Tucker grilled her as well, to my satisfaction.
She asserted the language she has asked be revised could have made lots of innocents vulnerable to a lawsuit.
She didn’t veto anything. If revisions aren’t satisfactory, she’ll demand a new bill.
She’s not caving, imho.
“She asserted the language she has asked be revised could have made lots of innocents vulnerable to a lawsuit.”
The bill has 4 sections, she wants 2 of them gone, completely. If he’s using the term ‘revise’, she’s flat-out lying. She wants the bill gutted, she can at least be that honest about her intentions.