Rand Paul

Yes, I think that is a big concern. There are a couple of things that I think are alarming. Even two domestic emails could be routed through a server in another country, and they could use that to actually get access to two Americans who…

I think I understand that question. The phone companies aren't excited about it, but they will do it if they are paid and told to do it, basically. But the phone companies, I don't know. I don't how much objection they have had to the…

I want to continue to keep the floor. I yield for a question without losing the floor.

In a different way, we are talking about whether in the intelligence selector numbers a person is a corporation and whether can have a single warrant. I think if you want phone records from Verizon, it should say ``Verizon'' and we want…

Let me make sure I have the question correct. The Senator's question is on my concerns on the USA FREEDOM Act?

This is on op-ed that was written by the Senator from Oregon and appeared in the LA Times in December. The op-ed says that building a backdoor into every cell phone, tablet or laptop means deliberately creating weaknesses that hackers and…

I would hazard that and I would propose that there is no person named 'Verizon,' so you do not have an individualized warrant under the Fourth Amendment.

I do not think that is a balanced approach to continue doing what his Privacy Committee specifically said exceeds the bounds where the Constitution intended.

Do you believe the government has the right to have bulk collection of records from millions of individuals without a warrant?

You think it is a balanced approach to collect all of the phone records and store them in Utah without an individualized warrant?

The President's own Privacy Committee recommended that we quit collecting these.

If we are going to complain about encryption or we are going to complain about individuals wanting privacy, we really need to have a thorough discussion and understanding of the Fourth Amendment.

My hope is as the Committee moves forward, that you will use some of our ideas or include some of our ideas in your deliberation.

This program provides a perverse incentive that encourages government to confiscate property because government officials get to keep up to 80 percent of the proceeds.

I think no one who listens to these horrendous abuses of our civil liberties should be not moved to think that we really do need reform in our country.

Civil forfeiture turns justice on its head. Our current laws presume you are guilty until you can prove your innocence.

These laws were originally intended to disrupt criminal networks, but they have increasingly been used against innocent citizens to strip them of their property without a lawyer to defend their rights, without a day in court to hear the…

This Committee has an opportunity to end an injustice, an injustice that disproportionately affects minorities and the poor, by reforming our civil asset forfeiture laws.

Today, I announce with God's help, with the help of liberty lovers everywhere that I am putting myself forward as a candidate for president of the United States of America.

This is an administration that seeks to legislate when it is not in their purview.

The letter was to you. The letter was to Iran, but it should have been cc'd to the White House.

We want you to obey the law. We want you to understand the separation of powers.

I cannot vote for something that is going to enable war in Libya, and Nigeria, and Yemen, and all these places with 100,000 troops.

I am not particularly happy with being lectured to by the administration about the Constitution.

I think to have an enduring victory, there is some question from some of us whether or not you can have an enduring victory and occupy Mosul and be seen as a legitimate government if you have got an 80- to 90-percent Shia force.