"Listen, Trent, you're out of the Senate now, but Mitch says you're good at this! We need your help! We've gotta do something about this Cruz kid - he's turning things upside down around here! "
Posted on 03/06/2013 12:17:46 PM PST by SeekAndFind
A must-see via Mediaite, not just because this is the right question to ask after Holder’s letter on drone policy yesterday but because it fell to Cruz, the new bete noire of the left, rather than a Democrat to press the civil-libertarian case. Simple question: Is it a violation of due process to fire a missile at a guy on American soil if he's not engaged at the moment in carrying out a terrorist attack? He might be a member of Al Qaeda; he might be planning an attack; but if he's strolling down Main Street in some American town, is there any constitutional justification to toss a Hellfire at him rather than send the cops in to pick him up? Watch Holder's reaction. Cruz has to browbeat him for three minutes to get him to shift from saying it wouldn't be "appropriate" --- which implies that the government might have the power to do it but would refuse to exercise that power for prudential reasons — to finally saying that, constitutionally, it doesn’t have that power. That’s an important admission; unless I missed something, it’s the first time anyone at the top has acknowledged a legal limit to drone strikes under certain circumstances. Here’s hoping we don’t have to point back to it someday.
As Ed already mentioned, Rand Paul’s been engaged in an old-fashioned talk-til-you-drop filibuster on the Senate floor for more than an hour to protest O’s refusal to rule out drone strikes against Americans on U.S. soil. A few choice quotes, first from the Examiner:
“Barack Obama, in 2007, would be down here with me arguing against this,” Paul said on the Senate floor. “It amazes me and disappoints me how much he’s changed.”
More from Breitbart:
“If there was an ounce of courage in this body I would be joined by many other Senators,” Sen. Paul said. “Would you tolerate a Republican who said I like the first amendment, I don’t plan to violate the first amendment, but I might,” he asked rhetorically. He then turned the question around and asked if Republicans would tolerate that sort of vaguery with regard to the 2nd amendment.
As of 1 p.m. ET, he’s live on C-SPAN 2. (You can watch here.) It’s a clever tactic twice over: While Holder’s already admitted that the feds can’t kill you at a cafe, he’s putting the Lightbringer on the spot to formally admit it too. Even if O refuses, the media attention caused by this stunt will highlight for liberals the fact that the anti-Bush they thought they elected in 2008 is a lot more Cheney-esque than they thought. (Then again, many Democrats have long since stopped caring about that.) It’s clever too because Paul needs to make amends to libertarians and paleocons for voting twice to filibuster Chuck Hagel. This is his way of reminding them ostentatiously that he’s still his father’s son.
Exit question: Why is Paul limiting his objection to killing Americans on American soil? Would he tolerate the feds firing a missile at a foreign national sitting in a U.S. cafe? Or have I misunderstood and he’s not actually limiting his objection that way?
Strange...
Heading to the floor to speak on Congressional oversight of executive branch & rules for targeted killings. Watch: c-span.org/Live-Video/C-S…
— Ron Wyden (@RonWyden) March 6, 2013
Last week, Eli Lake dubbed Paul and Wyden the odd couple on drones.
Really?! I have to find a TV!
Remember the Alamo!
I was having fun until that nut joined in. Grrrrr
Wow! Still some Americans left in America!!!
This might beron wyden’s finest day for the rest of his worthless life. If so, he chose wisely.
I am so proud Senator Ted Cruz represents my home state of Texas. I am glad he is doing what the voters of Texas sent him to do. I pray he does not fall victim to the go-along-to-get-along disease that infects too many so-called conservatives when they land in DC.
You have a right to be proud! Cruz is consummate T Party! G-d bless Texas!
God bless and protect Sen. Ted Cruz. Long may he serve Texas with courage and integrity.
Yes, it is Bush's fault. He created DHS and the TSA. He signed the Patriot Act and the NDAA. It was always meant for the American people not some Muslim boogieman. The US government is arming and financing Al Qaeda to kill Christians in Syria right now while leaving our borders wide open for God-knows-who to waltz right in.
You are justly proud - just as I am bitterly ashamed of my two Georgia RINO US Senators, Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson. Neither is worth warm spit.
I called both my senators' offices this afternoon and asked if my senator would be joining in Senator Paul's filibuster. The answers were instructive:
- Isakson's assistant didn't even know whether the senator planned to vote for or against Brennan's confirmation - no surprise for a gutless bastard who's often on the enemy's side from the start.
- Chambliss's flunky at least relayed that Saxby planned to vote against Brennan's confirmation - but she couldn't say if he'd go so far as to join the filibuster.
Saxby Chambliss has betrayed Georgians with such clever treachery countless times. Saxby likes to say the right things for the record, but then shrink away when the time comes to back his words with action. In this case, Chambliss knows that Brennan will be confirmed as DCI if his nomination comes to a floor vote. But will Chambliss join the filibuster and prevent Brennan's nomination from even reaching the floor?
Given that Chambliss is having dinner with Stalin tonight, I'm betting he'll bend over again, as usual.
Can’t argue with that.
Keep your powder dry. When these RINO’s terms are up, get behind a SINGLE conservative senatorial candidate and vote them out of office. This is what did not happen in the 2012 presidential election. This cost the conservatives the election and has damaged this country, almost irretrievably.
Grasping for arguments to refute your points, I find none. Obama is merely employing the tools that Bush left for him to use.
Remember those checks and balances that our wise Founders created to safeguard against tyrants? Many of them have been legislated away, and those that remain have atrophied from lack of use. Republicans like to grant dictatorial powers to the Executive, and Democrats like to wield them.
I largely agree with that sentiment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.