Hey, all you crazy bastards out there: Sen. Rand Paul’s got your back.

During a Senate debate on the detention and trial of terrorism suspects, Sen. Lindsey Graham argued that Americans don’t want to close Guantanamo Bay “to bring these crazy bastards that want to kill us all to the United States.”

Responding to Graham, Paul defended the right to trial by jury as he urged his colleagues to support the Feinstein-Lee amendment regarding indefinite detention of Americans. And perhaps setting a new Senate floor record, he used the term “crazy bastard” five times.

I will tell you since I know this record of this debate will be widely read, that I want to make former objection to the crazy bastards standard. I don’t really think that if we’re going to have a crazy bastard standard that we shouldn’t have a right to trial by jury, because if we’re going to lock up all the crazy bastards, for goodness sakes – would you not want if you’re a crazy bastard to have a right to trial by jury?

The Lee-Feinstein Amendment, co-sponsored by Paul, passed in a 67 to 29 vote.

The crazy bastards could not be reached for comment.

  • Scott

    Those crazy bastards

  • John (it true me am)

    Normally I like Rand more than Graham, but something is definitely off here. Since when was closing Gauntanamo an issue of indefinite detention of Americans? American Citizens should have a trial no doubt, but the enemy combatants in Gauntanamo are not American. The only American citizen to ever be held in Gauntanamo was because he had dual citizenship with Saudi Arabia and never told anyone he had American citizenship, and was subsequently released when it was discovered.

    • http://twitter.com/Angelheart1023 Benghazi?

      John I agree with you 100%. Rand is being reckless here and I don’t usually agree with Graham either.

    • Bill

      it’s an issue because the ndaa of 2012 allowed American citizens to be detained indefinitely

      • John (it true me am)

        And that has anything to do with Graham’s statement being hijacked by Rand Paul how? As I said in another reply, the “crazy bastard standard” was a comment about Gauntanamo, nothing else.

        • Vennoye

          BUT, the vote was on “The Lee-Feinstein Amendment, co-sponsored by Paul, passed in a 67 to 29 vote.” Wasn’t as much about Gauntanamo as it was protecting Americans from NDAA. Graham wrong as usual!!

          • John (it true me am)

            The crazy bastard comment was taken out of context by Rand Paul. That’s the entire point. There were two seperate issues, Gitmo and the indefinite detention of Americans. Graham made a comment about Gitmo in a discussion, wait for it, ABOUT GITMO. Paul then took his statement and repeated it as though it were part of the discussion about the Lee-Feinstein amendment. It is Paul who is 100% in the wrong and misleading on this.

    • http://www.redstateeclectic.com AngelaTC

      This has nothing to do with the Gitmo prisoners. Wow – it’s really sad to see so-called conservatives insisting the Constitution is optional when the government that it is intended to protect us from declares it optional.

      This country is so done. Stick a fork in it and call it Amerikka.

      • John (it true me am)

        Graham was refering to Gitmo, so it has everything to do with it. Rand took the statement and tried to apply it to something else. You missed the point entirely.

        • http://www.redstateeclectic.com AngelaTC

          If Graham was talking about keeping Americans in Gitmo without a trial, then he is the one trying to take the amendment out of context. The debate was on “The Lee-Feinstein Amendment, which wasn’t about Gauntanamo . It was about protecting Americans from the government. That’s the same thing the constitution was supposed to do.

          So,. Graham wrong as usual, because here are no citizens in Gitmo. He’s just muddying the waters by playing the “keep the people afraid of their own shadows game.”

          Watching the video, I see Graham invokes not only the ridiculously vapid “Crazy Bastard” standard, but also a morally vacuous “Most People Believe” standard.

          I hope beyond hope we can primary this little sissy.

          • John (it true me am)

            (Repeat of my reply to another poster.)
            The crazy bastard comment was taken out of context by Rand Paul. That’s the entire point. There were two seperate issues, Gitmo and the indefinite detention of Americans. Graham made a comment about Gitmo in a discussion, wait for it, ABOUT GITMO. Paul then took his statement and repeated it as though it were part of the discussion about the Lee-Feinstein amendment. It is Paul who is 100% in the wrong and misleading on this.

  • Steve_J

    They are prisoners of war and should remain in detention until the war is over.

    • Bill

      the war on terror? terrorism is a tactic you can’t win a war against that, to us the rebels in syria are freedom fighters, to Assad they are terrorists. If they are american they are constitutionally allowed a trial by jury

      “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a
      speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district
      wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have
      been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and
      cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against
      him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor,
      and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence”

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

      • TomJB

        Key word being “American.” If they aren’t, well, they made their choices.

        • http://twitter.com/Kennan100 Kenna Neel

          Absolutely!

      • http://twitter.com/Evilpa Ann

        Really? Your using wikipedia as a source? Those terrorists KNOW what they are accused of AND they have it better at Gitmo than they would EVER have had it in their home countries. I say let them die there!

        • Madfoot713

          They have it better than at their home countries… let them die!

          Lol

        • Mike M

          Really? Well that’s good, because prior to the NDAA being appealed by the justice dept, the Obama admin. refused to say whether or not the indefinite detention provisions have been enforced. And since the feinstein-lee amendment doesn’t apply to those already detained, there’s a good chance we have U.S. citizens already sitting in gitmo. Citizens ‘captured’ on U.S. soil and being held on nothing more than a finger point. Is everyone really sipping the kool-aid? Right to due process applies to every PERSON who is arrested in this country, citizen or not.

    • http://twitter.com/EFPanknin Eric Panknin

      Remember, the administration calls it “overseas contingency operations” now.
      al quida was defeated when Bin Laden was killed. It’s “work place violence” when it takes place in the United States. /SARC

    • moonsbreath

      This war will never end, so I say indefinitely.

  • https://twitter.com/SheilaDunn Sheila Daigneault

    Yadda, yadda, yadda, Rand Paul. Pick an issue that someone gives a rat’s ass about. Go kick some sense into our President, who is trying to ruin our country

    • Madfoot713

      You should care about the 6th Amendment.

  • medicinewomantwo

    Funny, crazy bastards calling others crazy bastards.

  • http://twitter.com/drbob456x 1Bob Stockton

    Americans. Americans. Rand Paul is as nuts as his old man.

    • Guest

      protecting the 6th amendment is nuts?

    • Bill

      How is this bill nuts?

  • http://www.noneedforastinkingwebsite.com/ dow daytrader

    the crazy bastards in detention offshore are not Americans, thus no trial…if some ARE Americans, then refer to the precedent in WWII under Roosevelt…still no trial in American shores and the military tribunal that judges them terrorist is final. Don’t need no law degree to figure out simple history and Constitutional principles….

    • Bill

      your right fortunatly this bill restores our 6th amendment right.

      “in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a
      speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district
      wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have
      been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and
      cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against
      him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor,
      and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence”

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

  • http://twitter.com/Kennan100 Kenna Neel

    Rand Paul devoid of reading comprehension skills that would enable him to correctly interpret the Constitution and Bill of Rights. They are POW’s, NOT American’s. Crazy Bastard’s not entitled to trial by jury. You are wrong in so many ways, in so many areas. Please, be seated, and start over with the Dick and Jane books.

    • Bill

      can you read this “The explosive 2011-2012 NDAA bill
      included a wildly unpopular clause in Section 1021 which provided for
      the indefinite detention without trial of American citizens judged to be
      involved in terrorism or “belligerent acts” against the US. ” ( http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/high-tide-and-turn/2012/nov/30/rand-pauls-victory-over-ndaa-indefinite-detention-/) or are you devoid of reading comprehensions skills ? This bill removes that and reestablishes our 6th amendment.

      • http://twitter.com/Kennan100 Kenna Neel

        Your link does not go anywhere. I would be happy to read it..if you can provide it. As lond as it does not go to a Wikipedia page. You’ve posted the same inadequate link twice now, and one for Wikipedia.. F- in Posting Comprehension skills.

        • http://www.redstateeclectic.com AngelaTC
          • http://twitter.com/Kennan100 Kenna Neel

            His argument, his link, not my problem. Thank you for helping him tho. I agree with parts of 11-12 NDAA. And agree with the F/L amendment which, in my mind, clarifies and puts into words things that should have been in the original. Meaning The original was poorly written IMO. Probable cause, warrants, caught in the act. Whatever. Charge a Citizen, give them a trial, and get it over with. Non Citizens, Enemy Combatants, Terrorists, which ever name you choose to call them, are not entitled to rights under our Constitution or Bill of Rights. There are already laws on the books covering all of this. My point is READ it! Read it before you pass it! Stop making more laws, and amendments to correct poorly written laws. Enforce the ones we already have. Stop trying to reinvent, redefine what is there, just enforce it. Reading Comprehension Skills. All those crazy bastards calling other people crazy bastards are just crazy bastards who can’t comprehend what is already there, and so feel the need to pass more laws and then amend those laws to close loopholes that crazy bastards keep passing into more laws until no one can breathe without offending some crazy bastards law. Or they just want to get their name on a law, or amendment…crazy bastards.

  • Herman LaClair

    and yet, another one of my favorite expletives has been hijacked…crazy bastards.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeBeq0i03bg Booker

    “Feinstein-Lee amendment regarding indefinite detention of Americans.”
    Makes sense. Terrorists = zero rights, Americans = Constitutional rights. Well, it looks like we can rest easy and not worry about NDAA. That’s all been taken care of.

    Paul is from my home state.

    • Bill

      “The explosive 2011-2012 NDAA bill included a wildly unpopular clause in Section 1021 which provided for the indefinite detention without trial of American citizens judged to be involved in terrorism or “belligerent acts” against the US. ” ( http://communities.washingtont… )This bill removes that.

    • Mike M

      Until the military decides that your ‘papers’ are not sufficient evidence of citizenship. Then what? You get detained, govt says you’re here illegally, and you can’t even defend your legal status. This is why due process applies to all PERSONS. The minute you make due process conditional, you open a can of worms. This is not to make it easy for terrorists but to make it hard for the govt to arbitrarily lock up its own people.

  • Robert Patrick Moscato

    Senator Rand How many of these Prisoners, oops sorry detainees are actually American Citizens?? I’d say less than 5%. Just say NO to Trial by Lury!!!

    • Madfoot713

      I didn’t realize non-citizens don’t deserve due process rights.

  • rokdevil

    Personally, I would rather stay on the side of caution and give EVERYONE a trial by jury. I don’t see the problem. If you have evidence use it. If you don’t then let them go. Governments have killed many more people than “terrorists”.

  • rokdevil

    I also find it sickening that we invade two countries and then call the people fighting us (the invaders) “terrorists” or “insurgents”. We are a fat country of hypocrites and Graham is one of the worst.

  • George Washington Mclintock

    Kelly Ayotte just got an Amendment passed that made sure no tax dollars would be used to bring Gitmo detainees to the US. So, this amendment from Sen. Paul isn’t any coddling of non-American Jihadis. The problem is filthy traitors, like anwar al awaki, who are Americans. It would seem that the govt could not have given him the Hellfire missiles assisted death he richly deserved if this amendment got passed a coiples years/. Surely will encourage stealth citizenship efforts from terrorists, and you just know OBama’s INS won’t be doing any extra vetting of immigrants from Yemen, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, or wherever ISlam reigns. STill, even after all that, I gotta be in favor of this vote. TOo much potential for abuse. Now, if Sen Paul get some bipartisan support together for whipping, if not outright eliminating, the TSA into line.

    • rokdevil

      The problem is that americans don’t know the legal meaning of the word “treason”. It is very clearly defined in the Constitution and the requirements are either two witnesses to the same act of treason or confession in court. I don’t care what people “think” someone did, I want the government to have to prove it before they start killing people. Personally, I believe that many members of the congress are much more treasonous than some idiot in Yemen, considering the amount of the debt and the body count of soldiers.

    • http://www.redstateeclectic.com AngelaTC

      The constitution clearly outlines the procedures for treason. Have you read it lately?

  • Christian Heiens

    I don’t care what you’re accused of or did, if you’re an American citizen, you DESERVE a trial if you’re being detained. you deserve to be given your day in court to defend yourself. Oppressive dictatorships do this kind of thing, not the United States of America.

    • http://www.theconservativevoices.com/ dmacleo

      what if you are not a US citizen?
      should we apply our laws to every person in the world?
      don’t we get called neo-cons for that?

      • Christian Heiens

        The Constitution follows the flag, or at least it should. Downes V Bidwell mess that up. Illegals in the US commit crimes and are charged as well BTW for the acts they commit. They aren’t just deported outright but charged for the actions they are accused of doing. Why do we NOT try these crazy nutjobs for killing Americas? We need to bring justice to the thousands of dead that they have brought upon this nation.

  • BeeKaaay

    C’mon, Rand Paul is standing up for leftwingwackos, AND THEYRE COMPLAINING :)

    • http://www.redstateeclectic.com AngelaTC

      And that’s the reason the GOP keeps losing young people. You are arguing against the constitution and in favor a big government while calling yourself a conservative?

  • http://twitter.com/EFPanknin Eric Panknin

    Why isn’t John Walker and how his case was handled being discussed? He was the first American terrorist and I believe he’s doing 20 to life somewhere in California.

    • http://www.redstateeclectic.com AngelaTC

      I think the Founders were probably the first terrorists. But you’re right, this shrieking hysteria over keeping violent prisoners in our prisons is new. Clinton kept the Twin Towers bombers in prison, tried them, and justice was served.

      How anybody can argue against the constitution while calling themselves an American, much less a conservative, is beyond me.

      • http://www.theconservativevoices.com/ dmacleo

        were they captured overseas or in the US?
        I forget for sure but I think they were captured on US soil by LEO agencies.

  • moonsbreath

    Did Paul take his crazy bastard pill? How about NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO NON-AMERICAN TERRORISTS? Geez, it’s so damn easy.

  • http://www.theconservativevoices.com/ dmacleo

    how many at gitmo are us citizens?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_G6NSU3W5VFVVPQDPQGPI3TXPIM rightofcenter

    Rand Paul is the son of Ron Paul (the original crazy bastard). The fruit doesn’t fall far from the tree.