that wedge as deep into the GOP coalition as he can.
In this scenario, it’s hard to see how Obama loses. If ratcheting up the pressure causes the GOP to cry uncle, then Garland ends up on the Supreme Court, giving liberals the majority for the first time in a generation. And if that pressure isn’t enough to get Garland a vote, it’s still going to cause the GOP even more internal strife than it’s experiencing already — which makes a Clinton victory more likely, too.
And if Clinton wins, then Obama has a few options. He can try to get Garland confirmed in a “lame-duck” session; or he can punish Republicans even further, as many liberals will no doubt advocate, by withdrawing Garland and letting Clinton pick an even more liberal nominee herself. Either way, the Supreme Court just got a lot more liberal; and the Republican Party just got a lot more demoralized and divided.
As noted in the beginning of the piece, it’s eminently possible that this doesn’t work. Republicans may prove just smart enough to take what Obama’s giving. But even if that happens, it wouldn’t change the subtly ruthless nature of the president’s gambit. You may disagree with the strategy — you may prefer firing up liberals to splitting Republicans — but there should be no question that Obama knows what he’s doing.



Saturday, March 19, 2016

RSN: Bernie Sanders Would Ask Obama to Withdraw Merrick Garland's Nomination if Elected




It's Live on the HomePage Now: 
Reader Supported News

FOCUS: Bernie Sanders Would Ask Obama to Withdraw Merrick Garland's Nomination if Elected 
Bernie Sanders. (photo: Karen Bleier/Getty Images) 
Cristian Farias, The Huffington Post 
Farias writes: "'The idea that the president should not be able to make a nomination is totally absurd. Republican obstructionism just tells us what's been going on for the last seven years,' Sanders said. 'I will do everything I can to see that there is hearings, that a vote takes place and that Garland becomes seated on the Supreme Court.'" 
READ MORE


In his view, the judge is not progressive enough.

emocratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders said he supports President Barack Obama’s choice to replace Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court, but that he’d do things differently if elected president.
Asked by MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on Thursday whether he’d ask the president to withdraw Judge Merrick Garland’s nomination during the lame-duck session so that he could make his own pick, Sanders was unequivocal: “Yes, I would.
The Vermont senator said Garland is “probably not the most progressive pick” the president could’ve made — a view shared by a number of advocates disappointed by the nomination. That said, Sanders is still “100 percent prepared” to throw his support behind the current choice.
Republican leaders in the Senate have repeatedly said they wouldn’t consider any Obama nominee, arguing that the next president should name the next justice instead.
“The idea that the president should not be able to make a nomination is totally absurd. Republican obstructionism just tells us what’s been going on for the last seven years,” Sanders said. “I will do everything I can to see that there is hearings, that a vote takes place and that Garland becomes seated on the Supreme Court.”
Sanders said the judge is “clearly very knowledgeable and can serve ably” on the high court. “But between you and me,” he told Maddow, “I think there are some more progressive judges out there.”
As he has done a number of times in this presidential cycle, Sanders said that his litmus test for an ideal Supreme Court justice is whether the person is committed to overturning the 2010 decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which made it possible for corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts in elections.
“I am very worried about the future of American democracy and about the ability of billionaires to buy elections,” he said.
Want to learn more about Merrick Garland? Listen to our in-depth discussion on this week’s “So, That Happened” podcast.  The conversation begins around the 33 minute mark.