Rand Demands Vote to End Indefinite Detention

[Matt Collins]

From a press release:

Dr. Rand Paul Demands Vote to End Indefinite Detention

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) demanded a vote on his amendment to the FY 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to respect the Bill of Rights and prevent the federal government from indefinitely detaining American citizens without trial.

Currently, Section 1021 of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act unconstitutionally declares that the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force allows our Armed Forces to indefinitely detain citizens, legal residents, and foreign nationals who are alleged to have engaged in hostilities against the United States. This means U.S. citizens apprehended within the boundaries of the U.S. could be held indefinitely without trial.

Senator Lindsey Graham objected to Dr. Paul’s motion for unanimous consent on a vote.

“We should be alarmed that there are people trying to prevent a trial by jury in our country,” Dr. Paul said while responding to Senator Graham. “You short-circuit America - you short-circuit American history - if you get rid of a trial by jury, if you get rid of presumption of innocence,” he went on to note.

“America needs to know there is one opponent in the Senate who does not believe in the Bill of Rights. When he declares you an enemy combatant, you don’t get the Fifth or Sixth Amendment. That’s what this is about,” Dr. Paul further stated.


You can watch Dr. Paul’s initial speech HERE and his response to Senator Graham HERE.

(Dr. Paul Speaks on the Senate Floor - June 12, 2018)

[timosman]

[timosman]

Rand should leave comedy to professionals.

[euphemia]

Again, nothing against Senator Paul. I love that he is a maverick. I love that he is bringing up these issues. I don’t love that he can be a little tone deaf about them. The US is a representative republic. It is important to pick these battles when the national attention is actually focused on them. He should want to have these discussions when a citizen will hear them and then immediately make a call or send an email. That’s probably not where the collective conscience is right now.

[nikcers]

Again, nothing against Senator Paul. I love that he is a maverick. I love that he is bringing up these issues. I don’t love that he can be a little tone deaf about them. The US is a representative republic. It is important to pick these battles when the national attention is actually focused on them. He should want to have these discussions when a citizen will hear them and then immediately make a call or send an email. That’s probably not where the collective conscience is right now.

The fourth Amendment is already gone, they are going after first, fifth and sixth. If Rand Paul doesn't bring this up, and bring it to peoples attention because they are tone deaf about it, who will? Who will live in a free society if no one wants to be free anymore, not because freedom isn't popular but because they don't know what it looks like. Do you think someone who was born and grew up in a prison could know what the outside world looks like?

[Aratus]

I MUST STAND WITH DOCTOR RAND

[Matt Collins]

Again, nothing against Senator Paul. I love that he is a maverick. I love that he is bringing up these issues. I don’t love that he can be a little tone deaf about them. The US is a representative republic. It is important to pick these battles when the national attention is actually focused on them. He should want to have these discussions when a citizen will hear them and then immediately make a call or send an email. That’s probably not where the collective conscience is right now.

He is raising the issue around election time and forcing the incumbents on record.

[EBounding]

Again, nothing against Senator Paul. I love that he is a maverick. I love that he is bringing up these issues. I don’t love that he can be a little tone deaf about them. The US is a representative republic. It is important to pick these battles when the national attention is actually focused on them. He should want to have these discussions when a citizen will hear them and then immediately make a call or send an email. That’s probably not where the collective conscience is right now.

I kind of agree. He's getting a reputation of someone who just grandstands. "Who cares?" Well, if you do it too often with no results, people will stop paying attention.

But that's just my perspective as a computer quarterback. If Rand thinks this is the right thing to do right now, I'm all for it.

[nikcers]

I kind of agree. He's getting a reputation of someone who just grandstands. "Who cares?" Well, if you do it too often with no results, people will stop paying attention.

But that's just my perspective as a computer quarterback. If Rand thinks this is the right thing to do right now, I'm all for it.

You never know how people will react to things, maybe people will admire him for it, lots of people like Ron Paul because of his passion and his consistency and his message. Plus he can watch how people respond to messaging which is invaluable because he can adjust his message for it to resonate better with people.

Yeah its not groundbreaking for libertarians to support these policies, but its not a part of the Republican platform. Rand has the potential to sell these ideas to a large amount of Republicans because Rand bounces his ideas off Trump because the media was trying to poison pill the liberty movements ideas by pushing a narrative that they are buddies and that they agree on a lot of things so if Trump does bad they can blame it on the ideas that Trump and Rand supposedly agree on.

Yes its not a political win, he can't deliver a political win until more republicans agree with him on this, and Rand was right to point out that Lindsay Grahams vision for America isn't Trumps vision for America so we should try to change it while we have Trump in power.