Getty Images
It took Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) 12 hours and 52 minutes to ask a question that was deeply important to him. It took the Obama administration a few sentences to answer it.
Attorney General Eric Holder, no doubt made aware of yesterday's spectacle on the Senate floor, wrote to the Kentucky Republican earlier today.
Dear Senator Paul:
It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" The answer to that question is no.
Sincerely,
Eric H. Holder, Jr.
Incidentally, this isn't an excerpt from Holder's letter; it's the entirety of Holder's letter.
In addition to Holder sending the one-paragraph correspondence to Paul earlier, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney read it aloud to reporters at his daily briefing.
The Republican senator, after receiving the letter, told CNN that he's now satisfied enough to allow the chamber to vote on John Brennan's CIA nomination. "I'm quite happy with the answer and I'm disappointed it took a month and a half and a root canal to get it," Paul said.
In related news, Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) were critical of Paul's filibuster, with the latter saying Paul helped convince him to vote for Brennan's confirmation.
Republican support for the "Stand with Rand" filibuster was broad, superficial, and apparently lacking in unanimity.
Leave a Comment:
Don't worry these gop/tp's will distort the facts and LIE even further about this subject and anything else that they can come-up with!And the Obstruction continues!I still find it mighty amazing that are still avoiding the Jobs issues after 4+Years,Not surprised though!What can you say when these gop/tp Anti-Americans are just soo plain Lazy!
Yeah,Not surprised seeings that Jobs have been going down the tubes for Americans since 2000!
I wonder did Randy boy actually ask that question "a month earlier" or was his standing filabuster just another "attention grabber" so the folk back home think that he's actually doing something to stop the socialist-marxist-muslim loving-kenyan in the White House?
I understand he did ask it, and Holder responded with a statement alluding to the fact it was hypothetical and not very probable. So, this response was much better even though it was a long time coming.
Rand Paul is correct.....
what is combat? protesting?
this is successive approximation to military rule by threat in the u.s. - akin to secret police and all the 3rd world terror practices of momar, bashar, mubarek, polpot, stalin, and friends.
it is the difference between military uniforms and police uniforms. israel is running this military game against palestinians to kill and steal property. this practicve is beginning in hte u.s. with benton harbor, mich.
step by step... check it out
http://seattlecommunitymedia.org/series/moral-politics/episode/california-resolution-35-makes-opposition-israel-anti-jewish-hatred
Superficial? Dude, "superficial" is their entire political philosophy. Don't be talking smack about being superficial when that's all they have.
LOL
It was a good day for Randy... any day you can gin up government hate for literally nothing is a good day...
The question was not "deeply important" to Rand Paul. He was just "Randstanding." Eric Holder answered the question already, but certain people chose to ignore it. Where was all this outrage when Bush 43 was using drones? Rand Paul is only worried that Barack Obama would use drone strikes against white separatist groups in America. Today, Rand Paul told CNN he supports drone strikes against people who pose an "imminent threat." He is not the peace-loving, hippie, the emoprogs are making him out to be. Rand Paul is so proud of himself for getting his 15 minutes of fame. Eff Rand Paul!
Taylor
What Rand did was way more than the 15 minutes Andy Warhol thought we all would get. How many 15 minutes can you get out of 12 hours? A lot!
I don't know about Paul's motives for his filibuster, but I am glad he went old school!
I'd hope Mitchy would be emboldened to take to the floor next time he wants to obstruct the Chamber's business instead of just sending Reid a note in private, regarding the 60 vote threshold! -Kevo
Instead of praising Paul for wasting everybody's time, Harry Reid should have called him out for creating this ridiculous strawman argument in the first place. Meanwhile, I can't believe Paul was actually satisfied by Holder's letter. It could be interpreted that we could assasinate Americans on US soil if they are engaged in combat (eg. punching a policeman). Or it could be interpreted that we can't assasinate Al awlaki in Yemen, because he wasn't carrying a grenade launcher. I'd like to believe Paul was chastened by the reaction to his speech, but I suspect he's a bit too dim for that.
So Mccain is happy to "filibuster" Hagel for no clear reason but a vague conspiracy theory, but won't support Rand Paul's real filibuster over a matter of critical importance. Good to know where his priorities lie.
Rand Paul's filibuster was a grandstanding complete waste of time but I do respect the fact that he stood up there and talked for 12 hours. Even if he didn't say anything of merit.
He could have hid in the corner and whispered his obstruction like his cowardly brethren. And I believe the only reason McCain and Graham were critical of his effort is because it highlighted their usual secret ways.
I'd like to see the media report more on the GOP's filibustering. It could be a daily segment on the nightly network news.
For once Obama administration gives a simple answer to a simple question, now...what about what happen in Libya?
Classified, in-depth briefings on Libya were held for Congressional members. The Republicans who keep insisting they "still don't know what happened" also admit they skipped the briefings.
There are 5 separate reports that have been released on Libya that you can go over along with a congressional hearing. If you have questions about Libya it's either because you're too lazy to do the research or too stupid to find the information that is out there.
The administration has never taken the position that drones can be used on US citizens while on US soil, but there has been ambiguity as to the legal limbo created by executing Americans thought to be associated with terrorist cells without a trial on foreign soil. That ambiguity still exists and Rand Paul has done nothing to advance that reality forward nor has this grandstanding granted US citizens any more information on the drone program than what we already knew. This entire thing has been grand-standing at it's finest.
Oh one more point that should be made: the entire belief that the US was justifying drone strikes on non-terrorist related Americans while on US soil has been a conspiracy that derives from people misreading and misunderstanding international agreements we have in place on the War on Terror and subsequently the US policy as it pertains to. Stupidity dominates public outrage- yet again.
Meanwhile how many of the Republicans who pretend to be soooo concerned about this program have complained about companies like Blackwater carrying out the majority of executions? Hmm? Yes, because when a business does it, it's suddenly OK *eyeroll*.
Maybe they didn't frame the question as a 13 hour fillibuster. It would be the same answer though.
This entire charade is aimed at the "low information voter". Or the naive.
"Teh Gummint" has ALWAYS had the "power" to kill American citizens on American soil, without "due process." (might makes right- cf Cheney, Dick)
Anyone recall the army/FBI/Justice department assault on the Branch Davidian cult at Waco? Children were burned to death without a judicial revue.
Randy Weaver's wife and child were assassinated by a "drone" - a pilotless bullet fired by a sharphooter.
And wrists were slapped, while the band played on.
Hilarious! This letter is one of the few good moves I've seen of late. It almost makes me smile, then I remember the next manufactured crisis by one side that will never be competently addressed by the other..
In this case the meme both sides do it is absolutely prolific.
Kind of an Emily Litella "never mind" moment for Rand. Think SNL will give it a shot?
Why do we call this little doofus "Rand"? He's much more of a "Randy" -- he even looks like he shops in the little boys department.
Paul satisfied after Obama admin response
**whew**
Now I can sleep tonight.
Cue the new narrative that Americans have been "secretly killed" in direct violation of the constitution...thus, being a treasonous act, it will necessitate a full congressional investigation leading to a likely call for impeachment.
Looks like it'll be a long two years to the midterms
After Rand Paul's performance, "Motor Man's Friend" sales are reported to have tripled with the new "Fill-it-Buster" model responsible for 73% of those sales.
I want to know when he will fillabuster again and ask Eric Holder what he meant when he told the senate banking commitee that some U.S. Banks and HSBC which was found to have been money laundering for Mexican Drug Cartels for YEARS..
Are actually "Too Big To Jail" ?...
WTF ?.. This coming from the Attorney General of the United States ?..
This Justice Department Puppet of the Obama administration, has the audacity to say that some American Banks and foreign banks also mind you, are actually ABOVE THE LAW ?..
ERIC HOLDER !.. You are a disgrace to the deparment of justice and the American people you so cowardly serve, And if you really had some balls you would resign !..
You are a cheap excuse for an Attorney General !....
The Problem is NOT Ron Paul's antics (who I mostly disagree with)
The Problem is NOT - "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?"
The Problem is WHO will decide who is "an American not engaged in combat?" Who gets to decide that? What does "engaged in combat" mean? Even recently we have seen it means some things that are not what the average person would call "engaged in combat."
- "I do not think that word means what you think it means" - P.B.
Yay for Paul... Now the GOP is mad at him for making the fillibuster understandable (and public) because they will have to rationalize their use of the secret fillibuster for obstructionism. It really sheds light on who is against a bill, and why. This might foreward the case for fillibuster reform yet!