January 25, 2013
John O. Brennan
Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. Brennan,
As the Senate moves forward with its consideration of your nomination to be the next Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it will be necessary to examine not only your qualifications and record, but also to determine whether you will provide the necessary leadership as the head of an agency that operates under unique rules for transparency and that quietly holds significant influence over the advancement of America’s strategic priorities around the globe. After reviewing your record—as well of the record of President Obama, to whom you have provided a great deal of advice and direction on issues of national security and terrorism—I must ask several questions to help inform my decision on your nomination:
 Do you agree with the argument put forth on numerous occasions by the Executive Branch that it is legal to order the killing of American citizens and that it is not compelled to explain its reasoning in reaching this conclusion? Do you believe this is a good precedent for the government to set?
 Congress has been denied access to legal opinions and interpretations authorizing placement of U.S. citizens believed to be engaged in terrorism on targeting lists, thus denying Congress the ability to perform important oversight. Will you provide access to those opinions, as well as future opinions?
 Would it not be appropriate to require a judge or court to review every case before the individual in question is added to a targeting list? Please describe the due process requirements in place for those individuals being considered for addition to a targeting list.
 Would you agree that it is paradoxical that the federal government would need to go before a judge to authorize a wiretap on a U.S. citizen overseas, but possibly not to order a lethal drone strike against the same individual? If not, please explain why you believe something similar to the FISA standard should not be applied in regards to lethal actions against U.S. citizens.
 Is it still your intent to codify and normalize the so-called “disposition matrix”—a targeting list that you helped to establish—to direct counterterrorism operations in future administrations, as well as the targeted killing procedures you have outlined in your “playbook”?
 Aside from the president, how many people have access to the full disposition matrix? Of those, how many participate in the process to add individuals to the targeting list, and how many have the authority to veto an individual’s inclusion?
 How many times have you specifically objected to an individual’s inclusion on a
targeting list, or how many times have you recommended to the president against
including an individual on a targeting list?
 How often are the criteria used for determining whether an individual should be included
on a targeting list amended (not simply reviewed)? How many government officials and
which agencies participate in establishing these criteria? Does the National
Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) have final say over all criteria?
 Of those individuals who have been but are no longer included in the disposition matrix
(or other targeting list), how many have been killed and how many have been removed
from the list by other means?
 How many individuals remain in the disposition matrix (or other targeting list) today and
how does that number compare to the number in prior years? Is the number growing,
shrinking, or static?
 How many U.S. citizens have been added to the disposition matrix (or other targeting
list), and how many remain on a targeting list?
 How many U.S. citizens have been intentionally killed by U.S. drone strikes since 2008?
How many have been unintentionally killed by U.S. drone strikes during the same
period?
 In how many countries has the U.S. executed a drone strike against a presumed terrorist?
 In each of the countries where the U.S. has executed a drone strike in the past four years,
please provide a year-to-year estimate of those who self-identify or otherwise associate
with al Qaeda within that country.
 You have indicated that no “credible evidence” exists to support recent claims of civilian
casualties resulting from U.S. drone strikes. Please indicate how you define “credible
evidence” and what process is in place to evaluate the legitimacy of alleged civilian
casualties.
 Which countries have publicly stated their support for U.S. drone strikes within their
territory? Have any publicly indicated support for U.S. drone strikes into the long-term?
 How relevant is the opinion of the public in the countries where U.S. drone strikes are
ongoing? In those countries, how would you characterize public opinion toward U.S.
drone strikes?
 In light of the civilian casualties caused by the extensive use of drone strikes under your
guidance, do you continue to stand by your remark that “sometimes you have to take life
to save lives”?
 Do you condone the CIA’s practice of counting certain civilians killed by U.S. drone
strikes as ‘militants,’ simply because they were of military age and within close
proximity of a target? Do you believe such accounting provides an accurate picture of
our drone program?
 What changes to the CIA review process will you put in place, or have you attempted to
put in place in your previous role, to prevent further unintentional killing of U.S.
citizens?
 What role did you play in approving the drone strike that led to the death of the underage,
U.S. citizen son of Anwar al-Awlaki? Unlike his father, he had not renounced his U.S.
citizenship. Was the younger al-Awlaki the intended target of the U.S. drone strike which
took his life? Further, do you reject the subsequent claim, apparently originating from
anonymous U.S. government sources, that the young man had actually been a “militaryage
male” of 20 years or more of age, something that was later proven false by the release of his birth certificate?
 Do you believe that the inadvertent killing of civilians, and the resulting anger from local populations, should cause us to limit, rather than expand, the drone program?
 The CIA has and will reportedly continue to have authorization to carry out lethal drone strikes in Pakistan autonomously and without approval from the president. Will you seek to reduce or eliminate this practice, or keep it in place? Will you hold to the discussed one or two year phase-out of this authority, or work to expedite the phase-out?
 What conditions would need to be present in order for you to recommend against executing a drone strike?
 Will you seek to return the CIA to its origins as an intelligence collection agency, or will you preside over continued growth in paramilitary drone strike operations? What are the ramifications of keeping lethal actions such as drone strikes within the CIA, thereby exempting it from the levels of transparency applied to the military?
 Will you support the proposal of your predecessor to expand the CIA’s drone fleet? How will you address any new drone bases operated by the CIA?
 Globally, how many of the individuals currently being actively targeted for disposition were directly and personally involved in the planning, support, or execution of the 9/11 terror attacks, or the bombing of the USS Cole, or the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania?
 Do you believe that lethal drone strikes constitute “hostilities” as defined by the War Powers Act? On what legal basis does the administration derive authorization to conduct such strikes?
 The president has stated that “al Qaeda has been decimated.” Do you believe this assertion is correct and, if so, who is it that we are now targeting if not al Qaeda?
 Is the U.S. drone strike strategy exclusively focused on targeting al Qaeda, or is it also conducting counterinsurgency operations against militants seeking to further undermine their government, such as in Yemen?
 Would you support expansion of the CIA’s drone program into Mali to provide support to counterterrorism operations?
 Do you believe a long-term, sustained drone strike program can eliminate all threats to the American people, or completely eliminate al Qaeda, as you have indicated is your intent? If not, how would we eventually wind down the drone program? At what point do you believe drone strikes will reach the point of diminishing returns? If so, can it be done on the scale the drone program operates on now, or would it have to be expanded?
 Do you support the Attorney General’s 2012 guidance to the NCTC that it may deliberately collect, store, and “continually assess” massive amounts of data on all U.S. citizens for potential correlations to terrorism, even if the U.S. citizens targeted have no known ties to terrorism?
 Please describe in detail the steps you have taken as Assistant to the President, as well as transparency measures you would support as Director of the CIA, to improve the transparency of the administration’s counterterrorism policies.
I understand that this is a significant amount of information relating to sensitive operations and procedures. However, answering these most basic of questions—especially those dealing with the power of the federal government to kill its own citizens under secret authorizations never to
be seen by the public—is a necessary step in the examination of our conduct around the globe, the protection of our Constitutional rights and our values, as well as your suitability to oversee these priorities as the Director of the CIA. I also believe that we can provide appropriate transparency and have a productive dialogue on the direction of our counterterrorism policies without weakening our national security. In fact, many of the matters I address in this letter have already been publicly disclosed and widely discussed. With this in mind, I respectfully request you provide an unclassified written response to the questions I have included by the time the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence begins consideration of your nomination on February 7th, 2013. I will consider your cooperation in this matter when the full Senate begins formal debate on your nomination, especially in regards to procedural matters requiring unanimous consent.
The president has described you as “an advocate for greater transparency in our counterterrorism policy, and adherence to the rule of law,” and this is a perfect opportunity to demonstrate your commitment to both. I further trust that I can count on your cooperation not only during your confirmation process but, should you gain confirmation, throughout the duration of your tenure at the CIA. Thank you for your prompt attention to these questions, and I look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Rand Paul, M.D.
United States Senator

February 12, 2013
John O. Brennan
Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. Brennan,
I understand that you are in receipt of my letter dated January 25, 2013, requesting answers to a set of questions relating to your nomination to be Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) is now considering, and which the full Senate may soon debate. I hope you are working expeditiously to answer that letter, as I initially asked that you provide a written response before SSCI’s initial hearing on your nomination, which was held on February 7th.
In addition to the first questions I submitted, I would also like to submit a few more questions in light of the recent release of a Department of Justice (DOJ) white paper on the use of lethal force against those suspected of terrorism:
• Do you believe that the president has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil? What about the use of lethal force against a non-U.S. person on U.S. soil?
• Do you believe that the prohibition on CIA participation in domestic law enforcement, first established by the National Security Act of 1947, would apply to the use of lethal force, especially lethal force directed at an individual on a targeting list, if a U.S. citizen on a targeting list was found to be operating on U.S. soil? What if the individual on the targeting list was a non-U.S. person but found to be operating on U.S. soil? Do you consider such an operation to be domestic law enforcement, or would it only be subject to the president’s wartime powers?
• Would such a discovery as described above invalidate any previous secret indictments against a U.S. citizen related to their disposition? In other words, if a U.S. citizen had already been indicted on terror-related charges in secret, could that indictment be used as a basis for lethal force, even if they were later discovered to be operating on U.S. soil?
• One of the criteria outlined by the DOJ white paper as necessary before the use of lethal force would be authorized is that capture must be “infeasible.” Therefore, are there any circumstances under which it might be considered “infeasible” to capture a terrorism suspect operating on U.S. soil? Would it matter if it was deemed infeasible to capture a suspect operating on U.S. soil who is also a U.S. citizen?
• How would the criteria for disposition be modified, if at all, if a person on a targeting list was found to be operating on U.S. soil?


• Do you believe that the Posse Comitatus Act, or any other prohibition on the use of the military in domestic law enforcement, would prohibit the use of military hardware and/or personnel in pursuing terrorism suspects—especially those on a targeting list—found to be operating on U.S. soil? If not, would you support the use of such assets in pursuit of either U.S. citizen or non-U.S. persons on U.S. soil suspected of terrorist activity?
• Do you believe that the Insurrection Act provides sufficient legal basis for using military hardware and/or personnel to pursue U.S. citizens on U.S. soil if it is believed they are participating in terrorism-related activities? What if they had previously been placed on a targeting list?
• Have you personally been involved in either the decision to place a U.S. citizen on a targeting list, or the decision to set criteria by which U.S. citizens may be placed on a targeting list?

As I relayed in my previous letter, these issues must be discussed openly so that the American people can understand what constraints exist on the government’s power to use lethal force against its citizens. Before you are confirmed to head the CIA, it must be apparent that you understand and will honor the protections provided to every American by the Constitution. For that reason, I request again that you answer the questions I have submitted, both in this letter and the one before it, and I will object to all unanimous consent requests relating to your nomination until you have done so. For your reference, I have included a copy of my previous letter. I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Sincerely,
Rand Paul, M.D.
United States Senator
Enclosure