Wrong. Your idea of “proof” is as substantial as your candidate’s rhetoric.
It’s like this Finny
If he supports banning Syrians until the vetting is fixed, but he doesn’t support Trump’s plan to ban all Muslims until the vetting can be fixed, then he supports allowing weakly vetted Muslims to enter the country.
You can argue with it all you want, but it’s pretty simple logic. They can sell that kind of illogical foolishness to sheeple on ABC/NBC/CBS/CNN/FOX, but they can’t sell it to people who can think on their own.