home to america, that america is a battlefield, and that the laws of war come home. but the laws of war don t involve due process, and can t. and i don t think they should. so, i don t want the law of war to be the law of america, because that would mean that we would be giving up on the bill of rights. on a slightly lighter note, you did get some support and you got some support from the democratic side. democratic senator ron wyden spoke up and defended you. senator paul, even majority leader harry reid had some praise for you and here is that. i ve been involved in a few filibust filibusters, as rand paul has, as rand paul did yesterday. and what i ve learned from my experiences, with talking filibusters, is this. to succeed, you need strong convictions, but also a strong bladder. it s obvious, senator paul has both. i have to say, i was
so there s a gray area in your mind? no, on awlaki, my opinion is that it would have been better to try him for treason, and he could have been executed, because you can have a death penalty for a treason case. for people who are engaged in a battlefield overseas, that are holding grenade launchers or firing weapons, there is no due process. my point is is that senators mccain and graham say that they want the laws of war to come home to america, that america is a battlefield, and that the laws of war come home. but the laws of war don t involve due process, and can t. and i don t think they should. so, i don t want the law of war to be the law of america, because that would mean that we would be giving up on the bill of rights. on a slightly lighter note, you did get some support and you got some support from the democratic side. democratic senator ron wyden spoke up and defended you. senator paul, even majority leader harry reid had some
holding grenade launchers or firing weapons, there is no due process. my point is is that senators mccain and graham say that they want the laws of war to come home to america, that america is a battlefield, and that the laws of war come home. but the laws of war don t involve due process, and can t. and i don t think they should. so, i don t want the law of war to be the law of america, because that would mean that we would be giving up on the bill of rights. on a slightly lighter note, you did get some support and you got some support from the democratic side. democratic senator ron wyden spoke up and defended you. senator paul, even majority leader harry reid had some praise for you and here is that. i ve been involved in a few filibusters, as rand paul has, as rand paul did yesterday. and what i ve learned from my experiences, with talking filibusters, is this. to succeed, you need strong convictions, but also a strong
demeaning the office of the presidency. your thoughts? the reason the question is asked is precisely because of the near is behind senator mccain and graham s logic. they think the whole world is is a battlefield, including america, and that the laws of war should apply. the laws of war don t involve due process. so, senator graham has been very explicit on the floor to say when they ask you for attorney you tell them to shut up. that s my understanding the way america works, not the way i understand an american would be accused of a crime would tell them if you want a lawyer to shut up. so i don t think the laws of war apply to america, i think the bill of rights do and i think it s a disservice to our soldiers that we have senators up there arguing that the bill of rights aren t important. this is a very serious question. it was a question that took me a month and a half to get an answer to and so i would argue, and i think that a lot of the public would agree with me, both on the