Khizr Khan stole the show at the Democratic National Convention with a stirring speech about how his Muslim-American son, Captain Humayun Khan, fought and died for his country. In the process, he seems to have taken up residence in Donald Trump's head.

That was there for all to see once again yesterday, when Trump sent one of his trusted advisors on CNN's Reliable Sources with Brian Stelter. Jason Miller, a Senior Communications Advisor, appeared determined to change the conversation and talk about the magic words: radical islamic terrorism. That's what this is really about, he repeatedly explained, after trying to say Trump had praised Khan in an ABC interview. (Stelter clarified that Trump called him "a nice guy." Trump did, in a statement, say Captain Khan was a hero before continuing to trash his father.)

This content is imported from YouTube. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

The RIT rhetoric brought the conversation to a fascinating juncture, where Stelter essentially nailed Miller's hands to the ground.

"You keep mentioning radical Islamic terrorism, as if that's somehow linked to Mr. Khan," said Stelter. "Why do you keep responding that way when I mention him?"

"Because that's the broader debate that we're having," said Miller, growing increasingly flustered. "The broader debate that we're having is about the screening and the vetting that we're having for people that are coming into this country—"

"But that has nothing to do with this family, with this Muslim-American family," Stelter shot back. And later: "You keep bringing up radical Islamic terrorism instead. Are you trying to change the subject, or are you trying to link him to terrorism?"

Ouch. Miller was actually parroting Trump's own diversion tactics, which he used on Twitter while Khan was giving an interview of his own on CNN:

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Mr. Khan, who does not know me, viciously attacked me from the stage of the DNC and is now all over T.V. doing the same - Nice! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 1, 2016

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

This story is not about Mr. Khan, who is all over the place doing interviews, but rather RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM and the U.S. Get smart! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 1, 2016

They also touched on Trump's statement, released Saturday:

"While I feel deeply for the loss of his son, Mr. Khan who has never met me, has no right to stand in front of millions of people and claim I have never read the Constitution, (which is false) and say many other inaccurate things. If I become President, I will make America safe again."

He has no right to say I haven't read the Constitution has to be one of the great self-defeating lines of all time. The Constitution expressly grants Khan the right to say that—in front of no one or a million people—and claiming otherwise is fairly strong evidence you haven't read it, or at least don't understand the rights guaranteed therein. (Further evidence: telling a group of senators you'll defend "Article XII" of the Constitution. The Constitution has seven articles.)

Such exercises in unintentional comedy were just a few of many responses to the controversy from Trump and his campaign. (Like Draymond Green and Anthony Weiner, they've tried a few different defenses in the face of a controversy.) After Khan, in his convention speech, rejected Trump's proposed ban on Muslims entering the country and said Trump has "sacrificed nothing," Trump initially responded by suggesting Khan's wife, Ghazala—who stood silently next to him throughout—had not been allowed to speak. Ms. Khan then proved she did, in fact, have something to say by slamming Trump in a Washington Post op-ed. Her husband suggested Trump's comments, which appeared to imply the Khans had an oppressive relationship because they are Muslim, showed he has "a black soul."

To dispel that notion, Trump took to Twitter yesterday:

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Captain Khan, killed 12 years ago, was a hero, but this is about RADICAL ISLAMIC TERROR and the weakness of our "leaders" to eradicate it! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 31, 2016

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

I was viciously attacked by Mr. Khan at the Democratic Convention. Am I not allowed to respond? Hillary voted for the Iraq war, not me! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 31, 2016

All of this extraordinary political (and moral) malpractice has earned (delayed, sort of weak) rebukes from Republican leaders, including Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Jeb Bush, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain. Of course, Trump was always going to have his defenders. This time, it was none other than Senator Jefferson Beauregard Sessions of Alabama, the last living Civil War general, who "rejects" Khan's criticism of Trump.

Of course, Trump isn't all alone in disparaging Captain Khan's family and his service. ISIS did too.

Update (1:09 PM): Veterans of Foreign Wars, one of the nation's premier veterans associations that Donald Trump addressed just last week, has condemned his statements about the Khan family:

Jack Holmes Politics Editor Jack Holmes is the Politics Editor at Esquire, where he writes daily and edits the Politics Blog with Charles P Pierce.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io