The True Meaning Behind Holder’s Response to Rand Paul

Friday, March 8, 2013
By Paul Martin

“Engaged in combat” could mean being an associate of an associate of a terrorist

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
March 8, 2013

Although it was heralded as a clear signal that the Obama administration has been forced to acknowledge that it cannot drone strike Americans on U.S. soil, Eric Holder’s response to Rand Paul only serves to re-affirm the government’s existing position.

Responding to the Kentucky Senator’s near 13 hour filibuster, Attorney General Holder sent a letter to Paul’s office which stated, “It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: `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.”
The key to this is the phrase “engaged in combat.” What does the administration consider to represent an act of “combat.”

The Rest…HERE

Leave a Reply

Join the revolution in 2018. Revolution Radio is 100% volunteer ran. Any contributions are greatly appreciated. God bless!

Follow us on Twitter