Rand Paul accuses Jon Stewart of being 'part of left-wing mob' after criticism over 9/11 victim fund

Sen. Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulSenate Democrats to hold caucus meeting Wednesday with ex-ISIS envoy Partisan squabbles endanger congressional response to Trump's course on Syria Paul blocks vote on House-passed Syria resolution for second time MORE (R-Ky.) accused Jon Stewart of being a member of the "left-wing mob" Thursday after the comedian and activist called Paul's move to block legislation to to extend the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund an "abomination."

“I know Jon Stewart. Jon Stewart is sometimes funny, sometimes informed. In this case, he’s neither funny nor informed," Paul said on Fox News while speaking with host Neil Cavuto.

Paul argued that he's spent his entire Senate career putting forward "pay-fors anytime spending is expanded," including for disaster relief funding. 

ADVERTISEMENT

"[Stewart is] really not informed," Paul added, before asserting that his "his name-calling" exposed him as a member of the "left-wing mob" who "really isn’t using his brain."

"It's really kind of disgusting," Paul continued. "He pretended for years when he was on his comedy show to be somebody who could see both sides and see through the B.S. Now he is the B.S. The B.S. meter is through the roof when you see him calling people names and calling people an abomination, when I'm asking for something reasonable." 

Paul on Wednesday sparked widespread outrage from Democrats after he objected to Sen. Kirsten GillibrandKirsten GillibrandSanders seeks spark from Ocasio-Cortez at Queens rally Overnight Defense — Presented by Boeing — House passes resolution rebuking Trump over Syria | Sparks fly at White House meeting on Syria | Dems say Trump called Pelosi a 'third-rate politician' | Trump, Graham trade jabs Senate confirms Trump's Air Force secretary pick MORE's (D-N.Y.) attempt to get the upper chamber to approve a House-passed bill that would reauthorize the victim compensation fund through fiscal 2090. 

Gillibrand tried to gain the upper chamber's approval by requesting unanimous consent, a procedural move that allows a bill to skip numerous steps if it's passed unanimously. 

But Paul, citing the United States's growing debt, objected, arguing that any new spending needed to be "offset by cutting spending that's less valuable." Paul added that he would offer an amendment to the House bill if it is brought up for a vote in the Senate. 
 
Stewart, a longtime advocate for 9/11 first responders, said he was unimpressed by the Kentucky senator's "fiscal responsibility virtue signaling." He also called it "outrageous" for Paul to argue for balancing the budget when he voted for President TrumpDonald John TrumpGraham to introduce resolution condemning House impeachment inquiry Support for impeachment inches up in poll Fox News's Bret Baier calls Trump's attacks on media 'a problem' MORE's tax cuts. 
 
Paul dismissed the charge, saying that he had wanted a "pay-go provision" balancing spending with revenue but that his Senate colleagues voted against it. He later accused Stewart and Gillibrand of "telling a lie," adding that he's always insisted on spending cuts.