What did he say?
He said it was a red herring. Holder used both the 9/11 and Pearl Harbor scenarios to deflect from Rand Paul’s real concern.
Paul responded a number of times that neither he, nor any other senator, was questioning the Executive’s authority to respond to an immediate external attack upon the United States (specifically the 9/11 and Pearl Harbor scenarios). Nor did he question the use of lethal force in response to an imminent threat (someone aiming a rocket launcher at a building, someone robbing a bank....).
His concern was the lack of a clear response from the Administration as to whether they though they had the constitutional authority to assassinate a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, without due process, even if that citizen was known to be involved in terrorist activities, but was not at the moment posing an imminent threat.
He’s been asking for a clear response to that very simple question since the end of January. And, if you saw the recent exchange between Ted Cruz and Eric Holder over this same question, you have an idea of the completely muddled, non-responsive answers he’s been receiving from the Administration.
Even Turbin Durbin came to the Senate floor last night to pose the 9/11 scenario to Rand Paul, in a desperate attempt to distract from the real issue — can the Executive Branch be arbitrary in its application of due process, or is every U.S. citizen on U.S. soil entitled to his Fifth Amendment rights, provided he is not posing an imminent threat.