• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Filibuster Timeline:

Want to know the full story?

Being the thorough researcher I am, unfortunately, I can only find limited sources questioning Rand’s Stand. Instead of brushing them away, like most members of my party. I actually listened to what some far left media outlets had to say about Rand’s Filibuster. I was shocked when all of them actually praised him. The only media talking head that agrees with me is Lawrence O’Donnell. Before the filibuster I had no idea who he was. The ultimate nail in the coffin for me was when Code Pink, the anti-war, anti-gun, leftist movement said that Rand Paul “Made a valiant effort,” and plan to meet with him in his office to discuss something. Isn’t that more scary than Rand Paul’s conspiracy theory?

I digress we need to get right to the facts and really straighten out what happened so that people can stop taking this nonsense seriously.

January 25, 2013: Rand Paul addresses this question in one of his first letters to Mr. John Brennan who was being considered and now is CIA Director “How many U.S. citizens have been intentionally killed by U.S. drone strikes since 2008?” He asks quite a lot of other questions in the same manner that paultards always ask questions. I recognize the methodology do you?

February 12, 2013: Not happy with Brennan’s speed. Rand Paul decides to bombard him with even more questions pertaining to more unlikely scenarios: “Do you believe that the president has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil? What about the use of lethal force against a non-U.S. person on U.S. soil?” Yes, Rand Paul asks the question to Brennan almost a month before his filibuster!

February 14, 2013: President Obama stages Google Hangout to “answer” questions about the State of the Union Address. Lee Doren a conservative asks Obama about the Drone question and Obama answered with this: “First of all, I think, there’s never been a drone used on an American citizen on American soil. And, you know, we respect and have a whole bunch of safeguards in terms of how we conduct counterterrorism operations outside the United States. The rules outside the United States are going to be different then the rules inside the United States. In part because our capacity to, for example, to capture a terrorist inside the United States are very different then in the foothills or mountains of Afghanistan or Pakistan.
But what I think is absolutely true is that it is not sufficient for citizens to just take my word for it that we are doing the right thing. I am the head of the executive branch. And what we've done so far is to try to work with Congress on oversight issues. But part of what I am going to have to work with congress on is to make sure that whatever it is we’re providing congress, that we have mechanisms to also make sure that the public understands what’s going on, what the constraints are, what the legal parameters are. And that is something that I take very seriously. I am not someone who believes that the president has the authority to do whatever he wants, or whatever she wants, whenever they want, just under the guise of counterterrorism. There have to be legal checks and balances on it.”

February 14, 2013, 10:00 AM: The US Senate convenes to discuss the nomination of Charles Timothy Hagel, of Nebraska, to be Secretary of Defense.

February 14, 2013, 11:35 AM: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Blasts Republicans for trying to stage a filibuster due to lack of answers relating to their Benghazi conspiracy.
“My Republican colleagues had led us to believe they would not filibuster Senator Chuck Hagel’s confirmation of as Secretary of Defense. But that has changed. Now, Senate Republicans have made it clear they intend to mount a full-scale filibuster, and block the Senate from holding a final passage vote on Senator Hagel’s nomination. Make no mistake: Republicans are trying to defeat Senator Hagel’s nomination by filibustering while submitting extraneous requests that will never be satisfied.”

February 14, 2013, 4:17 PM: Senate begins voting to invoke cloture on Hagel’s nomination. It failed, 58-40 1 voting present

February 14, 2013: Rand Paul issues statement on his website in defense of his support for John Kerry and why he placed a hold on John Brennan as Director of the CIA until he answers the Drone question… Notice nothing about Hagel? He only questioned Hagel’s financial activities outside the Senate. Rand Paul says in his statement about Brennan’s nomination, not Hagel’s that, “until [Brennan] answers the question of whether or not the President can kill American citizens through the drone strike program on U.S. soil."

February 14, 2013: Brennan responds. As if to make Rand realize how silly his question is. "This Administration has not carried out drone strikes inside the United States and has no intention of doing so."

February 20, 2013: As if Rand Paul has not gotten the message yet, he sends another letter to Brennan. “I once again request you answer the following question: Do you believe that the President has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial? I believe the only acceptable answer to this is no.”

February 26, 2013, 4:31 PM: Senator Hagel is confirmed as Secretary of Defense.

March 4, 2013: Attorney General Eric Holder responds to Rand Paul. He states: “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 interests abroad. Hundreds of individuals have been arrested and convicted of terrorism-related offenses 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…” Holder goes on to state that each President if dealt with a situation where they may have to use a drone in a 9/11 situation will have to consider all of the circumstances of the situation at hand and consider the advice of his advisers before he would make that legal and ethical decision.

March 6, 2013: In a contentious Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Senator Ted Cruz asked General Holder, various hypothetical drone use scenarios. “After much gymnastics, I am glad to hear that it is the opinion of the Department of Justice that it would be unconstitutional to kill a US citizen on US soil if that individual did not post an imminent threat,” Cruz said. “That statement has not been easily forthcoming.”

March 6–7, 2013: According to Rand Paul’s Wikipedia page: Paul engaged in a talking filibuster to block voting on the nomination of John O. Brennan as the Director of the CIA, questioning Barack Obama and administration’s use of drones, and the stated legal justification for hypothetical lethal use within the United States. Paul held the floor for 12 hours and 52 minutes.

March 7, 2013: Eric Holder responds to Rand Paul’s new question, "Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?" He answered with a simple two letter word. No.

March 7, 2013: John Brennan confirmed as CIA Director 63-34.

I have seen various interviews with Rand Paul since his filibuster. He himself seems confused about when he started questioning the drone issue. It wouldn’t surprise me, as it took a good few hours for me to sort out this nonsense. At times he says he’s been asking questions for months, but in a suspicious fundraising letter that he sent out to supporters, hours after his grandstanding scheme, he said that he has only been asking the question for a week. While he tells his tea party and paultard base that the question was about, John smith getting killed by a drone while emailing his buddy in the middle east. As was made clear by President Obama that is not and never was the issue, and it is actually a little bit racist. I’m surprised the liberals didn’t pick up on this. They sure do seem to care a lot about those targeted racial profilings happening all over Arizona… Is Rand Paul insisting that Obama is targeting all Americans who have Middle Eastern or “Muslim” friends with drones??? How outlandish can this guy be? Obama is one of the people calling for a new Muslim Peace Era! Remember many of his supporters believe Obama is a Muslim and is working with the terrorists! So would Obama have to target himself with a drone??


Anti-Ron Paul Bot: The Filibuster Timeline:
Now there was only minimal concerns that the CIA had authority to target American Citizens with drones. Even though, the CIA is more likely to do this type of thing. Remember John Brennan is the CIA Director and Republicans have some issues with him as a choice. But, Paul Pillar a former CIA official who is now a professor at Georgetown University makes it clear to far left website Mother Jones, "Nothing like this is ever going to arise as far as drone strikes are concerned, so I don't see it as a live issue." Pillar also told Mother Jones: "I expect that if the CIA were to do anything like that within the U.S. it probably would violate some of the legal restrictions that are placed on all of the agency's activities as far as inside-U.S. operations are concerned." So, if Rand Paul actually got people to look into this issue for him and maybe ask some people who worked for the CIA if the CIA would be allowed to use Drones on random American citizens he would have found the answer to be NO! Then, there would be no reason to rage against John Brennan, for this issue! The person the Republican Filibuster should have been focused on is Hagel, but he was confirmed as Defense Secretary weeks before this whole thing got out of control!

So that’s why this whole thing is crazy. You see, Rand Paul staged a filibuster against the wrong person, for the wrong topic, not knowing that the question he was asking was already answered by Eric Holder to Ted Cruz! Rand Paul also seemed to agree with The Obama Administration on the use of drones in extreme 9/11 situations. Despite cries from the paultard conspiracy minded camp that claims that this whole thing wasn’t about them, asking the Obama Administration if they want to target random US Citizens with Drones just because they think differently, that’s exactly what it was all about!!!!
At no point did Rand Paul claim the government would "use drones on random Americans."
joko104;bt2295 said:
At no point did Rand Paul claim the government would "use drones on random Americans."

you obviously didn't listen to him then. It's one thing to just watch him talk, but you actually have to listen to him and analyze what he was talking about. It's clear to me that Rand Paul has a paranoia of Obama or the government using drones to attack him and other American Citizens. He already agreed that it was ok to use drones in a 9/11 type of situation, which is the only situation the government would even consider!!!!!
Top Bottom