Khan Deletes Law Firm Website that Specialized in Muslim Immigration...

[saveliberty]

I can't speak for the motivations of the Khan family, but it was a Democrat convention. Of course they were going to put him up there to talk badly about Trump. I believe I read something about Mrs. Khan not wanting Mr. Khan to talk about terrorism, that it wasn't the proper time and place for it. I have no idea if that is true or not.

This is still not the same as holding terrorists blameless. In another interview Mr. Khan denounced terrorism, so the only statements I know of from him about the subject are far from holding terrorists blameless.

Maybe he should have spoken up about terrorism in his DNC speech. I just didn't agree with your particular characterization of it.

You did a fine job of making your point and not personalizing it. Thanks

 

[bendog]

And do I also have to remind you that Trump was not capable of voting for the Iraq war since he was not in office? But he WAS for it. Yessir, he certainly was:

Listen and weep, you poor misbegotten soul: Fast forward to 1:35



Trump Supported Iraq War Invasion In 2002 - Howard Stern Interview

That's weak. Stern asked him he paused and said "I guess so.." slowly in thinking about it. He didn't sound too definitive there. Do you have something more substantive?

Do you have something AT ALL proving that in 2002-2003 he was against it? He affirmed that he was in favor of the invasion, Mr. Weasel. Your brain is about the size of a weasel's too.

To be fair, I believe Donald was against the invasion in 2002-3 except when he was for it.

 

[Iceweasel]

And do I also have to remind you that Trump was not capable of voting for the Iraq war since he was not in office? But he WAS for it. Yessir, he certainly was:

Listen and weep, you poor misbegotten soul: Fast forward to 1:35



Trump Supported Iraq War Invasion In 2002 - Howard Stern Interview

That's weak. Stern asked him he paused and said "I guess so.." slowly in thinking about it. He didn't sound too definitive there. Do you have something more substantive?

Do you have something AT ALL proving that in 2002-2003 he was against it? He affirmed that he was in favor of the invasion, Mr. Weasel. Your brain is about the size of a weasel's too.

So the answer seems to be no, you don't have anything but a vague response from Trump.

 

[saveliberty]

Can you imagine how pissed Trump would have been if he owned the World Trade Center?

 

[Montrovant]

No picking on Montrovant, he's with me. Granted on the opposite side at the moment, but that's cool.

Hehe, I don't know if I'm on the opposite side so much as standing to the side commenting on the whole thing.

 

[ogibillm]

The Donald is already laying the groundwork by claiming the election will be rigged.

The DNC's exposed e-mails admitted they rigged the primaries for Hillary.
Based on the primaries ... and the last Presidential election...he will be right.

how so? what 'rigging' was done?

Read any of the Lib e-mails that were released?

The entire DNC was against Bernie.
The super delegate sham was designed to ensure Hillary won.

super delegates are part of the system, but if they weren't clinton still would have more delegates.

The ex-Hillary employee Iowa Primary Leader still refuses to release the raw data to prove that Hillary won

that info has never been released

...there were all kinds of voter fraud reported.

cite it

..just in the primaries....In the last election we saw a black female poll monitor brag to national TV crews how she voted for Obama 5 times to help him win...and then watched Eric Holder show up the next day and drop all charges against her.

sure sure

 

[edthecynic]

Nobody is smearing him.

He's a shill

Only a Trumpster could be stupid enough to post that!!!

 

[S.J.]

Remember these are rich people visas. You need to have an investment or business worth $500,000 or more to get one

And? What does that have to do with anything? Does that make him less patriotic? Less American? Less worthy of respect? Less loving of his son?

Yes it does make him less patriotic......you hire behind his son's death...the guy is a horrible human being to.exploit the death of his son

So was Patricia Smith exploiting the death of her son at the RNC, Mr. Buckeye? Or did you miss that?

Big difference. Her son was killed because of Hillary's incompetence and her "I don't give a shit" attitude toward him. Trump had nothing to do with the death of Khan's son.

Not true. Try the truth sometime.

I just did. Not my fault you can't handle it.

 

[Fueri]

Well, the internet is forever.

You can take your own site down, but nobody take the wayback machine down.....

Internet Archive Wayback Machine

Thing is, I'm far from a useful idiot for Hillary, as anyone that has read any of my posts will probably know, but, to me it doesn't seem that Khan's business was only immigration. Going all the way back to 2011 it would seem it's a typical law firm.

Here's what it looked like today, before it came down:

Home Page

and it looked much like that over the past couple of years, as can be seen by simply clicking back through the archived versions. In other words I don't see any major change after the convention or leading up to it in a way that would seem to indicate that they were trying to alter the site in a meaningful way.

People should also note that one of the areas of this guys' practice is electronic discovery. He damn well knows he cannot delete this, as he is an expert on this type of information and where to find it. So, the site is down, but I doubt it's an attempt to conceal anything, as he would know better than anyone that it is impossible to do that by simply taking it offline for a time...

 

[jc456]

She attacked her in an interview where she accused Mrs Smith of lying.

Except she didn't.

"I don’t hold any ill feeling for someone who in that moment may not fully recall everything that was or wasn’t said.”

No why did he attack Trump?
What does Trump have to do with his sons death?

He wasn't blaming Trump for his son's death.

So what's the big deal then?

You'd have to actually listen to his speech.

No I want your take, so we can't play word games.....why did he attack Trump? And why are we using his son, if he's not the issue?

He attacked Trump over his divisive and hateful and at times completely fabricated rhetoric on American Muslims and immigrants, particularly rhetoric that questions their allegience. He himself was an immigrant and his son served his country and died in that service.

For example:


"I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down. And I watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down. Thousands of people were cheering"

what's that got to do with his son?

 

[buckeye45_73]

And? What does that have to do with anything? Does that make him less patriotic? Less American? Less worthy of respect? Less loving of his son?

Yes it does make him less patriotic......you hire behind his son's death...the guy is a horrible human being to.exploit the death of his son

So was Patricia Smith exploiting the death of her son at the RNC, Mr. Buckeye? Or did you miss that?

Yes, but Clinton lied to.her...she wanted it known.


What does Trump have to do with Khans dead son.....Clinton voted for the war, trump.did not

Still waiting on what trump.had to do with the death of Khans son....so?

Good lord can you people here twist words! Who said that Mr. Trump had anything to do with the death of Mr. Khan's son? Are you all THAT incapable of focusing and comprehending a written sentence?

And do I also have to remind you that Trump was not capable of voting for the Iraq war since he was not in office? But he WAS for it. Yessir, he certainly was:

Listen and weep, you poor misbegotten soul: Fast forward to 1:35



Trump Supported Iraq War Invasion In 2002 - Howard Stern Interview

So this guy a can say whatever he wants on whatever subject to and noone can respond?

 

[jc456]

Two kids died serving their country. One parent condemns terrorists and a government official who had a say in his protection. The other parents lash out at a person who had nothing to do with his death and hold the terrorists blameless.

When did either Mr. or Mrs. Khan say that terrorists are blameless?

Mr. Khan did not blame them in his speech. In fact, he avoided the word terrorist completely.

OK. That's a lot different than to "hold the terrorists blameless".

It was an attack platform, why didn't he attack everyone associated with his son's death. Why didn't he use it as an opportunity to call for unity on defeating terrorism?

He used it to call for unity. Unity throughout our country. Not just unity for a single project.

no he didn't, how ridiculous is that.

 

[ogibillm]

Except she didn't.

"I don’t hold any ill feeling for someone who in that moment may not fully recall everything that was or wasn’t said.”
He wasn't blaming Trump for his son's death.

So what's the big deal then?

You'd have to actually listen to his speech.

No I want your take, so we can't play word games.....why did he attack Trump? And why are we using his son, if he's not the issue?

He attacked Trump over his divisive and hateful and at times completely fabricated rhetoric on American Muslims and immigrants, particularly rhetoric that questions their allegience. He himself was an immigrant and his son served his country and died in that service.

For example:


"I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down. And I watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down. Thousands of people were cheering"

what's that got to do with his son?

his son is an american hero. trump would have you believe all muslims are dangerous.

 

[jc456]

Two kids died serving their country. One parent condemns terrorists and a government official who had a say in his protection. The other parents lash out at a person who had nothing to do with his death and hold the terrorists blameless.

When did either Mr. or Mrs. Khan say that terrorists are blameless?

They said.twrroism.has nothing.to.do.with islam.....uh...utter bullshit

That's a far cry from saying terrorists are blameless.

To Fix a problem, you have to first admit you have a problem. Standard stuff

I wasn't commenting on Islam, though. I was talking about save's comment that the Khan's "hold the terrorists blameless". If Mr. Khan doesn't want terrorism conflated with Islam that doesn't mean he feels terrorists are without blame.

so what religion are the terrorists in question?

Edit, is someone lying if they say radical Islamist?

 

[buckeye45_73]

Two kids died serving their country. One parent condemns terrorists and a government official who had a say in his protection. The other parents lash out at a person who had nothing to do with his death and hold the terrorists blameless.

When did either Mr. or Mrs. Khan say that terrorists are blameless?

They said.twrroism.has nothing.to.do.with islam.....uh...utter bullshit

That's a far cry from saying terrorists are blameless.

To Fix a problem, you have to first admit you have a problem. Standard stuff

I wasn't commenting on Islam, though. I was talking about save's comment that the Khan's "hold the terrorists blameless". If Mr. Khan doesn't want terrorism conflated with Islam that doesn't mean he feels terrorists are without blame.

True, but it does show he's either ignorant or hiding......they are listed ked whether he likes it or not

 

[jc456]

So what's the big deal then?

You'd have to actually listen to his speech.

No I want your take, so we can't play word games.....why did he attack Trump? And why are we using his son, if he's not the issue?

He attacked Trump over his divisive and hateful and at times completely fabricated rhetoric on American Muslims and immigrants, particularly rhetoric that questions their allegience. He himself was an immigrant and his son served his country and died in that service.

For example:


"I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down. And I watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down. Thousands of people were cheering"

what's that got to do with his son?

his son is an american hero. trump would have you believe all muslims are dangerous.

I agree the son is an american hereo. what's that got to do with trump and the man's son?

 

[buckeye45_73]

Can you imagine how pissed Trump would have been if he owned the World Trade Center?

Yeah I think the rockerfellers owned it

 

[buckeye45_73]

So what's the big deal then?

You'd have to actually listen to his speech.

No I want your take, so we can't play word games.....why did he attack Trump? And why are we using his son, if he's not the issue?

He attacked Trump over his divisive and hateful and at times completely fabricated rhetoric on American Muslims and immigrants, particularly rhetoric that questions their allegience. He himself was an immigrant and his son served his country and died in that service.

For example:


"I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down. And I watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down. Thousands of people were cheering"

what's that got to do with his son?

his son is an american hero. trump would have you believe all muslims are dangerous.

When did he say that?
We need to.stop letting them in the country until we know they won't blow us up....

 

[SwimExpert]

Nobody is smearing him.

He's a shill that was used like toilet paper by hiLIARy.

That awkward moment when your second sentence disproves your first sentence.

 

[Montrovant]

When did either Mr. or Mrs. Khan say that terrorists are blameless?

They said.twrroism.has nothing.to.do.with islam.....uh...utter bullshit

That's a far cry from saying terrorists are blameless.

To Fix a problem, you have to first admit you have a problem. Standard stuff

I wasn't commenting on Islam, though. I was talking about save's comment that the Khan's "hold the terrorists blameless". If Mr. Khan doesn't want terrorism conflated with Islam that doesn't mean he feels terrorists are without blame.

so what religion are the terrorists in question?

I would guess some version of Islam. As a Muslim I imagine Mr. Khan doesn't want people to see Islam and terrorism as the same thing. To him, it may be that the terrorists are not real Muslims, just as I've seen people talk about certain Christians not being real Christians.