Given the changes in Dodd's story over time, I am not sure who could be. In this latest story on CNN, see the link below, Dodd is now indicating that it was a compromise he made to keep the amendment in the bill.

Remember that the initial bailout of AIG was done by the Treasury Department under old rules and did not require a new spending bill from congress.

In addition, given the existing law in the state of Connecticut, it is likely that state law would have required the payout of bonuses. If these bonuses were not paid to the letter of the existing contracts, it would have opened up AIG to lawsuits that could have doubled the amount payable to the contract holders. This was the main concern of the Obama administration, according to Dodd.

Whether or not you believe Dodd, especially considering how often he has changed his story over the last few days, he is a US senator and no-one can force him to modify a bill. Negotiate with him, bargain with him, maybe put pressure on him, but not force him.

First of all: Politicians often lie in these kinds of situations. Don't listen to what people are saying after the fact--read news articles from about a month ago concerning their positions before the whole controversy began. The source below quotes from and links to several of these articles.

Dodd is right. He publicly spoke for the need for great limits on executive pay and this is well-documented. The Administration also publicly expressed concern about excessive limits. The Republican Party, typically, expressed fear that any such limits would be Socialism.