Kentucky Senator Rand Paul’s thirteen hour filibuster against the Administration’s claim of authority to fly armed Predator drones in America has ended and the President has blinked.
Paul spoke for thirteen hours and brought home the disturbing news to many who were unaware that this Administration had contemplated using Predator drones inside the USA.
No longer does the Administration claim the authority to fire hellfire missiles in “extraordinary circumstances” at Americans inside America.
The good news comes to us in a laconic missive penned by the President’s chief lawyer, Eric Himpton Holder, Jr. The President may hope that this better-late-than-never statement will clear away the cloud of dissimulation regarding drones. He is mistaken.
Paul’s polite requests, starting in February, asked that the White House assure us that it had no legal authority to fire missiles at Americans inside the USA. His inquiries were met with either silence or double talk. The Administration’s 43 word climb-down memo written Thursday implies falsely that Senator Paul’s request only became an issue after the Senator’s filibuster ended. In fact, the Administration has been stonewalling Paul’s “additional question” since at least the 20th of February.
Senator Paul has done yeoman service and this is an important victory, but now is no time for complacency. No one in this Land of the Free and Home of the Brave should ever feel uneasy at the sound of distant aircraft in the night sky.
Now that the Administration has abnegated its right to fire from armed drones in the USA, there is no legitimate reason for armed Predator drones to be permitted to fly over US civilian air space.
Congress has the power to prohibit the flight of armed drones inside the USA. Armed drones in the airspace over military bases would be excepted. Congress must act now — through its power of the purse — to defund armed Predator drone flights over US civilian areas. If Congress and the President cannot agree to this simple stipulation, then the veracity of Mr. Obama’s assurances must be questioned.
now read the letter. “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.”
i’m sure there will be secret memos that redefine the meaning
of “combat” or “engaged,” but we’ll never know.
what we do know is, the president claims the power to execute
americans, both offshore and in ze fazzerlant. otherwise, why
restrict the answer to “weaponized drones?” can’t use a
drone? how ’bout a marine sniper? or an a-10?
Note that this administration still hasn't ruled out murdering its own citizens inside our borders as well as outside (as it already has). They're talking only about doing it with drones. It's a good thing someone in Washington is drawing attention to the issue at all, sure, but the focus is still tragically narrow.
"If the president does it, it's not illegal" Nixon
If the president wants somebody dead, it will happen. Every president since Washington has known this.
Randy Paul is a tool.