“Because he is the candidate whose position, if they had been in place, would have prevented Kahn and his son from entering the U.S. And whose most influential advisor would deport Kahn and his family immediately. That’s why he was there.”
So Khan was there to stop something in the past, like Terminator style? No, not at all. Bogus reasoning.
Khan was there to support his business and income. He runs an immigration law firm in NYC, specializing in Muslim immigration. He supports Sharia in America and is connected with the Muslim Brotherhood. Get a frickin clue.
If he cared about his son’s legacy AT ALL he wouldn’t support the Democrats. It was the Democrat Congress which cut Iraq OCO funding in 2007 ensuring the US withdrawal and the ascendency of ISIS.
Khan and the Democrats are equally corrupt. Money before morals. A marriage of convenience and greed.
Not bogus at all. Kahn and his family are from Pakistan. Even if you take the mildest of all of Trump's proposals on Muslims entering the country then Khan and his family, including his son, would never have been allowed in. What the Democrats were trying to do, obviously, was not to necessarily honor Humayun Khan's service and sacrifice to his adopted country but to highlight Trump's proposal to ban Muslims from entering. So striking back at Khan's father and blaming his son's death on radical Islam is missing the Democrat's point entirely. They would still be hammering the ban home...if Trump hadn't taken off after the parents. Now they're playing up the 'insulting the gold star mother' angle.
If he cared about his son’s legacy AT ALL he wouldn’t support the Democrats. It was the Democrat Congress which cut Iraq OCO funding in 2007 ensuring the US withdrawal and the ascendency of ISIS.
But it's the Republican candidate who would have banned him. And it's Newt Gingrich who would deport him immediately. That's his concern. And certainly no reason for him to back Trump.