911Infidel
This doesn't surprise me one bit coming from from either Gramnesty or McLame they are both one in the same. They flip and flop around more than a paint can shaker at a Home Depot.
Paul asked whether "the President has the power to use lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial."
Holder responded first that the U.S. has not conducted drone strikes in the U.S. and has no intention of doing so and, further, the President rejects the use of military force where law enforcement authorities in the country provide the best means of incapacitating a terrorist threat. He next noted that Paul's question thus is "entirely hypothetical [and] unlikely to occur" and responded: "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 [U.S] for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the [U.S.]"
Duh! The Civil War is a case in point.
Yet Paul grandstands, during which he concedes Holder's point and suggests that is not the question he had in mind: "Nobody questions if planes are flying towards the Twin Towers whether they can be repulsed by the military. Nobody questions whether a terrorist with a rocket launcher or a grenade launcher is attacking us, whether they can be repelled."
Holder then responded: "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."
Again, duh! And, so it seems, Paul and Holder agree--on both his general and specific questions.
Yet Paul grandstands--to what end, other than grandstanding for his own political sake, is not clear. In that, given the tenor of this post and some of the comments, he appears to have been quite successful. Bully show!
Paul, Cruz and others of the same mind should start beating up on McCain and Graham publicly. Start calling them out and put the squeeze on them instead of them taking that road all the time.
Good god. Gramnesty is insufferable. He was having dinner with Obama? Oh, surprise surprise.
Goober Lindsey Graham playing the useful idiot yet once again, criticizes Rand Paul’s filibuster.
How insulting can you be? Lindsey Grahm is a U.S. Senator!
Goober Pyle is much smarter and more patriotic Than either Lindsey Grahm or John McCain.
Don't insult the Goob!
Pat Toomey, yes I said Toomey who has sold his soul to the RINO world to get a seat on the Finance Committee and the rest of the RINO establishment were out for Dinner with Barry as Rand Paul did his thing. Man these RINOS are upset they are not getting the attention like Paul, Cruz, Johnson and that is killing them. Finally a CONSERVATIVE takes on Barry and the country cannot get enough of it ?? Go Rand
Please do not give this arrogant, unimportant piece horse pucky one dime of campaign finance money. He needs to be voted out next term.
A lot of that going around in DC.I am beginning to think it is contagious in the Beltway.Hopefully our Tea Party conservatives have an immunity.
Our POTUS, SCOTUS, and the Legislature are all doing things that the founding fathers would have considered "ridiculous" in their time and things that they never would have imagined would take place. Just give them enough time and the ridiculous becomes commonplace.
Question was posed to the AG by the Senator as a "What if", HYPOTHETICAL. As an American Citizen, I WANT to know his response and how the President of the United States, or any president of the US in the future, would handle this in the event it were to arise in the future.
HYPOTHETICAL (Dictionary.com) I especially like the last definition. That is how the politicians want to handle everything.
1.
assumed by hypothesis; supposed: a hypothetical case.
2.
of, pertaining to, involving, or characterized by hypothesis: hypothetical reasoning.
3.
given to making hypotheses.
4.
Logic.
a.
(of a proposition) highly conjectural; not well supported by available evidence.
b.
(of a proposition or syllogism) conditional.
noun
5.
a hypothetical situation, instance, etc.: The Secretary of Defense refused to discuss hypotheticals with the reporters.
Here's a great Rant from Wayne Root on the topic of 'Rand Paul's Shot Heard Around the World'. http://www.rootforamerica.com/webroot/blog/
Mr. Holder just sent a letter to Senator Paul this morning clarifying that the president does not have the authority to use a drone to kill a noncombatant American citizen on U.S. soil.
I feel much safer now.
He and his establishment RINO's are running for their lives.Rand Paul put them to shame and,and bruised their elitist egos.Any animal will strike when cornered.
How dare you SLAM Rand Paul as you have dined with the ENEMY! May your Constituents REMOVE your rino @S$ your next election.
Isn't it ironic that progressive Senators Wyden (D-Ore.) and Merkley (D-OR) praised Paul for pushing Brennan to clarify whether the CIA could ever target Americans on U.S. soil?
Thus I don't believe it was a TRUE Goober moment. Also supporting Sen. Paul's filibuster were Republican Senators John Barasso (Wyo.), Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), John Cornyn (Tex.), Mitch McConnell (Ky.), Jerry Moran (Kan.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), John Thune (S.D.), and Patrick J. Toomey (Pa.).
Would Graham or McCain have the guts to take on Barasso, Rubio, Thune, Toomey or the GOP Minority Leader, Senator Mitch McConnell? - of course not. These un-useful idiots only have the cojones to go after their brethren like Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. BTW, they represent the FUTURE of the GOP while the Graham's and McCain's end up hosting shows on MSNBC.
Lindsey, why not go ahead and put a (D) behind your title and name because you sure come across as a Dimocrat....
You know what Rand Paul achieved yesterday? He actually STOOD for conservative values and he didn't self-destruct, like the mainstream media probably wanted him to. If anything, Paul is now more popular than ever, and rightfully so. He showed that conservatives and libertarians need to physically stand up for something if they plan on achieving anything, or at the very least go over the heads of the mainstream media and be able to talk directly to the people of the United States. He is giving a voice to those of us in the wilderness and he is showing that playing by the old "country club" rules like McCain and Graham do only gives you political death on election day. STAND FOR SOMETHING!!! THAT is how you win people over and that is why Rand Paul is now the leader of the conservative movement in Congress. Deal with it, RINOs.
graham is such a jerk. South Carolina will do the right thing and vote this moron out of the senate in 2014.
Most times when I see Graham approaching a microphone I just sigh. Everyone is awhile he says something useful, but most times he seems like is playing on the other team.
oops. no pun intended.
He is up for reelection next year. It will be interesting thing to watch his ass kicked in the primaries. Come on South Carolina.
Remember this sickening event by the Rhinos. Remember when the mail comes and the phone rings from the Party and the other bogus Republican and Conservative groups wanting $$$$. And tell them all to go to hell.
We need Tea Party Takeover of the second national party. We can no longer live on the right margin of history. We need to takeover the Republican Party, rename it and run the nation according to principles not re-election pragmatism.
Tea Party Takeover. Ben Carson, Sarah Palin, Mark Levin action. Not Rhino or Right Wing or Libertarian stay-at-home, or Conservative sit-on-our-vote allow the tyrant to be re-elected nihilism.
Fight them everywhere, all the time, 24/7. It's all Tyranny and none of it is Liberty.
Why does Graham put any trust in this White House. Didn't Benghazi teach him anything???
Just what IS it that Barry exudes that holds such sway with everyone who encounters him?! Is he THAT evil? Because the way people who oppose him then back-peddle once they face him is so bizarre I'm beginning to believe he really may be the anti-Christ himself.
He exudes evil, to me. Look at his eyes, if you can. Pure reptile. Something vile and ancient in there. Then look at old photos of Hitler and Stalin. Same thing.
I never really believed in evil as a tangible force before this monster came along. Now I do. And I think it is fear.
They are all in the same club, the politcal class.
Last night was a cast party. This morning, when the curtain rises for Kabuki theater, they don their costumes for the cameras.
It's called power ~ Graham believes himself to be possessing power and is an elitist. It only makes sense that he would cling to anything that enables the possession of that power.
Remember Graham also suggested we curtail freedom of speech in the USA since it made the Afghanis angry when there were issues around the Koran. Useful idiot indeed.
If not for Greta having his face on FOX NEWS a couple times a month, no one would care.
Lindsay comes across as a little pip squeak fussing about losing the election to be head junior hi cheerleader.
Graham is right about one thing. The American people need to understand the threat we face. That threat, unbeknownst to Graham, is from Obama. I guess he doesn't have to worry about being hit with a drone attack as long as he keeps dining with Obama.
How about an attack on a .... Forget it. The White House response was a dinner with twelve senators, including yours holy.
In order for this to work, you have to have an unless. Without an unless, there is no need, and therefore, the question is what is the unless? I own a gun I never intend to use is a pointless statement. What I need to say is " I have a hand gun I never intend to use 'unless' someone tries to hurt my wife or family." Thus you know why I want the right and I explain why I own a hand gun. The government can only provide a 'just because', and without an explanation of what unless is then the answer should be no, you do not get to have the right to kill us by remote control.
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.