Duh. Not to muddle the issue any further, I'll agree they were talking about the bill. They were also talking about the amendments to the bill, as each speaker announces. Feinstein, for example, at around 5:50:
What they were discussing:
However, as reported earlier, the compromise amendment still may not
pass muster.
So, I'll still support the President's veto if it happens.
Hahahahha! Delusional!
Your Thomas link was dead by the way.
Those Feinstein amendments were not what Levin was discussing at 4:43. This Senate debate was held on November 17th and the Feinstein amendment was not introduced and voted on until December 1st. So Feinstein mentioning that there are proposed amendments mean exactly nothing.
So I get that you trust Obama, blah blah blah, but remember, Obama was the one who requested the language to include US citizens (Or asked for the bill not to exclude US citizens, whichever is clearer to you).
So in summary, Obama wanted the power to detain US citizens indefinitely regardless of where they are picked up, and you are cool with him having that power.
Also Obama did threaten a veto but not over the issue of detaining US citizens. That was his proposal after all. I already gave you the administrations misgivings:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/legislative/sap/112/saphr1540r_20110524.pdf So it’s interesting that support of Obama is more important than any one principle or policy for you. I pretty much knew that but glad to have you confirm it.
