Comment: RE: The Way Forward in the "War on Terror." RJ's response to Ran

(See in situ)


RE: The Way Forward in the "War on Terror." RJ's response to Ran

Thank you for responding to Rand Paul's recantation of his earlier Constitutionalism. Your statement is much more moderate and conciliatory, and therefore probably more helpful, than anything I would have composed in the heat of disappointment.

Where can this man have found in the Constitution:
(1) A power to allow military courts to try criminal acts within the US?
(2) A withholding of due process rights in cases where the charge is for a crime of sufficiently high seriousness (i.e. "This crime is so serious that persons accused of it should be punished on the basis of the accusation alone.")?
(3) A power for the government to punish, or even prosecute, an accused person merely on the basis of a coerced confession?
(4) A legal definition of "terrorism" ?

I am doubtful that Rand Paul will offer any reversal of his statement, which I suppose to have been from the heart, and also that, even if he does reverse it on the eve of his fund-raising event, his
reversal will be sincere. I cannot envision myself giving any further support to his campaign.

Further, I will be watching for a repudiation of his statement by Dr. Paul, Sr.,
in the absence of which I will have to reconsider giving any further support to his political efforts.

This is a crisis in the history of the Campaign for Liberty.