While the Attorney General did answer Rand Paul’s question as stated, it does not answer or define what constitutes “combat”, and even then, to say the government has the authority to execute a citizen based only on allegation or suspicion or being in “combat”, or by simply classifying someone as an enemy combatant prior to capture thereby claiming the Constitution no longer applies to them (which removes the accused ability to prove they are innocent), is a complete disregard for the heart of the rule of law.
There have been casualties of innocent people even in the use of drones to kill American citizen on foreign soil who were only alleged or suspected of so-called “terrorist” activity, which is an absolute breech of Article 3 Section 3 “No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”. Notice it does not say “Citizen” but rather “persons” which by human nature possess rights no matter where they are, or if they are considered criminals, terrorists, or not. This coincides which the 5th Amendment “No person… …shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…”
It is unwise, illogical, and against all Principles on which the Constitution was based to think armed drones in the use of assassination, especially on American soil, is the least bit acceptable… and would never be so by any rational mind.