Because they're sick of establishment's wars all over the world.
But insulting of Khan family was dumbest thing Trump ever did.
I was unaware that questioning a gold star parent's loyalties, attempting to string him together with the group that killed his own son was going "fairly easy."
Trump does not rebuttal. That requires careful thought and concise language. He just throws tantrums at people he doesn't like for the things they say about him regardless of their standing or the quality of their criticisms.
Yes.
And let's not forget about his initial attack on the mother/wife (Mrs Kahn).
She was so distraught about her son's death and nervous on stage, she did not say a word at the DNC. But yet trump felt it was "proper" to attack her, based on her religion.
Disgusting.
I understand that grief can last a lifetime. I know folks who have lost a child who have never fully gotten over it.
That being said, the phrase here implies that Captain Khan was a recent casualty. He was killed in 2004; that's 12 years ago.
Mr. Khan let loose with an attack on Trump and reading the Constitution. Yet Mr. Khan is a believer in Sharia Law, and he's got a paper trail on the issue. He's also an immigration lawyer, and he's got a paper trail on that issue as well. The Khan's jumped into the political pool with both feet. They got what they could reasonably expect when they became partisan advocates.
But let's hear from Gold Star Mothers themselves:
http://www.goldstarmoms.com/PressRelease082305.htm
This is in response to Cindy Sheehan, et al. The statement, however, speaks for itself.
1. My "phrase here" did not "imply" that he was a "recent casualty." We all know by now that vet Khan died in 2004. So don't try to use "this angle" as part of your argument.
2. Where are you getting this "Mr. Khan is a believer in Sharia Law" bull from ? I have not seen any reputable coverage on this topic (and don't tell me you got it from Seriously's great go-to websites).
3. We all know that Mr Khan is/was "an immigration lawyer." So ? What does that have to do with anything ? Or do you have some trump-low-level conspiracy theory regarding this ?
4. Just because someone speaks at a political convention, does not mean they should be attacked by the opposing candidate. The Khan family was attacked on the basis of their religion, for pete's sake. And it was targeted more towards Mrs Khan who just stood there. How can you justify this by saying "they got what they expect." Are you sub-human ?
5. Your inserted quote and statement on "four organizations serving military families" has no relevance to the topic. Why exactly did you insert it ? Filler ?
