There was no oxford comma, so couldn't we interpret the second part as an apposition, or even interpret the first comma as an OR?
Nevertheless, without breaking his oath to the constitution, there is no way that Rand Paul can tenably say that ANY GROUP does not have a right to a trial. All these politicians (as he rightly put it) would have to do is to just say that someone did these three things, and that person is done. Sounds like the Dorner fiasco. Doesn't everyone see the loophole?
Ron stood up for the right to a trial in all cases. The Allies gave the Nazi's trials, so why on earth can't the USA simply capture these "suspects" (and that is ALL they are), give them a trial, and prove their case?
The founders fought our revolutionary war over this.
Get with it Rand!
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and