Law Justice Brett Kavanaugh Megathread - Megathread for Brett Kavanaugh, US Supreme Court Justice

they're good justices, brentt

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/05/trump-picks-brett-kavanaugh-for-supreme-court.html

President Donald Trump has picked Brett Kavanaugh, a federal appeals court judge with extensive legal credentials and a lengthy political record, to succeed Justice Anthony M. Kennedy on the Supreme Court, NBC News reported.

Kavanaugh, 53, is an ideological conservative who is expected to push the court to the right on a number of issues including business regulation and national security. The favorite of White House Counsel Donald McGahn, Kavanaugh is also considered a safer pick than some of the more partisan choices who were on the president’s shortlist.

A graduate of Yale Law School who serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Kavanaugh has the traditional trappings of a presidential nominee to the high court.


If confirmed, the appellate judge would become the second young, conservative jurist Trump has put on the top U.S. court during his first term. Kavanaugh's confirmation would give the president an even bigger role in shaping U.S. policy for decades to come. The potential to morph the federal judiciary led many conservatives to support Trump in 2016, and he has not disappointed so far with the confirmation of conservative Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and numerous federal judges.

At times, he has diverged from the Republican party’s ideological line on important cases that have come before him, including on the Affordable Care Act, the 2010 health care law which Kavanaugh has declined to strike down on a number of occasions in which it has come before him.

Anti-abortion groups quietly lobbied against Kavanaugh, pushing instead for another jurist on Trump’s shortlist, 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett, ABC News reported in the run-up to Trump’s announcement.

Kavanaugh received his current appointment in 2006 after five years in the George W. Bush administration, where he served in a number of roles including staff secretary to the president. He has been criticized for his attachment to Bush, as well as his involvement in a number of high-profile legal cases.

For instance, Kavanaugh led the investigation into the death of Bill Clinton’s Deputy White House Counsel Vince Foster, and assisted in Kenneth Starr’s 1998 report outlining the case for Clinton’s impeachment.

Democrats criticized Kavanaugh’s political roles during his 2006 confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Your experience has been most notable, not so much for your blue chip credentials, but for the undeniably political nature of so many of your assignments,” Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said at the time.

“From the notorious Starr report, to the Florida recount, to the President’s secrecy and privilege claims, to post-9/11 legislative battles including the Victims Compensation Fund, to ideological judicial nomination fights, if there has been a partisan political fight that needed a very bright legal foot soldier in the last decade, Brett Kavanaugh was probably there,” Schumer said.

Kavanaugh's work on the Starr report has been scrutinized by Republicans who have said it could pose trouble for the president as he negotiates with special counsel Robert Mueller over the terms of a possible interview related to Mueller's Russia probe. The 1998 document found that Clinton's multiple refusals to testify to a grand jury in connection with Starr's investigation were grounds for impeachment.

In later years, Kavanaugh said that Clinton should not have had to face down an investigation during his presidency. He has said the indictment of a president would not serve the public interest.

Like Trump's first nominee to the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch, Kavanaugh clerked for Kennedy. If he is confirmed, it will mark the first time ever that a current or former Supreme Court justice has two former clerks become justices, according to an article by Adam Feldman, who writes a blog about the Supreme Court.

Kavanaugh teaches courses on the separation of powers, the Supreme Court, and national security at Harvard Law School and Yale Law School, and does charitable work at St. Maria’s Meals program at Catholic Charities in Washington, D.C., according to his official biography.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ett-kavanaugh-nomination-by-a-28-point-margin

After a blistering confirmation battle, Justice Brett Kavanaugh will take his seat for oral arguments on the U.S. Supreme Court with a skeptical public, a majority of which opposed his nomination. However, Democrats may not be able to exploit this fact in the upcoming elections as much as they hope, because the independent voters overwhelmingly disapprove of their own handling of the nomination by a 28-point margin, a new CNN/SSRS poll finds.

Overall, just 41 percent of those polled said they wanted to see Kavanaugh confirmed, compared to 51 percent who said they opposed his confirmation. In previous CNN polls dating back to Robert Bork in 1987, no nominee has been more deeply underwater.

What's interesting, however, is even though Democrats on the surface would seem to have public opinion on their side, just 36 percent approved of how they handled the nomination, compared to 56 percent who disapproved. (Republicans were at 55 percent disapproval and 35 percent approval). A further breakdown finds that 58 percent of independents disapproved of the way the Democrats handled the nomination — compared to 30 percent who approved. (Independents also disapproved of Republicans handling of the matter, but by a narrower 53 percent to 32 percent margin).

Many people have strong opinions on the way the Kavanaugh nomination will play out in November and who it will benefit. The conventional wisdom is that it will help Democrats in the House, where there are a number of vulnerable Republicans in suburban districts where losses among educated women could be devastating, and that it will help Republicans in the Senate, where the tossup races are in red states where Trump and Kavanaugh are more popular.

That said, it's clear that the nomination energized both sides, and that the tactics pursued by the parties turned off independent voters in a way that makes it much harder to predict how this will end up affecting election outcomes.

 

[Hui]

And then, beneath the hysteria, lurks a more primitive emotion: disgust at women’s animal bodies. Human beings are probably hard-wired to find signs of their mortality and animality disgusting, and to shrink from contamination by bodily fluids and blood. But in every culture something worse kicks in: the projection of these feared and loathed characteristics onto a vulnerable group or groups from whom the dominant group wishes to distance itself. In the United States, we observe this dynamic in racism, in homophobia and even in revulsion toward the bodies of people who are aging. But in every culture male disgust targets women, as emblems of bodily nature, symbolic animals by contrast to males, almost angels with pure minds. Disgust for women’s bodily fluids is fully compatible with sexual desire. Indeed, it often singles out women seen as promiscuous, the repositories of many men’s fluids. As with the shunning of sex workers until the present day, as with the apparent defamation of Renate Dolphin in Kavanaugh’s infamous yearbook, men often crow with pride over intercourse with a woman imagined as sluttish and at the same time defame and marginalize her. As the great philosopher Adam Smith observed about post-coital disgust, “When we have dined, we order the covers to be removed.” Disgust for the female body is always tinged with anxiety, since the body symbolizes mortality. Disgust is often more deeply buried than envy and anger, but it compounds and intensifies the other negative emotions. Our president seems to be especially gripped by disgust: for women’s menstrual fluids, their bathroom breaks, the blood imagined streaming from their surgical incisions, even their flesh, if they are more than stick-thin.

Why would you post this here?

 

[Iceland Heavy]

and again why are lie detector tests all of a sudden not very good. less than a year ago he said they were great and modern. he refuses to take one after saying they were spot on in current day

Given that you just keep autistically repeating the same shit that's either by your own admission, completely irrelevant and highly debateable or just a outright lie on your part like a broken record even though people have repeatedly called you out on it, at this point I'm choosing to believe that you're doing one of two things. Either playing the same game that the more calculating dems are; attack as many perceived, minor and irrelevant 'inconsistencies' to gaslight people into thinking of Kavanaugh as a lying liar who lies, since though there's no evidence whatsoever for what really matters. Or you know, just plain :autism:.

 

[Turkey Beef]

Oh I have no doubt Trump is gonna tard cum this for everything its worth. Most GOP candidates as well.
It's been pointed out before but the Dems have managed to give practically every GOP faction bar the most ardent Never Trumpers something to rally around and be motivated by.

I'm aware the following skewed polls are from the same media outlets currently screaming "Kavanaugh is a literal incel who should stay away from children", but it's worth keeping tabs for a few days. They have yet to update since Mad Maxine Waters' doxxing niggershines and the moonbat establishment collective meltdown over SCOTUS that's been going since last friday.

https://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/house/

 

[Krokodil Overdose]

This does make me wonder...
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/09/why-the-brett-kavanaugh-smear.php

"I think that Judge Kavanaugh’s pristine reputation is one reason why the Democrats have unleashed against him a smear campaign unparalleled in American history. This is the message they are trying to send: If we can do this to the Boy Scout Brett Kavanaugh, we can do it to anyone. Are you thinking of serving in a Republican administration? Or accepting an appointment to the federal judiciary from a Republican president? Think twice, and then think again.

Because our smear machine will reach back to middle school if necessary. If we can’t find any dirt on you, we will manufacture some. There is no depth to which we will not stoop, and your honesty, integrity and spotless reputation are no match for our control over the media and our determination to dredge up ridiculous allegations against anyone who stands in our way.

Really, the more ridiculous the better. If we can accuse Brett Kavanaugh, one of the most respected lawyers and judges in America, of gang rape, we can accuse anyone of anything! And our insane accusations will dominate the news."

At risk of revealing the stunning depths of my :autism:, Moldbug talked a lot about this years ago (not Kavanaugh, but the related concepts. Hell, when you write million-word blog posts on and off for years, eventually you'll get something right.) He referred to the role of the press as "speaking power to truth," that is to say, silencing the truth by shouting over it with whatever their preferred narrative is, and the inherent threat of this sort of smear campaign if you deviate from their approved line. A related concept was "nonsense as uniform," in which crazier and crazier ideas gained ascendancy because they signal membership in a group, and rarely receive accidental signal interference: who but someone with years of academic brainwashing is going to claim that there's no inherent biological difference between men and women?

To this day, I still cannot believe that "Binders full of women" worked. It was never offensive, yet the Democrats and the media successfully convinced people that they should be offended by it. It still blows my mind to the umpteenth degree. What the fuck. I'll blame Romney on the fact that he didn't fight hard enough after the first debate (which he won in every which way imaginable). Near the end, he let the smears continue with not much contesting.

Romney was a decent man (in the moral sense) but not a wise one: he fell for the "respectability" trap, just like John McCain and so many others. Many people (and I'm guessing that Mormons are especially susceptible to this) have an inherent sense of decency and fair play, and get caught completely off-guard when the press does a 180 and yanks the football away, Lucy-like, whenever it's convenient. It's inconceivable to them, on a gut level, that the cynics are right and the media are nothing more than apparatchiks who believe whatever the Party tells them to believe at any given time. Hell, McCain was famous for gladhanding and building relationships with the press, and look what they did to him the moment he impeded their Chocolate Messiah.

These leftists have called EVERY Republican candidate since Reagan (or even before then) a Nazi. Now that Trump is in office, they expect someone like me to believe that "it's actually true this time tho!"

This is a pretty shit article, but it contains a lot of choice quotes illustrating just how far back this smear goes.

 

[XYZpdq]

decency and fair play

I recall Romney's camp being credited/blamed for the harassment accusations thrown at Herman Cain.

 

[Turkey Beef]

Romney was a decent man (in the moral sense) but not a wise one: he fell for the "respectability" trap, just like John McCain and so many others. Many people (and I'm guessing that Mormons are especially susceptible to this) have an inherent sense of decency and fair play, and get caught completely off-guard when the press does a 180 and yanks the football away, Lucy-like, whenever it's convenient. It's inconceivable to them, on a gut level, that the cynics are right and the media are nothing more than apparatchiks who believe whatever the Party tells them to believe at any given time. Hell, McCain was famous for gladhanding and building relationships with the press, and look what they did to him the moment he impeded their Chocolate Messiah.

Romney was always meant to lose, and he would've just been a continuation of the same Uniparty establishment way of fucking up the world. His tenure and track record as governor of Taxachusetts isn't all that different from what King Barry did in the White Hut for 8 years.

 

[Flexo]

Romney was always meant to lose, and he would've just been a continuation of the same Uniparty establishment way of fucking up the world. His tenure and track record as governor of Taxachusetts isn't all that different from what King Barry did in the White Hut for 8 years.

Yes and he wasn't my first choice, but it's undeniable that as a man he is as far different from Trump as one could conceivably be and still have the same sex and race. That's why nobody's listening to them any more.

If you want a real time example, listen to the opening of this podcast where even Jonah Goldberg is getting fed up and he still thinks Ford has some credibility.
https://ricochet.com/podcast/remnant-jonah-goldberg/in-case-of-emergency-talk-to-charles-murray/

 

[Polyboros]

ITT Q-Anon has infiltrated Kiwi Farms.

Oh please, if that were the case, this thread would be about the "Ford was Amy Schumer in Hollywood makeup" posts I've seen. I haven't even seen it mentioned anywhere, even for laughing at.

 

[Jetpack Himmler]

I think that Obama created some lasting damage (especially in his second term) that would not have happened if Romney had won.

One thing that perturbed me about Obama is the massive cult of personality the Democrats and the media built around him to the point where I see shades of Mao and the Kim dynasty. This Chernobyl-like meltdown I am witnessing from the (far) Left reminds me of China's Cultural Revolution where the Kavanaugh confirmation has devolved into a show trial that has nullified any notion of the presumption of innocence. The accusation is evidence itself, and anything else is misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, or insert whatever flavour of false bigotry here. To paraphrase what Senator Graham said, this is about power and the Democrats was willing to shred to sixth and whatever amendments they have to get it. Call me , but I really hope that this exposes what the Left really is to independents sitting on the fence to dash any possibility of the "Blue Wave" coming to pass.

I see shades of this happening in Canada despite our different form of governance. We already have a woefully unqualified trust-fund brat of a Prime Minister who is already accusing political opponents as divisive and/or bigoted with our mainstream media backing him 110%. The UK its already transforming into a police state, and the EU is looking to become an authoritarian state. The "Kavanaugh Trial" is yet another canary in the coal mine for Western Civilization that demonstrate unhinged these would-be technocrats truly are. With corporate backing from Silicon Valley and the People's Republic of China as a test bed for state censorship, there will be a flashpoint in the very near future. As John F. Kennedy said in a much saner time, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

Those fucking idiots can't see that they could very well be the ones executed on the steps of the Capitol.

 

[Jaimas]

Who he?

Am I some sort of culturally backwards drongo because I've never heard of half these blue tick types?

In this case? No. He hasn't been relevant in 2 decades so you can be forgiven for now knowing who in the fucking he is. He's one of a few thousand Actors who now thinks he has every right to dictate to you how you should feel and think about things. Prior to this he was mostly known for being in a few decent films, a whole lot of trash, and being an absolute dumbass who went through a rough divorce where he was repeatedly accused of cheating on his wif--

....Oh, nevermind, that explains everything.

Well, I'm just gonna' put away my sunglasses because that's all the shade I'll need for awhile. God damn, Grassley.

Sanders can climb a wall of dicks. The second he fucking caved to the Hillary campaign and became complicit with basically letting the DNC decide who was going to be the nominee, will of the people be damned, he unconditionally showed himself to be part of the problem. I'm glad that Grassley demonstrated to him that words are peerfectly capable of forcible sodomy.

 

[Spooky]

@Waveysauce
I think you messed up your post there, but you are wrong on basic factual claims. He didn't write "Renate 9," he wrote "Renate Alumnius." There is also nothing to back up your claim that he only saw her 2 or 3 times, and she was one of the women who signed off on his letter that he was a decent guy indicating they did know each other fairly well. Does he have to have fucked her or could he just have dated her, kissed her, or brought her to a dance even if it did have a sexual connotation? You're gonna need to start bringing some sources and stop getting things wrong if you want anyone to believe you, but maybe this is just bait.

 

[Waveysauce]

@Waveysauce
I think you messed up your post there, but you are wrong on basic factual claims. He didn't write "Renate 9," he wrote "Renate Alumnius." There is also nothing to back up your claim that he only saw her 2 or 3 times, and she was one of the women who signed off on his letter that he was a decent guy indicating they did know each other fairly well. Does he have to have fucked her or could he just have dated her, kissed her, or brought her to a dance even if it did have a sexual connotation? You're gonna need to start bringing some sources and stop getting things wrong if you want anyone to believe you, but maybe this is just bait.

they were the renate alum yes but when grouped in its just referred to as the 9 to make it shorter. only thing he admitted about her was sharing a kiss or some shit/ they were not great friends. they all hooked up and make a joke about in the year book. something thats not even bad for 17 yearolds to do. its a dumb fucking thing to lie about. thats the only thing im saying. No 9 high school kids would have that shit in there over some chick

and only thing ive said was kind of a hypocrite how all of a sudden lie detectors are not accurate when less than a year ago they were so solid

what is a fact tho is an IP from capitol hill went on wikipedia trying to instert a new meaning of devils triangle. when no person in history has had that definition online. again 2 things that aren't even serious for a 17 year old just 2 stupid things to not come clean about. Just like what "boofing means" if he meant it as "farting" which is bs thats a random thing to put in about a fart joke

Guys are acting like im a liberal democrat or some shit, and dont want him in. Ive only said I think he is bs'ing about a couple things that we'd been better off with a different option and we'd be better off if he admitted some shit, shits thats not even bad for a 17 yearold to say

 

[Kari Kamiya]

When it comes to Romney, I hardly could understand how hard the media fucked him over back in 2012, and I still can hardly wrap my head around it these days because it seemed there were a lot of attacks by the media that played into him losing: "Binders full of women"; his "47 percent" comment; the claim that he's going to shut down Big Bird; putting the family dog up on the roof of his car; attacking him over his wife's cancer or MS treatment or something--there was so much shit, it was ridiculous. But despite all of that, one of the conclusions I had come to rather early on that year was that I personally felt him being Mormon scared a lot of people or something, like they were so convinced that if a Mormon got into power that it'd fuck up everything for everyone who wasn't Mormon or whatever their reasons were (kind of similar to "Trump's going to open up a camp for Muslims!" but not as extreme). And then there's the anti-Mormons who were registered Republicans, but they hate those goddamn Mormons so much that they didn't want to vote for him. So Romney had a long road going for his campaign, and as much as I felt like his economic policies could've helped get us out of the recession quicker, that wasn't enough to get him a lot of votes.

So when it came to choosing between Chocolate Jesus and Mormon Jesus, chocolate's easier to swallow for a lot of people.

AMany people (and I'm guessing that Mormons are especially susceptible to this) have an inherent sense of decency and fair play

Yeah, pretty much. Which is kind of funny given that Romney became governor of Massachusetts, a blue state, and he was apparently popular from what I've heard (yet he still lost that state in the election, so... *shrugs*). But he did flip-flop on abortion before running full pro-life by 2012, which I'm a bit surprised the media didn't exploit, least as far as I know. At least around here and in my family, that rubbed folks the wrong way, but they didn't like Obama's policies so they felt they had to vote for Romney anyway regardless.

 

[Vorhtbame]

they all hooked up and make a joke about in the year book. something thats not even bad for 17 yearolds to do. its a dumb fucking thing to lie about. thats the only thing im saying

I think I have you figured out now, Waveysauce.

You want us to believe that it's perfectly normalnaturalhealthy for teenaged boys to run a train on a girl with low self-esteem, repeatedly. You want us to agree that the exploitation of young women is "not even bad", but to be expected, embraced, and even praised.

Because you did it yourself.

Your troubled conscience screams louder than anything else in your posts; you need to believe that what you did didn't hurt anyone and was even a good thing. If even one girl can be friends with men without banging them, then your victim was actually a victim and not just an easy lay. If even one group of boys manages not to prey on girls seeking friendship, acceptance, and approval, then you are condemned as an opportunistic predator yourself.

Get out of here, you rape apologist.

 

[Iceland Heavy]

they were the renate alum yes but when grouped in its just referred to as the 9 to make it shorter. only thing he admitted about her was sharing a kiss or some shit/ they were not great friends. they all hooked up and make a joke about in the year book. something thats not even bad for 17 yearolds to do. its a dumb fucking thing to lie about. thats the only thing im saying. No 9 high school kids would have that shit in there over some chick

and only thing ive said was kind of a hypocrite how all of a sudden lie detectors are not accurate when less than a year ago they were so solid

what is a fact tho is an IP from capitol hill went on wikipedia trying to instert a new meaning of devils triangle. when no person in history has had that definition online. again 2 things that aren't even serious for a 17 year old just 2 stupid things to not come clean about. Just like what "boofing means" if he meant it as "farting" which is bs thats a random thing to put in about a fart joke

Guys are acting like im a liberal democrat or some shit, and dont want him in. Ive only said I think he is bs'ing about a couple things that we'd been better off with a different option and we'd be better off if he admitted some shit, shits thats not even bad for a 17 yearold to say

I really don't care about your autistic insistences that if a bunch of guys all know the same girl they must be running a train on her or that if something isn't on Urban Dictionary, it must not be true, but for this particular part:
>and only thing ive said was kind of a hypocrite how all of a sudden lie detectors are not accurate when less than a year ago they were so solid
Post. The. Source of him saying this, a court ruling, anything at all. Until you do it's basically Occupy Democrats tier shitposting even if you're trying to smokescreen it with 'haha I'm not saying he raped her or anything but that's really hypocrital of him really makes you think huh'

 

[frozenrunner]

I think I have you figured out now, Waveysauce.

You want us to believe that it's perfectly normalnaturalhealthy for teenaged boys to run a train on a girl with low self-esteem, repeatedly. You want us to agree that the exploitation of young women is "not even bad", but to be expected, embraced, and even praised.

Because you did it yourself.

Your troubled conscience screams louder than anything else in your posts; you need to believe that what you did didn't hurt anyone and was even a good thing. If even one girl can be friends with men without banging them, then your victim was actually a victim and not just an easy lay. If even one group of boys manages not to prey on girls seeking friendship, acceptance, and approval, then you are condemned as an opportunistic predator yourself.

Get out of here, you rape apologist.

The emotions I feel reading your baseless accusation are all the proof I need Waveysauce is a literal rapist. Believe his victims!

 

[Vorhtbame]

The emotions I feel reading your baseless accusation are all the proof I need Waveysauce is a literal rapist. Believe his victims!

And now it's his job to prove me wrong.

 

[Jaimas]

they were the renate alum yes but when grouped in its just referred to as the 9 to make it shorter. only thing he admitted about her was sharing a kiss or some shit/ they were not great friends. they all hooked up and make a joke about in the year book. something thats not even bad for 17 yearolds to do. its a dumb fucking thing to lie about. thats the only thing im saying. No 9 high school kids would have that shit in there over some chick

and only thing ive said was kind of a hypocrite how all of a sudden lie detectors are not accurate when less than a year ago they were so solid

what is a fact tho is an IP from capitol hill went on wikipedia trying to instert a new meaning of devils triangle. when no person in history has had that definition online. again 2 things that aren't even serious for a 17 year old just 2 stupid things to not come clean about. Just like what "boofing means" if he meant it as "farting" which is bs thats a random thing to put in about a fart joke

Guys are acting like im a liberal democrat or some shit, and dont want him in. Ive only said I think he is bs'ing about a couple things that we'd been better off with a different option and we'd be better off if he admitted some shit, shits thats not even bad for a 17 yearold to say

I'm gonna boil this down for you real simple, dude: Even if you think he's 100% guilty, it doesn't matter.
You can't prove a negative, and burden of proof is on the accuser.

If you do not have actual, credible evidence that the accusations against Kavanaugh happened - and by evidence, I mean hard evidence, not hearsay, impossible-to-corraborate stories that are contradicted by the very people who fucking spout them, accusations that happened decades ago and is fucking impossible to verify one way the other, or attempts at guilt-by-association, then you do not have a fucking case - and if you don't, then fuck off with this shit.

Until you provide such evidence (I'm like 99.9% you can't), you're just shitposting.

 

[IV 445]

@Waveysauce raped me

 

[Cubanodun]

I'm gonna boil this down for you real simple, dude: Even if you think he's 100% guilty, it doesn't matter.
You can't prove a negative, and burden of proof is on the accuser.

If you do not have actual, credible evidence that the accusations against Kavanaugh happened - and by evidence, I mean hard evidence, not hearsay, impossible-to-corraborate stories that are contradicted by the very people who fucking spout them, accusations that happened decades ago and is fucking impossible to verify one way the other, or attempts at guilt-by-association, then you do not have a fucking case - and if you don't, then fuck off with this shit.

Until you provide such evidence (I'm like 99.9% you can't), you're just shitposting.

He has feels that is enough evidence, how dare you to say that feels dont prove anything you feelphobic!!! [Insert 20 pages of Tumblr rambling about how Jaimas literally killed one million trannies by being a feelphobic]

Jokes apart, let me get this in the more easy way possible you think that if the democrats had hard, solid and beyond doubt proof of Kavanaugh guilt they would not be have used it by now just to shut down all of this and get a victory against trump? think about it, the headlines would have been amazing "Trump nominated and defended a rapist!!!" it would be the Holy Grail of fuck yous that they could get by now with the midterms just in the corner

But no, all this shitshow is 1 person saying with hundreds and hundred of contradictions, without proof, and with a very suspicious timing that the person that Trump choose is a rapist, because that is his actual crime in their eyes, that he was chosen by Drumpf