adult, or any senator who would say that they get to judge your guilt and without a charge send you to indefinite detention. these are the same people who are also arguing that the laws of war apply to america, because america is the battlefield. in the law of war, the conclusion to that is that you don t get due process. so what they re arguing for is alarming. every american should be alarmeded and worried about the philosophy behind their arguments. and i understand what you re saying. i get the logic of that. but, you know, you ve said in the past that you would have convicted al awlaki of treason, and you wouldn t have been against a drone strike against him. how can you be all right with al awlaki killed in yemen by a drone, and not be okay with him being killed by a drone here if he s an enemy combatant plotting against america in america. i think, in america, we have a doctrine of lethal force if
alarmeded and worried about the philosophy behind their arguments. and i understand what you re saying. i get the logic of that. but, you know, you ve said in the past that you would have convicted al awlaki of treason, and you wouldn t have been against a drone strike against him. how can you be all right with al awlaki killed in yemen by a drone, and not be okay with him being killed by a drone here if he s an enemy combatant plotting against america in america. i think, in america, we have a doctrine of lethal force if you re using lethal force. a person named awlaki has a grenade launcher on his shoulder, they can be wiped out with lethal force by the police, by the fbi. if you re robbing a liquor store so the issue is the drone? you don t mind killing him, it s the drone? no, it has nothing to do with that. you can use lethal force when somebody is committing lethal force. but what we re doing with our targeted drone attacks is we re
conclusion to that is that you don t get due process. so what they re arguing for is alarming. every american should be alarmeded and worried about the philosophy behind their arguments. and i understand what you re saying. i get the logic of that. but, you know, you ve said in the past that you would have convicted al awlaki of treason, and you wouldn t have been against a drone strike against him. how can you be all right with al awlaki killed in yemen by a drone, and not be okay with him being killed by a drone here if he s an enemy combatant plotting against america in america. i think, in america, we have a doctrine of lethal force if you re using lethal force. a person named awlaki has a grenade launcher on his shoulder, they can be wiped out with lethal force by the police, by the fbi. if you re robbing a liquor store