Two minutes and forty-five seconds into the video linked above, Cenk Uygur explains why the conservatives on the Supreme Court love bribery: because "they [the conservatives] got there through bribery."
Uygur makes an excellent case throughout the video that the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the conviction of Bob McDonnell demonstrates that our government is openly for sale because the highest court in the land is unwilling to consider anything bribery.
But that conclusion somehow becomes ancillary to Uygur's primary contention, which is that this lamentable state of affairs is the fault of deeply corrupt Republican justices appointed by deeply corrupt Republican administrations.
By the end of the video, Uygur is sputtering with rage against conservative Republican corruption. (Watch his apoplectic fit for yourself if you like.)
At no point, however, does Uygur mention that the Supreme Court's decision concerning McDonnell was unanimous.
He doesn't even bother to wonder why the justices appointed by Democratic administrations are every bit as eager to make bribery legal as their Republican colleagues.
So the question TYT viewers need to confront is simple: Is Uygur blind, or is he trying to impose blindness on his viewers?
Is his point in discussing the corruption of the Democratic Party to expose it--or to pretend that it is somehow less treacherous and less pervasive than the corruption of the Republican Party?
Each time he explains his convoluted reasoning behind supporting Clinton out of a fear of Trump, I think he answers that question.