Transcript

Geraldo Rivera: I’m very delighted to welcome back to the program the former Congressman from Texas, the former candidate for president of the United States, the father of someone who is talked about as a future candidate for president of the United States. The son is Rand Paul, the Kentucky Republican, the father is Ron Paul. How are you doing, Congressman, how’s life?

Ron Paul: Geraldo, I’m doing well, thank you.

Geraldo Rivera: I’ve read, with great interest, a couple of hours ago, that you have endorsed the candidacy of Mark Sanford, the former Governor of South Carolina, who is embattled in his race for the congressional seat in Charleston, South Carolina. What’s up?

Ron Paul: Well, he’s a good friend, I’ve known him for years, he was a good voter, and I thought he was the best candidate, so I decided to help him out while everybody else is piling on him.

Geraldo Rivera: So do you think he’s personal transgressions are irrelevant?

Ron Paul: No, I think they’re very relevant, I think some people will vote against him for that, and that’s okay. But if we always look for perfection in our candidates, we’d have a tough time finding them. I think he’s obviously the best candidate, and he certainly has his shortcomings, but I imagine all of us have some shortcomings somewhere along the way.

Geraldo Rivera: Well, everyone in this radio broadcast facility can say, “Yes, that’s true”. But it seems to me that you have set yourself up in some ways to be the anti-GOP Establishment. They forsake and cut off Mark Sanford after he got caught walking in his ex-wife’s backyard or something, and then you embrace him. Are you doing that to tweak the Karl Roves of the world?

Ron Paul: Not really, because I actually sent him the endorsement before that last story broke. And, technically speaking, I would have had to reverse it and take it away, but I decided not to, especially after having made a commitment. I think the only thing that we did was we delayed it one week so it wouldn’t be lost in all the other news. But, no, I don’t think I’m taking on anybody as much as it seems like the party takes on us who want to be a little bit determined about limiting the government and cutting spending and having a different attitude towards civil liberties, and maybe having a foreign policy more like Robert Taft. So I think they take us on as much as we take them on, I think they’re on the wrong side of many of these issues.

Geraldo Rivera: You established the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, to kind of continue your philosophy, your public advocacy, of a non-interventionist foreign policy. A lot of people you know are saying that this was the worst thing that could have happened for your son’s potential national aspirations. They’re throwing the usual mud at you, that the people involved are or were anti-Semitic and all the rest of that. Do you take that with a grain of salt, do you worry that it might affect your son’s possibilities?

Ron Paul: I can’t worry about it because I can’t care too much about it and I can’t change my ways, and I’m not going to all of a sudden quit doing what I’ve been doing for 30 years because I have opportunities now to actually continue. I can get on the radio once in a while, I have an influence on you and others. So I would say no, I’ll keep doing it, but I’m aware of it. But, in a way, I don’t think it hurts him. We do have some differences and the approaches will be different, but that makes him his own person. Why should it be said that he’s a clone and he has to do everything and think exactly as I have. I think it’s an opportunity for him to show that he’s an independent minded, and he has different opinions.

Geraldo Rivera: You don’t want him to forsake his dad, do you? I would hate that if my son did that, if he went out in public and said, “My dad is one thing, I’m totally different”. Do you want the same thing?

Ron Paul: No, I don’t think he will, because we’re about 99% same.

Geraldo Rivera: Yes, that’s the way is strikes me, I like you both.

Ron Paul: I think there are people who want to drive wedges through that, that’s one reason why, if somebody calls up … if you would have called today and said, “Ron, all we’re going to talk about today is where you and Rand disagree on”, I would say, “I’m not interested in that subject so much”. Because it’s other people who want to do that, they want to dwell on the differences, and I don’t think that’s that important.

Geraldo Rivera: I’m almost out of time, and I hate that I put you in this shorter segment.

Ron Paul: I know you didn’t do that on purpose.

Geraldo Rivera: I know, you know we care deeply for you. But I’m just thinking, have we recovered from the Boston bombing, are we doing enough to investigate the origins?

Ron Paul: Well, probably not, but I don’t have the information on what they exactly have done. I think investigations, whether you’re investigating assassinations or whatever, most of the time cover up blames. It’s not so much that somebody conspired to do these things, but I think so often what they do is make sure nobody gets blamed. If somebody goofed up, then you won’t hear about it. So investigations are fine if they’re revealing the truth.

Geraldo Rivera: We got to leave you, Congressman, so sorry. I hear you.

by Ron Paul

Last week the US Senate took a break from debating the phony cuts known as “sequestration,” for Senator Rand Paul to hold a 13-hour filibuster to force the Obama administration to state whether it believes the President has the right to kill American citizens with drones on US soil. I find it tragic that there has to be a discussion on an issue that should be so self-evident.

However, feeling the pressure, the administration finally said “no,” but in language so twisted that no one should feel in the slightest bit reassured. According to Attorney General Eric Holder, the president does not believe he has the right to use the military to kill an American who is “not engaged in combat on American soil.” Left undefined is how the administration defines “combat.” As constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley wrote last week, “one can easily foresee this or a future president insisting that an alleged terrorism conspiracy is a form of ‘combat’.”

The administration’s outrageous response to the most serious Constitutional question of all — when a government can kill its own citizens — is clear evidence of an executive branch out of control.

Many of the drafters of the Constitution envisioned the presidency as an office with very limited powers, but even the most dedicated proponents of a strong presidency at the time would be shocked to see the concentration of power in the modern presidency.

Today the presidency is viewed as the center of the federal government, with each successive administration expanding the power of the executive at the expense of Congress and the people.

Ironically, some of the worst offenders are those who campaigned promising to reverse the power grabs of their predecessors. For example, candidate George W. Bush campaigned on a “humble foreign policy,” but as president he attacked Iraq based on his own administration’s lies and claimed the right to indefinitely detain anyone he deemed an “enemy combatant.”

Candidate Barack Obama promised he would reverse his predecessor’s constitutional abuses. Yet not only has President Obama not closed Guantanamo Bay, he reportedly holds weekly meetings in the oval office to draw up “kills lists,” uses drones against American citizens, and routinely sends the US military into combat abroad without even consulting Congress!

The modern use of “executive orders” also usurps the lawmaking function of Congress. The most notable recent example was President Obama’s January series of executive orders on gun control, but unfortunately there are countless other examples over the last several administrations.

Ultimately, the fault for the expansion of presidential power lies with Congress. Too many members of Congress are all too eager to avoid responsibility for controversial actions, preferring to “pass the buck” to the president. For example, Congress no longer declares war, but instead passes an “authorization of force” telling the president he can go to war when or if he wants!

On domestic policy, Congress passes large, vaguely-worded pieces of legislation and leaves it to the president and the bureaucrats to fill in the details. Many members of Congress score points with their constituents railing against “the faceless D.C. bureaucrats” while never mentioning that they voted for the law that gave the bureaucrats their power!

Last week, a group of “fiscally conservative” senators even tried to give President Obama more authority over spending as a part of sequester replacement that would have “required” Obama to decide where to reduce spending and where to increase it. They want to restrain the president by giving him more authority?

Growth of executive power is a threat to liberty. Fortunately, Congress can restrain the executive simply by exercising its constitutional powers. The American people must demand that Congress stop passing the buck on its foreign and domestic policy responsibilities. If the people care about liberty, they will demand their representative stand up to the imperial president. Let us hope last week’s filibuster will give Congress the backbone it needs to do its job.

Senator Rand Paul, the son of former Congressman Ron Paul, has introduced the bipartisan Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2013. Known widely as “Audit the Fed,” the bill calls to eliminate restrictions on Government Accountability Office (GAO) audits of the Federal Reserve and mandating the Fed’s credit facilities, securities purchases, and quantitative easing activities would be subject to Congressional oversight.

“The Fed’s operations under a cloak of secrecy have gone on too long and the American people have a right to know what the Federal Reserve is doing with our nation’s money supply,” Sen. Paul said. “Audit the Fed has significant bipartisan support in Congress and across the country and the time to act on this is now.”

During the 112th Congress, Audit the Fed legislation (H.R. 459) passed the House of Representatives handily, 327-98.

Sen. Paul’s version, S. 209, currently has 19 bipartisan co-sponsors in the Senate and companion legislation was introduced earlier this year in the House of Representatives and currently has over 100 co-sponsors.

Below is text of Sen. Paul’s legislation:

S.209

A BILL to require a full audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Reserve banks by the Comptroller General of the United States, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2013”.

SEC. 2. AUDIT REFORM AND TRANSPARENCY FOR THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding section 714 of title 31, United States Code, or any other provision of law, an audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks under subsection (b) of such section 714 shall be completed within 12 months of the date of enactment of this Act.

(b) REPORT.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—A report on the audit required under subsection (a) shall be submitted by the Comptroller General to the Congress before the end of the 90-day period beginning on the date on which such audit is completed and made available to the Speaker of the House, the majority and minority leaders of the House of Representatives, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the committee and each subcommittee of jurisdiction in the House of Representatives and the Senate, and any other Member of Congress who requests it.

(2) CONTENTS.—The report under paragraph (1) shall include a detailed description of the findings and conclusion of the Comptroller General with respect to the audit that is the subject of the report, together with such recommendations for legislative or administrative action as the Comptroller General may determine to be appropriate.

(c) REPEAL OF CERTAIN LIMITATIONS.—Subsection (b) of section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking all after ‘‘in writing.”.

(d) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.— Section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking subsection (f).

SEC. 3. AUDIT OF LOAN FILE REVIEWS REQUIRED BY ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct an audit of the review of loan files of homeowners in foreclosure in 2009 or 2010, required as part of the enforcement actions taken by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System against supervised financial institutions.

(b) CONTENT OF AUDIT.—The audit carried out pursuant to subsection (a) shall consider, at a minimum—

(1) the guidance given by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to independent consultants retained by the supervised financial institutions regarding the procedures to be followed in conducting the file reviews;

(2) the factors considered by independent consultants when evaluating loan files;

(3) the results obtained by the independent consultants pursuant to those reviews;

(4) the determinations made by the independent consultants regarding the nature and extent of financial injury sustained by each homeowner as well as the level and type of remediation offered to each homeowner; and

(5) the specific measures taken by the independent consultants to verify, confirm, or rebut the assertions and representations made by supervised financial institutions regarding the contents of loan files and the extent of financial injury to homeowners.

(c) REPORT.—Not later than the end of the 6-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall issue a report to the Congress containing all findings and determinations made in carrying out the audit required under subsection (a).

Later, Rand Paul joined Daily Paul Radio with Kurt Wallace to discuss his endorsement of Mitt Romney and to answer the questions submitted by the Daily Paul community.

Results

As expected, pretty much any GOP ticket that includes Ron Paul as President and a non-establishment VP does extremely well among RonPaul.com visitors:


Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Potential GOP tickets that pair Ron Paul as President with an establishment VP also do very well:

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

On the other hand, not a single establishment ticket that doesn’t include Ron Paul (or Rand Paul) is able to capture a significant percentage of the Paul vote. The most popular non-Paul ticket is Romney-Huntsman which barely beats Obama-Biden:

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

It goes downhill from there:

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Adding Rand Paul as VP to an establishment President increases the ticket’s appeal among RonPaul.com visitors:

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Adding Ron Paul as VP to an establishment President makes a more significant difference, even though a large percentage would still abstain from voting or vote third party:

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Some have speculated about a late entry of Rand Paul into the race; Rand Paul for President would do quite well if paired with an establishment VP…

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

…and extremely well if paired with Ron Paul or Gary Johnson:

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

Should we poll any other combinations? Leave a comment below.

Senator Rand Paul

Historic instance of a U.S. Senator campaigning for his father, a U.S. Congressman, in run-up to the consequential 2012 New Hampshire Primary

Details of the events are as follows.

Saturday, January 7, 2012

10:30AM – 11:30AM
Substance over Soundbites w/Charlie Arlinghaus [Rand Paul]
The Draft
67 South Main Street, Concord

2:00PM – 3:30PM
Town Hall Meeting, hosted by Southern NH 912 [Rand Paul]
Windham High School
64 London Bridge Road, Windham, NH

9:00PM – 11:00PM
ABC/WMUR New Hampshire Debate [Ron Paul]
Dana Center at Saint Anselm College
Manchester, 100 Saint Anselms Drive

Sunday, January 8, 2012

9:00AM – 11:00AM
NBC News Facebook and Union Leader Debate in New Hampshire [Ron Paul]
Chubb Theatre at the Capitol Center for the Arts
44 South Main Street, Concord
This debate will air on the NBC network as a special edition of “Meet the Press” and will stream live on Facebook. It will also air on MSNBC and NECN.

3:00PM – 4:00PM
Town Hall Meeting [Ron Paul and Rand Paul]
Church Landing at Mill Falls
281 Daniel Webster Hwy, Meredith

Sunday, January 9, 2012

7:30AM – 7:45AM
LIVE on CNN Starting Point [Rand Paul]

8:05AM – 8:30AM
LIVE on Mike Church Radio [Rand Paul]

9:15AM – 10:00AM
LIVE on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal [Rand Paul]

10:30AM – 10:45AM
LIVE w/Jim Mackay and John Harper on WNTK [Rand Paul]

Ron Paul addresses the crowd at his Linn County Whistle Stop

Ron Paul’s whistle-stop tour of Iowa, done today in concert with his son Rand Paul, yielded enormous crowds often numbering in the hundreds.

The Polk County Whistle Stop in Downtown Des Moines attracted more than 700 supporters, the Scott County Whistle Stop held in Davenport drew more than 350 people, and the Linn County Whistle Stop held in Cedar Rapids yielded more than 300 people.

In addition, the Black Hawk County Whistle Stop in Cedar Falls drew more than 300 supporters, and the Cerro Gordo County Whistle Stop in Mason City attracted more than 200 voters.

“The excitement is palpable as Ron and Rand Paul make Ron’s closing arguments to the hundreds of supporters who braved the cold, windy weather to see the Pauls. We hope this level of energy, so unique to Ron Paul’s candidacy, propels us to a strong top-three finish in tomorrow’s caucus,” said Ron Paul 2012 Iowa Chairman Drew Ivers.

Supporters listen as Ron Paul speaks during the Black Hawk County Whistle Sto.

Ron Paul greets the spillover crowd at the Cerro Gordo County Whistle Stop