Trump responds to Khan parents DNC speech megathread

[Wells]

Atlas Democrat logic:
Mrs. and Mr. Khan: Yuge Freedom Fighters, bravely acting in defiance for their country!

The Benghazi mother: Classless bitch using her sons death to attack Hillary.

FWIW, I find Trump's comments disgusting. They are reprehensible and wrong. But a Presidential candidate being an asshole is still better than a corrupt, tired, and incompetent relic from the 90s. 

And FWIW, one of the Benghazi mothers asked Trump to stop politicizing her son's death. And unlike Benghazi Night, there was reason for Mr. Khan to speak.

The "Benghazi mother" who asked Trump to stop speaking was the mother of Chris Stevens, the career diplomat who supported the Libyan mission and played a role in his own demise. The mother of the marines who died protecting the very man who assisted Clinton and the State Department in the insidious campaign against Qaddafi isn't a "Benghazi victim."

And yes, Benghazi is a black mark on Clinton's record as Secretary of State. Sorry, there is a lot to talk about there. There is a reason for them to speak. Can you guys handle any criticism of Hillary at all?

13 different attacks on our Embassay happened in the last administration, and yet only Benghazi has been investigated non-stop for FOUR YEARS now with no new conclusions.

And if your team really has this much contempt for Chris Stevens then you probably should stop addressing his name every single time you talk about Benghazi.

Oh, I'm just speaking for myself, not my team.

Also, the 13 embassy attacks never resulted in multiple deaths, nor were we responsible for directly destabilizing the situation outside of Iraq.

That's completely false. The attack on the US embassy in Yemen in 2008 resulted in 16 deaths, which is four times as many as the Benghazi attack.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Atlas Democrat logic:
Mrs. and Mr. Khan: Yuge Freedom Fighters, bravely acting in defiance for their country!

The Benghazi mother: Classless bitch using her sons death to attack Hillary.

FWIW, I find Trump's comments disgusting. They are reprehensible and wrong. But a Presidential candidate being an asshole is still better than a corrupt, tired, and incompetent relic from the 90s. 

And FWIW, one of the Benghazi mothers asked Trump to stop politicizing her son's death. And unlike Benghazi Night, there was reason for Mr. Khan to speak.

The "Benghazi mother" who asked Trump to stop speaking was the mother of Chris Stevens, the career diplomat who supported the Libyan mission and played a role in his own demise. The mother of the marines who died protecting the very man who assisted Clinton and the State Department in the insidious campaign against Qaddafi isn't a "Benghazi victim."

And yes, Benghazi is a black mark on Clinton's record as Secretary of State. Sorry, there is a lot to talk about there. There is a reason for them to speak. Can you guys handle any criticism of Hillary at all?

13 different attacks on our Embassay happened in the last administration, and yet only Benghazi has been investigated non-stop for FOUR YEARS now with no new conclusions.

And if your team really has this much contempt for Chris Stevens then you probably should stop addressing his name every single time you talk about Benghazi.

Oh, I'm just speaking for myself, not my team.

Also, the 13 embassy attacks never resulted in multiple deaths, nor were we responsible for directly destabilizing the situation outside of Iraq.

That's completely false. The attack on the US embassy in Yemen in 2008 resulted in 16 deaths, which is four times as many as the Benghazi attack.

Six attackers, six police, and six Yemeni citizens were killed. No Americans.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Atlas Democrat logic:
Mrs. and Mr. Khan: Yuge Freedom Fighters, bravely acting in defiance for their country!

The Benghazi mother: Classless bitch using her sons death to attack Hillary.

FWIW, I find Trump's comments disgusting. They are reprehensible and wrong. But a Presidential candidate being an asshole is still better than a corrupt, tired, and incompetent relic from the 90s. 

And FWIW, one of the Benghazi mothers asked Trump to stop politicizing her son's death. And unlike Benghazi Night, there was reason for Mr. Khan to speak.

The "Benghazi mother" who asked Trump to stop speaking was the mother of Chris Stevens, the career diplomat who supported the Libyan mission and played a role in his own demise. The mother of the marines who died protecting the very man who assisted Clinton and the State Department in the insidious campaign against Qaddafi isn't a "Benghazi victim."

And yes, Benghazi is a black mark on Clinton's record as Secretary of State. Sorry, there is a lot to talk about there. There is a reason for them to speak. Can you guys handle any criticism of Hillary at all?

13 different attacks on our Embassay happened in the last administration, and yet only Benghazi has been investigated non-stop for FOUR YEARS now with no new conclusions.

And if your team really has this much contempt for Chris Stevens then you probably should stop addressing his name every single time you talk about Benghazi.

Oh, I'm just speaking for myself, not my team.

Also, the 13 embassy attacks never resulted in multiple deaths, nor were we responsible for directly destabilizing the situation outside of Iraq.

The difference with Benghazi was that it happened in the midst of the 2012 political campaign, and the real narrative undermined Obama's claims to being an effective President on foreign policy.  A false narrative was therefore created to deflect the press from the fact that it was radical jihadist terrorists that perpetuated the attack.

I think much more of Benghazi and the "narrative" issue has been made than what should be.  There is another issue, and that issue is one of whether or not we should have had an embassy in Benghazi in the first place.  It is the responsibility of the host country, and not our military, to provide security for our embassies.  If our embassies require a massive show of force to defend them in a nation, then we don't have an embassy there; it's the way it's always been.

[Suburbia]

Oh, Donald. I guess he can say whatever he wants to say, but he's pretty crazy. I don't know if this will hurt him in the polls. Probably not. It probably will not. Mr. Khan served his country.

[Seriously?]

He's right, her husband probably told her she couldn't. I thought that when I saw her

Typical knee-jerk reaction by the leftists on this board when Classic Conservative basically states the horrible way that some Muslim women are treated by their male counterparts.
And assuming that they didn't remove the post on their own, then there's that typical Atlas BS censorship.
Fact: Muslim women are treated like dirt in Muslim-dominated countries. Ask Malala Yousafzai what happens when they try to aspire to learn or do other things that women here take for granted.
It's Untrustworthy, Crooked, Lyin' Hillary that is on the wrong side of history, taking money from unscrupulous folks like the Saudis.
Culturally, it's not outside of the realm of normalcy for the woman to concede to the male in Muslim culture. With that said, if the record states otherwise in the instant case, Trump should apologize and go from there.
But you folks really need to get a grip.

So it's okay to assume that an immigration lawyer living in the US, who had a son who died serving in the military would mistreat his wife because he's a Muslim? And you wouldn't just assume that the mother is staying silent because she's grieving over her dead son?? Why don't you take your own advice and get a ing grip?!

You can assume whatever you want to. Sometimes it makes you look like an ass, like it did here. With that said, I'll pass on the idea of a thought police. They have stuff like that in backwards-assed third world Muslim countries that Hillary! has no problem taking money from. Even though those countries oppress women.

Seriously .... if anyone here is "looking like an ass," it is you.
As this Atlas member so precisely pointed out, and it just happens to have your name painted all over it .....

Oh, I am sorry. I shouldn't have pointed out certain countries that Hillary! took money from degrade and demphasize the role of women in their societies. That's certainly not relevant to the discussion or anything.

The fact remains that in countries like Saudi Arabia, women are not equal to men. But that didn't stop HIllary! from making bank. I already said what Trump said was unwise. As is your candidate's position on taking money from foreign governments that oppress women.

[Wells]

Atlas Democrat logic:
Mrs. and Mr. Khan: Yuge Freedom Fighters, bravely acting in defiance for their country!

The Benghazi mother: Classless bitch using her sons death to attack Hillary.

FWIW, I find Trump's comments disgusting. They are reprehensible and wrong. But a Presidential candidate being an asshole is still better than a corrupt, tired, and incompetent relic from the 90s. 

And FWIW, one of the Benghazi mothers asked Trump to stop politicizing her son's death. And unlike Benghazi Night, there was reason for Mr. Khan to speak.

The "Benghazi mother" who asked Trump to stop speaking was the mother of Chris Stevens, the career diplomat who supported the Libyan mission and played a role in his own demise. The mother of the marines who died protecting the very man who assisted Clinton and the State Department in the insidious campaign against Qaddafi isn't a "Benghazi victim."

And yes, Benghazi is a black mark on Clinton's record as Secretary of State. Sorry, there is a lot to talk about there. There is a reason for them to speak. Can you guys handle any criticism of Hillary at all?

13 different attacks on our Embassay happened in the last administration, and yet only Benghazi has been investigated non-stop for FOUR YEARS now with no new conclusions.

And if your team really has this much contempt for Chris Stevens then you probably should stop addressing his name every single time you talk about Benghazi.

Oh, I'm just speaking for myself, not my team.

Also, the 13 embassy attacks never resulted in multiple deaths, nor were we responsible for directly destabilizing the situation outside of Iraq.

That's completely false. The attack on the US embassy in Yemen in 2008 resulted in 16 deaths, which is four times as many as the Benghazi attack.

Six attackers, six police, and six Yemeni citizens were killed. No Americans.

Actually, five Yemen civilians were killed, and one American citizen was killed.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Atlas Democrat logic:
Mrs. and Mr. Khan: Yuge Freedom Fighters, bravely acting in defiance for their country!

The Benghazi mother: Classless bitch using her sons death to attack Hillary.

FWIW, I find Trump's comments disgusting. They are reprehensible and wrong. But a Presidential candidate being an asshole is still better than a corrupt, tired, and incompetent relic from the 90s. 

And FWIW, one of the Benghazi mothers asked Trump to stop politicizing her son's death. And unlike Benghazi Night, there was reason for Mr. Khan to speak.

The "Benghazi mother" who asked Trump to stop speaking was the mother of Chris Stevens, the career diplomat who supported the Libyan mission and played a role in his own demise. The mother of the marines who died protecting the very man who assisted Clinton and the State Department in the insidious campaign against Qaddafi isn't a "Benghazi victim."

And yes, Benghazi is a black mark on Clinton's record as Secretary of State. Sorry, there is a lot to talk about there. There is a reason for them to speak. Can you guys handle any criticism of Hillary at all?

13 different attacks on our Embassay happened in the last administration, and yet only Benghazi has been investigated non-stop for FOUR YEARS now with no new conclusions.

And if your team really has this much contempt for Chris Stevens then you probably should stop addressing his name every single time you talk about Benghazi.

Oh, I'm just speaking for myself, not my team.

Also, the 13 embassy attacks never resulted in multiple deaths, nor were we responsible for directly destabilizing the situation outside of Iraq.

That's completely false. The attack on the US embassy in Yemen in 2008 resulted in 16 deaths, which is four times as many as the Benghazi attack.

Six attackers, six police, and six Yemeni citizens were killed. No Americans.

Actually, five Yemen civilians were killed, and one American citizen was killed.

There was not, however, a false narrative created about this event as there was in Benghazi.

Of course, the 2008 narrative was more about the collapsing US economy.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Atlas Democrat logic:
Mrs. and Mr. Khan: Yuge Freedom Fighters, bravely acting in defiance for their country!

The Benghazi mother: Classless bitch using her sons death to attack Hillary.

FWIW, I find Trump's comments disgusting. They are reprehensible and wrong. But a Presidential candidate being an asshole is still better than a corrupt, tired, and incompetent relic from the 90s. 

And FWIW, one of the Benghazi mothers asked Trump to stop politicizing her son's death. And unlike Benghazi Night, there was reason for Mr. Khan to speak.

The "Benghazi mother" who asked Trump to stop speaking was the mother of Chris Stevens, the career diplomat who supported the Libyan mission and played a role in his own demise. The mother of the marines who died protecting the very man who assisted Clinton and the State Department in the insidious campaign against Qaddafi isn't a "Benghazi victim."

And yes, Benghazi is a black mark on Clinton's record as Secretary of State. Sorry, there is a lot to talk about there. There is a reason for them to speak. Can you guys handle any criticism of Hillary at all?

13 different attacks on our Embassay happened in the last administration, and yet only Benghazi has been investigated non-stop for FOUR YEARS now with no new conclusions.

And if your team really has this much contempt for Chris Stevens then you probably should stop addressing his name every single time you talk about Benghazi.

Oh, I'm just speaking for myself, not my team.

Also, the 13 embassy attacks never resulted in multiple deaths, nor were we responsible for directly destabilizing the situation outside of Iraq.

That's completely false. The attack on the US embassy in Yemen in 2008 resulted in 16 deaths, which is four times as many as the Benghazi attack.

Six attackers, six police, and six Yemeni citizens were killed. No Americans.

Actually, five Yemen civilians were killed, and one American citizen was killed.

So yeah, the Yemen attack in other words wasn't as severe nor did it require the administration to lie about it. Ok.

[Hermit For Peace]

What a guy! America thanks you for all your sacrifices.

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

What a coward trump is...The guy lives a better life then 90% of Americans after draft dodging because he is a rich little brat that wouldn't want to risk a single hair on his worthless head, yet the asshole thinks he can attack our veterans. He hasn't sacrificed a goddamn thing and should never be allowed to be the cic of our military. We can't allow that to ever happen.

[ProudModerate2]

Fuzzy, what Trump said wasn't even criticism. It was just a race-baiting insult.
Trump's desire to strike back on any person who criticizes him, regardless of who they are, is disturbing.

When I post here, I endure folks calling me all sorts of names, and I endure the questioning of any and all of my motivations.  Some of it may be a bit unfair, but that's the price of advocacy in today's political discourse.  Folks who take a public stand are going to get negative feedback; that's just the way it is.

The Khans took a public stand.  God Bless them; that's their right.  When they did so, however, they forfeited the deference of being received uncritically.  Mr. Khan made partisan public statements.  Trump fired back.  And when Mr. Khan took Trump to task on the Constitution, Trump fired back about the issue on the status of women in the eyes of Muslims.  Was that wrong?  Is there some pot-calling-the-kettle-black here?

Fuzzy,
You are wrong.
There is a big difference between the two, it's not a simple kettle and pot description.
Mr Khan taking "trump to task on the Constitution," versus trump's personal attack on the Khans regarding the wider issue of "the status of women in the eyes of Muslims" is not comparable.
It's like me saying that your cooking (food) does not taste very well, and then out of nowhere, you call me a ni**er (if I were black) in retaliation.
And remember this bigoted attack from donald on the grieving Kahns who lost their son (a US soldier) comes directly from trump's mouth. This makes trump look completely un-presidential in the eyes of the public. What kind of president would say such a thing ?
I don't recall Hillary personally attacking the moms of those who died in Benghazi, after they spoke at the RNC.

I do wish to clarify certain things (although I'm sure I've said them before here).
I would vote for Trump if the election were held today, but I'm not asking anyone else to.  His persona is why I won't go further in my support for him.  I agree with him, issue by issue, more than any other candidate, but I do have reservations about his persona, and I understand why other folks do as well.  
If I were Trump, I would have responded to the Khans with something like, "I appreciate their son's sacrifice and empathize with their terrible loss, but I respectfully submit that the Khans and myself have differences as to what the Constitution says and doesn't say on the issue of immigration." and leave it at that.  I wouldn't have "gone there" on the issue of Mrs. Khan's silence.  .....

Fuzzy,
Your description of a proper response, that trump should have used, is spot on.
It at least sounds "Presidential," and not like a hot-head who has no control but to retaliate against everyone and anything with childish playground attacks.
The best thing, actually, would be for trump to just ignore it altogether, but we ALL know that trump does not have the temperament for any kind of "adult response."

The only thing that disturbs me (just barely) is that you use the word "persona" to describe trump's "verbal mess-ups" and comments that resemble hatred and bigotry. I understand that it probably makes it easier for you to support (or possibly support) trump if you tell us and others (like your friends and family) that these "errors" from trump are just "persona" related.
But your use of "persona" are putting it lightly .... very lightly.
The truth of the matter is that all these disgusting attacks from trump on "groups" of people, or on people directly (individually), makes him look like an (insert REALLY bad curse words here), and I would never describe this as something as simple as using the term "persona."

But in any case, using your description, it also baffles me that anyone could support a person with this kind of "persona," even though you support him "issue by issue."
His "style of persona" attacks/comments, should (IMO) override any policy/issue acceptance from the electorate.
It's like if you were to support your local police chief because his ways of dealing with crime are very much in tune with your beliefs, but time and again the chief refers to some of the perpetrators of crime in his jurisdiction, as ni**ers, sp*ks or white-trash, when seen live on camera during police updates (at the podium).

[Wells]

Atlas Democrat logic:
Mrs. and Mr. Khan: Yuge Freedom Fighters, bravely acting in defiance for their country!

The Benghazi mother: Classless bitch using her sons death to attack Hillary.

FWIW, I find Trump's comments disgusting. They are reprehensible and wrong. But a Presidential candidate being an asshole is still better than a corrupt, tired, and incompetent relic from the 90s. 

And FWIW, one of the Benghazi mothers asked Trump to stop politicizing her son's death. And unlike Benghazi Night, there was reason for Mr. Khan to speak.

The "Benghazi mother" who asked Trump to stop speaking was the mother of Chris Stevens, the career diplomat who supported the Libyan mission and played a role in his own demise. The mother of the marines who died protecting the very man who assisted Clinton and the State Department in the insidious campaign against Qaddafi isn't a "Benghazi victim."

And yes, Benghazi is a black mark on Clinton's record as Secretary of State. Sorry, there is a lot to talk about there. There is a reason for them to speak. Can you guys handle any criticism of Hillary at all?

13 different attacks on our Embassay happened in the last administration, and yet only Benghazi has been investigated non-stop for FOUR YEARS now with no new conclusions.

And if your team really has this much contempt for Chris Stevens then you probably should stop addressing his name every single time you talk about Benghazi.

Oh, I'm just speaking for myself, not my team.

Also, the 13 embassy attacks never resulted in multiple deaths, nor were we responsible for directly destabilizing the situation outside of Iraq.

That's completely false. The attack on the US embassy in Yemen in 2008 resulted in 16 deaths, which is four times as many as the Benghazi attack.

Six attackers, six police, and six Yemeni citizens were killed. No Americans.

Actually, five Yemen civilians were killed, and one American citizen was killed.

So yeah, the Yemen attack in other words wasn't as severe nor did it require the administration to lie about it. Ok.

So it wasn't as severe, even though more people were killed? Why does it only matter if Americans are killed? Shouldn't it matter that there have only been seven attacks under Obama and 12 attacks under Bush, and four attacks under Clinton and six under Rice? And after Benghazi, the State Department said it was a clearly planned attack (not based on a video).

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Atlas Democrat logic:
Mrs. and Mr. Khan: Yuge Freedom Fighters, bravely acting in defiance for their country!

The Benghazi mother: Classless bitch using her sons death to attack Hillary.

FWIW, I find Trump's comments disgusting. They are reprehensible and wrong. But a Presidential candidate being an asshole is still better than a corrupt, tired, and incompetent relic from the 90s. 

And FWIW, one of the Benghazi mothers asked Trump to stop politicizing her son's death. And unlike Benghazi Night, there was reason for Mr. Khan to speak.

The "Benghazi mother" who asked Trump to stop speaking was the mother of Chris Stevens, the career diplomat who supported the Libyan mission and played a role in his own demise. The mother of the marines who died protecting the very man who assisted Clinton and the State Department in the insidious campaign against Qaddafi isn't a "Benghazi victim."

And yes, Benghazi is a black mark on Clinton's record as Secretary of State. Sorry, there is a lot to talk about there. There is a reason for them to speak. Can you guys handle any criticism of Hillary at all?

13 different attacks on our Embassay happened in the last administration, and yet only Benghazi has been investigated non-stop for FOUR YEARS now with no new conclusions.

And if your team really has this much contempt for Chris Stevens then you probably should stop addressing his name every single time you talk about Benghazi.

Oh, I'm just speaking for myself, not my team.

Also, the 13 embassy attacks never resulted in multiple deaths, nor were we responsible for directly destabilizing the situation outside of Iraq.

That's completely false. The attack on the US embassy in Yemen in 2008 resulted in 16 deaths, which is four times as many as the Benghazi attack.

Six attackers, six police, and six Yemeni citizens were killed. No Americans.

Actually, five Yemen civilians were killed, and one American citizen was killed.

So yeah, the Yemen attack in other words wasn't as severe nor did it require the administration to lie about it. Ok.

So it wasn't as severe, even though more people were killed? Why does it only matter if Americans are killed? Shouldn't it matter that there have only been seven attacks under Obama and 12 attacks under Bush, and four attacks under Clinton and six under Rice? And after Benghazi, the State Department said it was a clearly planned attack (not based on a video).

Yes. It wasn't as severe, because the people killed weren't American citizens who were abandoned by their government in their hour of need. All twelve attacks under Bush resulted in little if any loss of American life, nor were any of those countries (besides any attacks inside Iraq) ruined by our own foreign policy.

And yes, American lives always come first. Is Bill Clinton responsible for the Armagh bombing? A lot of people were killed and he was President, even if no Americans were killed. Is that what you are trying to say?

[Wells]

Atlas Democrat logic:
Mrs. and Mr. Khan: Yuge Freedom Fighters, bravely acting in defiance for their country!

The Benghazi mother: Classless bitch using her sons death to attack Hillary.

FWIW, I find Trump's comments disgusting. They are reprehensible and wrong. But a Presidential candidate being an asshole is still better than a corrupt, tired, and incompetent relic from the 90s. 

And FWIW, one of the Benghazi mothers asked Trump to stop politicizing her son's death. And unlike Benghazi Night, there was reason for Mr. Khan to speak.

The "Benghazi mother" who asked Trump to stop speaking was the mother of Chris Stevens, the career diplomat who supported the Libyan mission and played a role in his own demise. The mother of the marines who died protecting the very man who assisted Clinton and the State Department in the insidious campaign against Qaddafi isn't a "Benghazi victim."

And yes, Benghazi is a black mark on Clinton's record as Secretary of State. Sorry, there is a lot to talk about there. There is a reason for them to speak. Can you guys handle any criticism of Hillary at all?

13 different attacks on our Embassay happened in the last administration, and yet only Benghazi has been investigated non-stop for FOUR YEARS now with no new conclusions.

And if your team really has this much contempt for Chris Stevens then you probably should stop addressing his name every single time you talk about Benghazi.

Oh, I'm just speaking for myself, not my team.

Also, the 13 embassy attacks never resulted in multiple deaths, nor were we responsible for directly destabilizing the situation outside of Iraq.

That's completely false. The attack on the US embassy in Yemen in 2008 resulted in 16 deaths, which is four times as many as the Benghazi attack.

Six attackers, six police, and six Yemeni citizens were killed. No Americans.

Actually, five Yemen civilians were killed, and one American citizen was killed.

So yeah, the Yemen attack in other words wasn't as severe nor did it require the administration to lie about it. Ok.

So it wasn't as severe, even though more people were killed? Why does it only matter if Americans are killed? Shouldn't it matter that there have only been seven attacks under Obama and 12 attacks under Bush, and four attacks under Clinton and six under Rice? And after Benghazi, the State Department said it was a clearly planned attack (not based on a video).

Yes. It wasn't as severe, because the people killed weren't American citizens who were abandoned by their government in their hour of need. All twelve attacks under Bush resulted in little if any loss of American life, nor were any of those countries (besides any attacks inside Iraq) ruined by our own foreign policy.

And yes, American lives always come first. Is Bill Clinton responsible for the Armagh bombing? A lot of people were killed and he was President, even if no Americans were killed. Is that what you are trying to say?

I'm saying Clinton wasn't responsible for Armagh, Bush wasn't responsible for Yemen, and Hillary and Obama weren't responsible for Benghazi. Even the House report said that even if Clinton had responded faster, then Stevens and the others still would have died.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Atlas Democrat logic:
Mrs. and Mr. Khan: Yuge Freedom Fighters, bravely acting in defiance for their country!

The Benghazi mother: Classless bitch using her sons death to attack Hillary.

FWIW, I find Trump's comments disgusting. They are reprehensible and wrong. But a Presidential candidate being an asshole is still better than a corrupt, tired, and incompetent relic from the 90s. 

And FWIW, one of the Benghazi mothers asked Trump to stop politicizing her son's death. And unlike Benghazi Night, there was reason for Mr. Khan to speak.

The "Benghazi mother" who asked Trump to stop speaking was the mother of Chris Stevens, the career diplomat who supported the Libyan mission and played a role in his own demise. The mother of the marines who died protecting the very man who assisted Clinton and the State Department in the insidious campaign against Qaddafi isn't a "Benghazi victim."

And yes, Benghazi is a black mark on Clinton's record as Secretary of State. Sorry, there is a lot to talk about there. There is a reason for them to speak. Can you guys handle any criticism of Hillary at all?

13 different attacks on our Embassay happened in the last administration, and yet only Benghazi has been investigated non-stop for FOUR YEARS now with no new conclusions.

And if your team really has this much contempt for Chris Stevens then you probably should stop addressing his name every single time you talk about Benghazi.

Oh, I'm just speaking for myself, not my team.

Also, the 13 embassy attacks never resulted in multiple deaths, nor were we responsible for directly destabilizing the situation outside of Iraq.

That's completely false. The attack on the US embassy in Yemen in 2008 resulted in 16 deaths, which is four times as many as the Benghazi attack.

Six attackers, six police, and six Yemeni citizens were killed. No Americans.

Actually, five Yemen civilians were killed, and one American citizen was killed.

So yeah, the Yemen attack in other words wasn't as severe nor did it require the administration to lie about it. Ok.

So it wasn't as severe, even though more people were killed? Why does it only matter if Americans are killed? Shouldn't it matter that there have only been seven attacks under Obama and 12 attacks under Bush, and four attacks under Clinton and six under Rice? And after Benghazi, the State Department said it was a clearly planned attack (not based on a video).

Yes. It wasn't as severe, because the people killed weren't American citizens who were abandoned by their government in their hour of need. All twelve attacks under Bush resulted in little if any loss of American life, nor were any of those countries (besides any attacks inside Iraq) ruined by our own foreign policy.

And yes, American lives always come first. Is Bill Clinton responsible for the Armagh bombing? A lot of people were killed and he was President, even if no Americans were killed. Is that what you are trying to say?

I'm saying Clinton wasn't responsible for Armagh, Bush wasn't responsible for Yemen, and Hillary and Obama weren't responsible for Benghazi. Even the House report said that even if Clinton had responded faster, then Stevens and the others still would have died.

You're missing the bigger picture: Hillary and Obama first of all lied and denied the root cause. They also of course were on their big victory lap ever since they overthrew Qadaffi and couldn't face the fact that they created the conditions that resulted in the attack. The Clinton legacy at the State Department is a record of abject failure. Thank God we have Kerry cleaning up the mess.

[Indy Texas]

Chairman Sanchez, does Reagan deserve the same treatment as Clinton for all the embassy deaths that happened during his presidency?

[Classic Conservative]

Jesus christ. How low can he go?

Very good song

[Illiniwek]

Trump and his enablers are absolute c***s

[Fuzzy Bear]

Fuzzy, what Trump said wasn't even criticism. It was just a race-baiting insult.
Trump's desire to strike back on any person who criticizes him, regardless of who they are, is disturbing.

When I post here, I endure folks calling me all sorts of names, and I endure the questioning of any and all of my motivations.  Some of it may be a bit unfair, but that's the price of advocacy in today's political discourse.  Folks who take a public stand are going to get negative feedback; that's just the way it is.

The Khans took a public stand.  God Bless them; that's their right.  When they did so, however, they forfeited the deference of being received uncritically.  Mr. Khan made partisan public statements.  Trump fired back.  And when Mr. Khan took Trump to task on the Constitution, Trump fired back about the issue on the status of women in the eyes of Muslims.  Was that wrong?  Is there some pot-calling-the-kettle-black here?

Fuzzy,
You are wrong.
There is a big difference between the two, it's not a simple kettle and pot description.
Mr Khan taking "trump to task on the Constitution," versus trump's personal attack on the Khans regarding the wider issue of "the status of women in the eyes of Muslims" is not comparable.
It's like me saying that your cooking (food) does not taste very well, and then out of nowhere, you call me a ni**er (if I were black) in retaliation.
And remember this bigoted attack from donald on the grieving Kahns who lost their son (a US soldier) comes directly from trump's mouth. This makes trump look completely un-presidential in the eyes of the public. What kind of president would say such a thing ?
I don't recall Hillary personally attacking the moms of those who died in Benghazi, after they spoke at the RNC.

I do wish to clarify certain things (although I'm sure I've said them before here).
I would vote for Trump if the election were held today, but I'm not asking anyone else to.  His persona is why I won't go further in my support for him.  I agree with him, issue by issue, more than any other candidate, but I do have reservations about his persona, and I understand why other folks do as well.  
If I were Trump, I would have responded to the Khans with something like, "I appreciate their son's sacrifice and empathize with their terrible loss, but I respectfully submit that the Khans and myself have differences as to what the Constitution says and doesn't say on the issue of immigration." and leave it at that.  I wouldn't have "gone there" on the issue of Mrs. Khan's silence.  .....

Fuzzy,
Your description of a proper response, that trump should have used, is spot on.
It at least sounds "Presidential," and not like a hot-head who has no control but to retaliate against everyone and anything with childish playground attacks.
The best thing, actually, would be for trump to just ignore it altogether, but we ALL know that trump does not have the temperament for any kind of "adult response."

The only thing that disturbs me (just barely) is that you use the word "persona" to describe trump's "verbal mess-ups" and comments that resemble hatred and bigotry. I understand that it probably makes it easier for you to support (or possibly support) trump if you tell us and others (like your friends and family) that these "errors" from trump are just "persona" related.
But your use of "persona" are putting it lightly .... very lightly.
The truth of the matter is that all these disgusting attacks from trump on "groups" of people, or on people directly (individually), makes him look like an (insert REALLY bad curse words here), and I would never describe this as something as simple as using the term "persona."

But in any case, using your description, it also baffles me that anyone could support a person with this kind of "persona," even though you support him "issue by issue."
His "style of persona" attacks/comments, should (IMO) override any policy/issue acceptance from the electorate.
It's like if you were to support your local police chief because his ways of dealing with crime are very much in tune with your beliefs, but time and again the chief refers to some of the perpetrators of crime in his jurisdiction, as ni**ers, sp*ks or white-trash, when seen live on camera during police updates (at the podium).

The "police chief" analogy you are making is not an accurate one.

Trump has not referred to minorities in that manner.  Not once.  

Trump's statements about illegal immigrants from Mexico are substantially correct.  Many of them ARE, in fact, criminals, and some are members of transnational gangs.  Trump's statements about ISIS refugees ARE, in fact correct; there are embedded terrorists in with the refugees, and our vetting process is woefully inadequate.  And jihadist terrorists have, indeed, made it to America to wreck havoc and destruction, and have done so, and folks are rightly concerned about it.

https://www.quora.com/Where-does-Barack-Obama-belong-on-the-James-David-Barber-scale-of-presidential-character-active-positive-active-negative-passive-positive-or-passive-negative

When I was in college, I read James David Barber's The Presidential Character, a book using the character of a President to predict what sort of President he/she would be.  Barber's book has, undoubtedly been subjected to a great deal of revision, as not only LBJ and Eisenhower, but Nixon and Harding, have been subjected to a degree of revisionism since the book was published, but the character of a man does give some insight into what sort of President a candidate will be.

Donald Trump is impulsive, shoots from the hip, and is reluctant to apologize.  Barber would probably view Trump as likely to be an Active President, but whether or not he'd be an Active-Positive, or a Passive-Negative President remains to be seen.  However, Hillary Clinton is more likely to be an Active-Negative President, seeing power as a means to self-realization.  That's been a theme of Hillary's entire adult life, and one of the things I've always not liked about her.  Trump, for all his faults, is already self-realized.  He may find the job boring, but he'll do less harm.  

[Ebowed]

We're at the point now where people who support Trump are broadly condoning his behavior.  They condone it when you attack a judge for his Mexican ancestry.  They condone it when you insult veterans.  They condone it when you stiff contractors and skirt your obligations.

They condone the actions of a racist, hateful man who has never sacrificed anything for America.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

What else would you expect from cowardly bullying misgynistic bully like Trump?

[Ogre Mage]

Donald Trump you stand convicted of a$$holism!

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Chairman Sanchez, does Reagan deserve the same treatment as Clinton for all the embassy deaths that happened during his presidency?

Dude, Reagan is the most overrated President ever. At least Trump is slowly destroying the "movement conservative" fetish. Reagan's historical GOP fueled narrative is a myth.

[Averroës Nix]

This is one of the most viscerally upsetting public comments that we have heard from Trump yet. It's unreal that anyone would attempt to defend it.

[AZDem]

Trump and his enablers are absolute c***s

God. Where is Babs Johnson and her kangaroo court when we need it?