Both sides of the isle stood with the Senator throughout the day and night to help bring details out which the administration wishes to remain hidden from the citizens of this nation. We saw the president for the past few weeks campaigning against sequestration. You heard what he wanted you to hear. At no time did you ever hear these words, "I believe I have the authority as president to attack US citizens who I believe are a threat to our country."
As the majority leader, Harry Reid attempted to have vote on nomination of John Brennan to head the CIA Wednesday morning a new leader emerged on the floor as Kentucky Senator Rand Paul executes a raw moment for Conservatives as he uses one of Senator Reids own tactics and begins a filibuster to bring light to the drone attacks this administration believes are within his purview as Commander in Chief.
Senator Paul took to the floor just minutes before noon discussing in great detail why he felt the nomination of Brennan needed to be addressed in this style. The passion was evident throughout the filibuster as he detailed the concern he had for a man to head an office with the belief that the President could without the consent of Congress attack citizens of the United States with drones on American soil without judicial process required by the 5th Amendment for all citizens of this nation.
Rand Paul stood on the floor of the Senate for close to 13 hours stating time and again "the 5th Amendment is not optional" as he cited Congressional hearing transcripts where the Director of the Department of Justice, Eric Holden wouldn't answer if the drone strikes discussed where in fact legal under our Constitution. Time after time when asked the question by Ted Cruz if the drone strikes were legal under our Constitution Mr. Holder would ramble on about being unacceptable time and again.
At the beginning of the filibuster Senator Paul stated the president doesn't have the right to supersede the Constitution. One point brought up early on in the chambers concerned the candidate for President Barack Obama had stated wire taps should be illegal unless Congress is inform when attempting to monitor American Citizens both here and abroad when dealing with enemies of our nation during war activities.
Yet, now after winning the election, President Obama believes he has the right to attack American citizens with drones who do not present an imminent danger and have not had the due process clause invoked. As remembered by Senator Paul the presidents response to the question ‘Can you kill an American on American soil?’ the response was "He hasn't killed anyone yet. We’re supposed to be comforted by that."
The Senator stipulated that if you are engaged in warfare against this nation he understands those fighting are considered combatants but the issue or the problem he sees is the standards used to decide who will be attacked by the drone strikes. Rand Paul stated "he should have chosen a more responsible parent" when the president was asked about American Anwar al-Aulaqi who was killed by a drone strike.
After 12 hours and 52 minutes it was apparent that all Senator Paul was asking the president and his department heads along with his nominees to please just inform our nation and the Senate in writing, on the phone, in a tweet or email that they (the president and administration) will not kill citizens of these United States who are not combatants or are not causing imminent danger on American soil.
Then, today in the Capital the RHINO's came out. Senator McCain, Graham and a host of others felt threaten or insulted by the question that was presented to the president and his administration. However, regardless of what others think Mr. Paul got the answer from Eric Holder that the president does not have the Constitutional right to kill citizens living and breathing here in America who are not enemy combatants or engaged in war.
Comments