• With: Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.

    This is a rush transcript from "Your World," July 16, 2013. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

    ERIC BOLLING, GUEST HOST: To Egypt, where we are clearly not buying their love, so maybe it's time to stop putting a deposit down on their hate while they're burning our flag.

    Senator Rand Paul says America continues to burn billions, giving them aid, and the Republican from Kentucky says it's time to pull that plug.

    Now, thank you for joining us, Senator.

    Tell us, so no aid at all. I tend to agree with you. Boy, I got to tell you, with all that is going on, we don't know who we're giving money. Just cut off aid completely, sir?

    SEN. RAND PAUL, R-KY.: Well, the law says when there's a military coup the aid should end. So, the first thing we ought to do is obey the law.

    The president seems to think he is above the law and he can do whatever he wants, but we pass laws and some of us think it's pretty important that we obey the law and that the president should obey the law.

    So, yes, the aid should finish.

    BOLLING: But he doesn't call it a military coup, does he?

    (LAUGHTER)

    PAUL: He is the only person in the country who doesn't think it's a military coup. It's really even beyond debating. It's such a ridiculous notion that you could say the military evicted Morsi, but that's not a coup? In fact, the statute goes one step further. The statue says either a military coup or anything substantially affected by the military, the aid should end.

    BOLLING: Aid should end.

    All right, can we turn to some of the news of the day? There's all this talk about the filibuster, the nuclear option. Can you tell us what is going on, break it down in simple terms for our viewer?

    PAUL: Well, basically, the filibuster is when one senator or more stands up and says that you're going to speak until you can speak no more, and then sometimes it happens where it delays things where you don't speak, you just ask for a 60-vote margin, which means more than 50; 60 senators have to vote to pass something.

    It has been used more recently, and the Democrats are unhappy about it so they want to change the rules. But in order to change the rules they have to break a rule to change the rules, because we don't normally change the rules in the middle of the year.

    All that being said, there's some use for the filibuster. I used the filibuster to make the president respond, can you kill an American with a drone without a trial? And he finally said no. I'm using the filibuster or a hold right now to hold up the FBI director because he is using drones to spy on Americans but won't tell us how he is using them. So I'm using the filibuster to get information. I think it's an important tool.

    BOLLING: Tell us a little bit more about that. You're putting a hold on it. Can explain what that means? It's a little bit of political speak. Maybe people don't understand what that means. Go ahead.

    PAUL: A hold is like a filibuster in the sense that I'm saying if you want him to be released from my hold, which is kind of figurative, if you want to vote on him, you're going have to end my filibuster and have a 60- vote margin and then do it again.

    Some people say, oh, well, that's ridiculous. You're just an obstructionist. My response would be, I'm trying to get a real truth. Is the FBI using the Bill of Rights, are they seeking a warrant from a judge before they spy on us? That to me is an important truth and the only way I can do it is by using my leverage as a senator.

    So, I think the leverage of using the filibuster to get information and to make the president obey the law, I think it's a very important tool. And our founding fathers put it in there for precisely this reason.

    BOLLING: Well, for that reason, to call attention to what they're trying to do, especially if you're in the minority, you can do that. And, frankly, if you didn't have a filibuster, what would stop President Obama from appointing, say, Al Sharpton as attorney general or Rachel Maddow on the Supreme Court?

    PAUL: Right.

    If you were to get an extremist like that, someone with an extreme point of view, the majority here could pass it with 51 votes. But with a filibuster, then it would take 60 votes and you're less likely to get someone with those kind of extreme views to be nominated or approved by the Senate.

    BOLLING: OK. Tell me again what's your hold on James Comey? President Obama wants to put him in as director of the FBI.

    PAUL: Yes. And I'm placing a hold on it, not because I have the intention of ultimately defeating him, but I'm going to slow it down enough to see if the administration will respond to my question. I asked the FBI about 15 questions about three or four weeks ago, but they have not responded to me.

    I want to know when the FBI uses a drone to fly over my property or someone's house, are they getting a warrant first or are they just doing it willy-nilly because they can?

    The thing about a drone is it has amazing ability to look everywhere from 50,000 feet, so you don't know you're being spied upon, and I think that that kind of spying goes against right to privacy that all Americans have, and I want to make sure that this isn't being done without a judge's warrant. If it is, I will highly object to what is going on and try to stop it.

    BOLLING: And last thought, sir. While you have this hold on the nominee, can they break that hold?

    (CROSSTALK)

    PAUL: The way they break the hold is they bring it to the floor and they get 60 votes. So a hold really isn't that you stop someone indefinitely. It's that you threaten to slow down the process by -- it's sort of like -- a hold is like the beginning of a filibuster, and should they bring it to the floor and I choose to speak like I did on the drone subject earlier, then as long as I can speak, I can stop the debate. But there are certain physical limits to how long you can speak.

    (LAUGHTER)

    PAUL: So, you can't hold things forever.

    (CROSSTALK)

    BOLLING: You did 13 hours, sir. You did 13 hours. What would you do differently this time?

    PAUL: Tennis shoes. Got to have tennis shoes next time.

    BOLLING: Right. And what about -- are you allowed to eat and drink while you're doing this?

    (CROSSTALK)

    PAUL: Yes, I would probably have more food in my pockets. I had a lot of candy bars that people were bringing me, and Senator Kirk brought me a thermos and an apple. But then it turned out that was against the rules and the sergeant at arms took my apple and the thermos from me, which was kind of comical, but it was a great gesture.

    BOLLING: Senator, we have to leave. We're coming up against the hard break. Appreciate your time.