It’s like no one knows math.
After the untimely (or, timely, depending on from who’s perspective you look at it) death of Justice Scalia, Obama is now set to nominate his third Supreme Court justice — out of only nine justices — for life. While campaigning for reelection in Kentucky, Rand Paul talked about the huge “conflict of interest” this poses.
Citing the recent 5-4 Supreme Court ruling that halted Obama’s Clean Power Plan, Paul said that with the absence of Scalia, a sympathetic appointee would tip the scales in favor of the president’s immigration policies.
“It’s not that I’m implying he doesn’t have the power. Sure, he has the power to nominate somebody,” Paul said on Friday.
“But it sure doesn’t look very fair if he’s going to be picking the person that’s going to decide whether it’s constitutional or not.”
Can you just imagine? Everything Obama wanted to get passed and couldn’t will now fly right through the Supreme Court including immigration. Really there might as well not even be a Supreme Court anymore after Obama gets done with it. Why would they appoint anyone in government for life anyway? What an asinine idea. Speaking of life, how old is Ruth Bader Ginsburg again? 82? Is there any precedent for a single president getting four Supreme Court justices?
Then again, Hillary has already made the comment that Obama would be a great Supreme Court justice himself…
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).
Contributed by Melissa Dykes of The Daily Sheeple.
Melissa Dykes is a writer, researcher, and analyst for The Daily Sheeple and a co-creator of Truthstream Media with Aaron Dykes, a site that offers teleprompter-free, unscripted analysis of The Matrix we find ourselves living in. Melissa and Aaron also recently launched Revolution of the Method and Informed Dissent. Wake the flock up!