Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
blotsfan

Rand Paul Fillibuster

Recommended Posts

When did Holder say they could use drones against non-combatant Americans in America? Genuinely curious here. I'm not calling you a liar.

 

He didn't explicitly state it, but he sent this answer to Rand Paul after Paul asked him whether the President had the authority to use drone strikes on American citizens:

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, Sen. Rand Paul received two pieces of correspondence regarding the legality and constitutionality of the U.S. government using lethal force, including drone strikes, on Americans and in U.S. territory. Sen. Paul sent three inquires on the matter to President Obama's nominee to be Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, John Brennan (HERE, HERE and HERE). He finally received responses from both Mr. Brennan and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder on one item of inquiry.

 

Attorney General Holder stated in a letter to Sen. Paul dated March 4, 2013: "It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States."

 

Because Holder refused to rule it out, Paul was concerned that he was implicitly saying, yes, the administration could indeed do so. Since that was the answer he was given when asking about drone strikes, I think I would come to the same conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Phailadelphia

I don't know how you can come to that kind of conclusion if you read the entire letter to Sen. Paul objectively.

 

As members of this Administration have previously indicated, the US government has not carried out drone strikes in the United States and has no intention of doing so. As a policy matter, moreover, we reject the use of military force where well-established law enforcement authorities in this country provide the best means for incapacitating a terrorist threat We have a long history of using the criminal justice system to incapacitate individuals located in our country who pose a threat to the United States and its interested abroad. Hundreds of individuals have been arrested and convicted of terrorism-related offense in our federal courts.

 

The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no President will ever have to confront. It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United states for the President to authorize to use lethal force with in the territory of the United States. For example, the President could conceivably have no choice but to authorize the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland in the circumstances of a catastrophic attack like the ones suffered on December 7, 1941, and September 11, 2001.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't answer the question. And left the door open for that possibility. Being wishy-washy, vague, and unhelpful.

 

He didn't make the same mistake twice.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/attorney-general-eric-holder-drone-letter-to-sen-rand-paul-88572.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how you can come to that kind of conclusion if you read the entire letter to Sen. Paul objectively.

 

Because most dont have strong liberal biases and a love for this president. Your bias is just as clear as theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Phailadelphia

He didn't answer the question. And left the door open for that possibility. Being wishy-washy, vague, and unhelpful.

 

He didn't make the same mistake twice.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/attorney-general-eric-holder-drone-letter-to-sen-rand-paul-88572.html

 

Or you could realize how dangerous it is for an administration to answer a hypothetical scenario and question with a definitive statement. Circumstances matter, and I think Holder tried to make that point in his letter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Phailadelphia

Because most dont have strong liberal biases and a love for this president. Your bias is just as clear as theirs.

 

It's not about bias. It's giving Holder and Obama the benefit of the doubt which, until Americans are killed on US soil, they deserve.

Edited by Phailadelphia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rand Paul and his father are both idiots.

 

I don't get why people care so much about the idea of a drone strike. They're obviously not going to do it to the average citizen walking down the street for no reason. They would only use it against people who present a clear danger to American people.

 

I'm not a fan of giving our government that power under the assumption that they're going to use it exclusively against our enemies, which isn't due process to begin with.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now you're just trolling. And if you're not, just say you are. It'll make you sound less dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due process is overrated

 

276251_Papel-de-Parede-Meme-Are-You-Kidding-Me_1152x864.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not trolling, anyone doing anything bad enough to cause America to kill someone with a drone is only going to be convicted of a crime that would put them in jail for life/get the death penalty anyway. Why waste all the time in court?

  • Downvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not trolling, anyone doing anything bad enough to cause America to kill someone with a drone is only going to be convicted of a crime that would put them in jail for life/get the death penalty anyway. Why waste all the time in court?

The President is not judge, jury, and executioner. If he is, then this is no longer a free country. I am sorry, but free countries don't give their leader the power to hand out the death penalty to whomever he wants. That is a power that can be substantially abused and puts the country at risk of losing all of the freedoms that we have gained over the past two and one half centuries.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not trolling, anyone doing anything bad enough to cause America to kill someone with a drone is only going to be convicted of a crime that would put them in jail for life/get the death penalty anyway. Why waste all the time in court?

 

Wow.

 

You are really naive, eh? Why on earth would you hand that power to the government? Do you not understand that it 100% against the constitution? Every citizen has the right to due process.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NY Diehard is a typical example of exactly what is wrong with the way of thinking these days. Rand Paul just basically stood up for our rights, and now you say those rights don't matter. People like you always bitch about the government needing to change, to do something for the people for once in their pathetic existence... and when they do, you don't want to hear anything about it. That's just great.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NY Diehard is a typical example of exactly what is wrong with the way of thinking these days. Rand Paul just basically stood up for our rights, and now you say those rights don't matter. People like you always bitch about the government needing to change, to do something for the people for once in their pathetic existence... and when they do, you don't want to hear anything about it. That's just great.

 

At the same time, some of us don't think it was a valid question because we're not worried about our government OK'ing drone strikes that could potentially endanger civilians on our own soil. Rand Paul did this more for a 2016 nomination than anything, so I don't buy the whole "caring about our safety" or "standing up for our rights" bit.

  • Downvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow.

 

You are really naive, eh? Why on earth would you hand that power to the government? Do you not understand that it 100% against the constitution? Every citizen has the right to due process.

 

I would give it to the government because I don't care. I'm not negatively affected in any way by allowing America to use drone strikes to kill people. I will never do anything that would make them think for a second about killing me with one.

 

NY Diehard is a typical example of exactly what is wrong with the way of thinking these days. Rand Paul just basically stood up for our rights, and now you say those rights don't matter. People like you always bitch about the government needing to change, to do something for the people for once in their pathetic existence... and when they do, you don't want to hear anything about it. That's just great.

 

Doing anything that would warrant the government to use a drone strike to kill you should waive your right to due process.

 

When have you seen my bitch about the government needing to change?

 

And I'm sure the people who are always bitching about the government to change aren't looking for stupid things like drone strikes to change, they want something that to change that would actually affect/improve their everyday life.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doing anything that would warrant the government to use a drone strike to kill you should waive your right to due process.

I don't want to live on this planet anymore. Take me somewhere where people still value basic human freedoms and actually question things once in a while.

 

EDIT: I meant to neg you. The things you are saying are absurd and make me lose faith in this country.

Edited by WindyCitySports

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to live on this planet anymore. Take me somewhere where people still value basic human freedoms and actually question things once in a while.

 

EDIT: I meant to neg you. The things you are saying are absurd and make me lose faith in this country.

 

I got your back, Jack. I may not agree with you, but this guy is off his rocker.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Doing anything that would warrant the government to use a drone strike to kill you should waive your right to due process.

Absolutely disagree with this. This is an absurd statement.

 

 

 

And I'm sure the people who are always bitching about the government to change aren't looking for stupid things like drone strikes to change, they want something that to change that would actually affect/improve their everyday life.

 

Right, because the government issuing drone strikes on our own soil wouldn't be a big deal at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about bias. It's giving Holder and Obama the benefit of the doubt which, until Americans are killed on US soil, they deserve.

 

If it were Bush would you give him the benefit of the doubt ? Doubtful, I will not speak for you, but I seriously doubt it. Just the thought that they think under any circumstance is acceptable is not warranting any faith from anyone.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would give it to the government because I don't care. I'm not negatively affected in any way by allowing America to use drone strikes to kill people. I will never do anything that would make them think for a second about killing me with one.

 

I would be in awe of the irony if you were standing next to someone who they just decided to skip due process in favor of a drone strike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would give it to the government because I don't care. I'm not negatively affected in any way by allowing America to use drone strikes to kill people. I will never do anything that would make them think for a second about killing me with one.

 

Doing anything that would warrant the government to use a drone strike to kill you should waive your right to due process.

 

And what if you're framed by someone? You don't believe in the court of law having to find someone guilty? What are you, 12? Take a single political course and look at how many people have been sentenced to death, (using due process, mind you), and were later found to be innocent. If even the courts can get it wrong, then the government with no oversight can sure as hell get it wrong. People like you are why this country is going down hill. You don't care enough about basic American rights to understand the political, nevermind the ethical, ramifications of letting the government use drone strikes on AMERICAN CITIZENS as they please, simply assuming that they can't possibly get it wrong and use it on an innocent person.

 

You, sir, are a fool.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Enough about my Tits and Ass campaign... if I became president I would seriously limit the power of the government over personal matters sooo damn much. The government was never meant to hold the power to declare a man a terrorist, nor the right to search us without warrant (THIS IS IN THE FUCKING CONSTITUTION). I've tried to deny that America is sliding down the slippery slope to a police state, but I just can't anymore. It's time for a change.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does any politician really deserve the benefit of the doubt? I think we are beyond that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

544245_10151414355001107_1556356334_n.jpg

 

Stay thirsty, my friends.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Chatbox

    TGP has moved to Discord (sorta) - https://discord.gg/JkWAfU3Phm

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×