John Marshall: The Chief Justice Who Saved the Nation

[@McClanahan2548]

Chief Justice John Marshall's father, Thomas Marshall, and my ggggrandmother, Mary Marshall McClanahan, were brother and sister.

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

ur grandma must be 200+ years old if she's John Marshall's auntie.

[@McClanahan2548]

Voided

[@McClanahan2548]

The Greatest Debator in the World No, not grandma, but my 3rd great grandmother. She was born circa 1736; Her first born, Thomas Marshall McClanahan, who is my 2nd great grandfather was born in 1753; his oldest son, Thomas McClanahan, born to his second wife, who is my great grandfather was born in 1821; his first born. William Finis McClanahan, who is my grandfather was born in 1846; his youngest child, Louis McClanahan, who is my father was born in 1907; and I was born in 1948. Colonel Thomas Marshall, who is the father of Chief Justice John Marshall, and Mary (Marshall) McClanahan, who is my 3rd great grandmother, parents were Captain John "Of the Forest" Marshall and Elizabeth (Markham) Marshall. 4th Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court John Marshall is my first blood cousin 4 times removed.

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

cool. maybe u inherited his intelligence genes?

[@McClanahan2548]

I believe that he and I could agree and disagree on various subjects in a common rational manner.

[@SuperUnknownNetwork]

All day long he craves for more, but the righteous give without sparing.

[@Justshill]

Just learned he is my ancestor

[@emanuelpascual3833]

Cool!

[@jameszeris5418]

Great lecture

[@dr.scotus4335]

@24:31 The Constitution starts with "We the people of the United States." It's in the Preamble.

[@kingfugazi]

21:00-25:00 "there aren't any Constitutional rights! The Constitution doesn't even mention the people." "You in the military... You don't work for the American people... You work for the Constitution." [JADE Helm, NDAA, Patriot Act, H.W.'s CIA operated Crack Epidemic, etc.] [ as FOP militarized police, toward imperial anarchy, the cops swear the same oath, do you comprehend?)

[@margaretsilsby2585]

+User Error funny

[@margaretsilsby2585]

+User Error funny

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

_"This guy has some weird ideas. He says the Constitution is just a scheme for governance and not a thing that creates individual rights. He's just plain old wrong....We are all familiar with the creation of individual rights by express prohibition on government action--"congress shall make no law abridging......"_ You're wrong. Rights can't be created. Thousands of years ago there was no constitution so was it okay to just butcher families? No It was a terrible crime that caused horrific suffering. Their happiness & suffering was equally as important as your own. Because ur happiness is very important u r the sovereign & rights arise automatically from this sovereignty. Thus, those families had the right to live before any law or constitution was created. U seem to think that they only acquired a right to live, when the law banned the government from infringing with people's right to be alive. Thus the constitution doesn't bestow the right to speak freely, it just stops the government from interfering with the right to speak freely that the People have always had. The Chinese government stop their Citizens speaking freely (eg talking about how much wealth the Chinese ruling elite have) but the Chinese People still retain the right to speak freely because it is an inalienable right. It cannot be taken away for as long as their happiness is as important as our own. Thus Unger is correct to say the constitution doesn't grant the people rights - it's a blueprint for the government.

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

You're being very rude. I spent a long time writing for u a great proof that ur ideas are wrong. And instead of saying thank you, you are condescending and lie that it's irrelevant before stating that I am right and u r wrong. However, u r too rude to admit that u r wrong. Ur basically behaving like a spoilt brat & u shud be ashamed of urself. "Then came John Locke. John Locke starts with the premise that freedom is the default and that we contract together to limit one another's freedom in an effort to protect us all from intrusions on our rights." So u seem to be completely agreeing that I'm right then. But ur too mentally deficient to admit it. So u seem to accept Lockes right. 1) first of all there are free people. 2) They have rights. 3) The rights are violated. 4) The people contract together in an effort to protect themselves from those violations. This is ur position. Therefore u accept that I am correct. The constitution does not create rights. You also accept that u were wrong previously in saying that "Constitution is thing that creates individual rights." Sadly u r too mentally deficient to admit it. This is because u embrace assholeship due to ur heartfelt hatred of ur constitution (which says assholery is BS).

[@1776Historyfan]

He keeps thinking Marshall's name is Thomas in some places of this video instead of John.

[@sandrayoung9098]

We're did name chief come from why do you say it today??

[@ExecutiveCounsel]

This guy makes some big historical and legal errors in his recollection of Marbury v. Madison. That case was decided in 1803, not 1808 like he says. 1808 was Thomas Jefferson's last year as president, so the facts underlying Marbury v. Madison couldn't have happened that late. Jefferson also never dissolved the Supreme Court. Not sure what this guy is even talking about.

[@onesmoothstone5680]

👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼

[@jameszeris5418]

Ivermectin works Dr Pierre Kory

[@tarikhoshin9084]

Abutahernoaparanangolkotcomillbangldesh

[@neilhasid3407]

Introduction too long and syrupy. Juvenile,the guy looks and moves like he's on ecstasy.