What's the definition of "joining al Qaeda," and who is to determine the association before the drone killing?
Rand Paul says that "if you join al Qaeda, bear arms and attack U.S. forces, no one will argue that you still have a right to a trial."
How does one define "al Qaeda? What proof is there of the association? What proof is there of the attack? Rand misses the boat here on the whole point. We need a trial to answer these questions and accusations. Otherwise, there is tyranny.
Of course there is a difference on a battlefield, but these people have made the entire world the battlefield. You cannot find a place that they don't think is a battlefield.
I am arguing that it is Rand's duty as a US Senator to defend any and every citizen's right to a trial, exactly as it is clearly defined in the Constitution.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: