He had the details of the families wrong, but he had the point right. Knowing relatives were permitted to flee when they should have had to account.
That's him answering a question other than the one that is being asked.
Look, the quote has been provided multiple times. He talked about "taking out" the families of terrorists because "they care about them". That is something completely different from saying that we should hold for questioning family members of known terrorists. You're focusing only on one remark in one context but ignoring the broader statements he has made.
He's had a million chances to come out and say "no, I am not talking about taking out someone just because they have a family member who is a terrorist." He hasn't said that. At least, not that I'm aware.
This family thing IS valid. When Germans attack French, they do so knowing that German Mothers will die.
When Saudi’s wear masks and cut off American heads on Youtube, they do this knowing their Saudi Mother faces no ramifications.
It is legitimate to make your enemies take responsibility for their actions.
That’s because I don’t disagree with his point. It was brought up again about families, and his illustration was which families he meant. Some people simply don’t interpret correctly what he’s saying.