You seem to be reading a lot more into their comments than is needed. I read nothing in their comments other than clarification based on what's in your replies. They've just expressed a desire to discuss the submission, which seems to actually support the idea of criticism.
Which implies that someone was arguing the contrary.
They explicitly did not imply that something was unlawful, which is how you phrased your reply:
Nobody is accusing him of being unlawful or outside his rights to endorse him. Nor, as far as I'm aware, has he been deprived on any right by that association.