[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Ron Paul See other Ron Paul Articles Title: Rand Paul filibuster against CIA nominee gains strength in Senate Sen. Rand Paul's old-fashioned filibuster Wednesday against CIA nominee John Brennan has gained strength, with several Republicans and one Democrat joining him on the floor. Paul began the filibuster at 11:45 a.m. to prevent Senate Democrats from ending debate on Brennan and moving to a final vote. The Kentucky Republican spoke on the floor for more than three hours by himself before he was joined by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — who, like Paul, is a favorite of the Tea Party Movement. Paul's effort is aimed at drawing attention to the administration's drone program, which Brennan played a key role in administering as White House counterterrorism chief. “I’m here to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination to be director of CIA,” Paul said on the Senate floor Wednesday as he began a long afternoon of speaking. “I will speak for as long as it takes. “I will speak today until the president says 'no,' he will not kill you at a café.” Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) eventually helped Paul continue the filibuster, as did Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.), the only Democrat to join the effort so far. Just before 5 p.m., Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) threw in the towel, announcing the Senate was done for Wednesday and would seek to end debate on Brennan's nomination on Thursday. “We’ll just finish this matter tomorrow,” Reid said. “We’re through for the night.” When Reid (D-Nev.) asked Paul if he’d agree to having a vote on Brennan’s nomination Wednesday night, Paul said he would not stop his filibuster until the president or Attorney General Eric Holder “put that in words” that they “will not kill non enemy combatants” inside the United States. Paul had said earlier that he would continue the filibuster unless the president or Attorney General Eric Holder provided more answers on whether American citizens can be targeted by armed drones inside the United States. “No American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being found guilty of a crime,” Paul said. “That an American could be killed on American soil is an abomination.” More from The Hill: • Obama faces deadline to find gatekeeper for regulations • House Dem: White House overstated sequester harm • Holder defends prosecution of Web activist Swartz • Snowstorm buries climate change hearing • Jimmy Carter extends condolences over death of Chávez • House passes 2013 spending bill as Dems rail against sequester • Hoyer to federal workers: Don't expect 2013 pay increases • Grassley: Holder owes lawmakers who backed contempt apology Reid had hoped to have a vote on Brennan’s nomination on Wednesday so that lawmakers could leave town early. The Senate Intelligence panel in a 12-3 vote on Tuesday approved Brennan. Paul began the filibuster at 11:45 a.m. and was a one-man show for three hours before he was first joined by Lee. “Has America the beautiful become ‘Alice in Wonderland?’ ” Paul said. “When I asked the president can you kill an American on American soil, it should have been an easy answer — an unequivocal no. “But his answer was, ‘I haven’t killed anyone yet and I have no intention of killing Americans, but I might.’ ” At one point he noted that his throat was getting dry as he passed the one-hour mark of the talking filibuster, which has become rare in the upper chamber. Senators are allowed to filibuster without commanding the floor, so few choose to hold up nominations or legislation by speaking. "This is the first time I’ve come to the floor to use a true talking filibuster," Paul said. "It almost never happens. ... I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone come and speak in a filibuster before." In joining Paul, Lee argued people should be concerned about the drone program as an intrusion on life, liberty and prosperity. “We’re talking here about the sanctity of human life and we have to take steps to protect that," he said. Wyden said that despite the fact that he'll support Brennan's nomination, he appreciated Paul using the opportunity to bring up U.S. policies that target U.S. citizens. "It’s in our view that the executive branch should not be allowed to conduct such a far-reaching program without any scrutiny because that’s not what our American democracy is about," Wyden said. "Americans need to know what the rules for targeted killing are. ... Every American has the right to know when their government believes they have the right to kill them." RELATED ARTICLES Reid seeking deal for vote on CIA nominee WATCH LIVE: Rand Paul filibuster Paul said the possibility that a citizen could be targeted without being charged in the courts went against the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, which gives citizens the right to a trial by a jury of their peers. “The Fifth Amendment should also protect you from a president who might kill you with a drone,” Paul said. “No American should be killed in their house without a warrant. ... But [Obama] says trust him, he hasn’t done it yet. “Mr. President, that’s not good enough. ... I will not sit quietly in my office and let him shred the Constitution.” Recently released Justice Department documents claim the CIA and Department of Defense have the legal right to take out terror suspects across the globe via armed drone strikes, even if those suspects happen to be U.S. citizens. The legal justifications allowing armed drones to take out U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism overseas would open the door to such strikes against Americans inside the U.S., according to Paul. Holder this week declined to rule out armed-drone strikes on American soil, though he said it's a far-fetched scenario. In a letter sent to Paul before Brennan's confirmation vote, Holder said the White House "has no intention" of launching drone strikes on American soil, saying the administration "rejects the use of military force" inside the U.S. when "well-established law enforcement authorities" exist. "The question you have posed is therefore entirely hypothetical, unlikely to occur, and one we hope no president will ever have to confront," Holder wrote. Lee said that Holder’s memo expressed a “standard-less standard.” “No one can reasonably look into this and see who the government may kill with a drone and who the government won’t kill with a drone,” Lee said. — Carlo Muñoz contributed. Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/286533-paul-launches- talking-filibuster-against-brennans-nomination#ixzz2Mnmpy5DI Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
#1. To: Ada (#0)
(Edited)
“Mr. President, that’s not good enough. ... I will not sit quietly in my office and let him shred the Constitution.” This stage play should be seen as comedy. Why, if I might query, is a Senator quibbling, debating, fili-blustering and whining about an issue so basic to ones very existence ? The notion of having the "Executioner in Chief" promise not to kill the so called citizenery upon his singular determination would detract from his supreme power. The head nigger in charge can do whatsoever he chooses, when he chooses. Shut up, Rand. Please, go sit quietly in your office or the shitter or somewhere. Let the head nigger provoke a situation so that it can be properly dealt with by the people. Washington D.C. is a cancer and those choosing to operate there are cancer cells. It's time for some radiation treatment. And, once the radiation appears to be positively affecting D.C. - Give Jew York a dose ! Asshats like Rand Paul make it appear that we need to beg this communist, Kenyan punk for our lives. Not only that, but the pussified actions of those selected to represent Americans and their values gives me a new respect for the founders. When they reached the "enough is enough" point they said "fuck it, let's get it over with", and did what they knew had to be done.
#2. To: noone222 (#1)
"hear, hear!" It's hard to respect the likes of randy yarmulke paul.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||