Institutionally, what did the Daily Caller think? Many people, in both parties, jumped on this as disrespectful. And Trump’s response to this was to question whether Khan’s speech was ghostwritten by Hillary's people, whether his wife standing next to him onstage was muzzled by the Koran and then to claim that his work as a developer is somehow equivalent to the Khans’ sacrifice. SCOTT GREER: I think it is still relevant to see what his views on Islamic law are and how it applies to the Constitution, and he is very fervent in how Islamic law is relevant in the discussion today.īOB GARFIELD: Unless I’m missing something, Scott, Khan’s speech was meant to dramatize the idea that Muslim Americans and immigrants shouldn't be stereotyped as threats and, not least, to compare patriotic sacrifice between what his son sacrificed, the ultimate, and what Trump has done for his country. SCOTT GREER: I think it is relevant in the fact that now he’s a public figure and he has brought up the fact that Donald Trump did not read the Constitution, and I think there is nothing wrong with bringing the fact that what he has written in the past on Sharia law, on Islamic law is up for discussion at the moment.īOB GARFIELD: Is there any mention in that 1983 law review article that he supports Sharia law as the law of the land for the United States or anything like that, even a single line that would make it relevant to the contemporaneous discussion? What does that bring to the table about our understanding of the Trump story? Scott, welcome to OTM.īOB GARFIELD: I want to call your attention to one of the recent headlines at the Daily Caller, “Khizr Khan Has Written Extensively on Sharia Law.” As far as I can tell, it was one article when he was a law student in 1983. Scott Greer is deputy editor at the Daily Caller. ![]() An article in Breitbart was headlined, “Khizr Khan's Deep Legal, Financial Connections to Saudi Arabia, Hillary Clinton’s Foundation Tie Terror, Immigration, Email Scandals Together.” The Washington Examiner had a story by Paul Bedard claiming, “Khan specializes in visa programs accused of selling US citizenship.” The same story, nearly verbatim, appeared hours later in the Daily Caller, along with an article which featured the headline, “Khizr Khan Has Written Extensively on Sharia Law.” A broadside on the blog accused Khan practicing US lawyer of being an agent of the Muslim Brotherhood, in short, a multi-front attack on the character of a man who would presume to criticize Donald Trump. Within 48 hours of his speech at the Democratic National Convention, conservative media outlets were busy turning the grieving victim into an enemy of the republic. ![]() ![]() The Khizr Khan blowout is the latest example. BOB GARFIELD: Of course, there’s one segment of the media that absolutely does understand the dynamic, the right-wing media echo chamber, which has dutifully spun the straw of Trumpian outrage into the gold of incitement.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |