Law The Search For The 114th Supreme Court Justice: The Witch-Hunt Against Judge Brett Kavanaugh

Who do you believe?


  • Total voters
    453
Normally I would be against going after a sitting justice like this; it sets a bad precedent unless there is clear clear proof of real lying.

I dont see enough there to warrant this.

However, robbing Obama of replacing Scalia opened an ugly door. And here we are.
 
Probably went back to her normal life? Where should she be?

Her normal life + $2,000,000

But you would think that considering her state has no statute of limitations on sex assault cases, she would, you know, file charges or something. You know, 'cause it was so devastatingly traumatizing for her...
 
Her normal life + $2,000,000

But you would think that considering her state has no statute of limitations on sex assault cases, she would, you know, file charges or something. You know, 'cause it was so devastatingly traumatizing for her...

What the $2,000,000 about?
 
What the $2,000,000 about?

I overestimated her GoFundMe. It was about $600,000.

Either way, she cashed in on her lies. Probably went on a few vacations taking those scary planes that scare her to death.
 
Oh Senate Dems, wtf are you doing...

Senate Dems' social media poll finds more users want Supreme Court justices like Kavanaugh than Ginsburg

By Andrew O'Reilly | May 5, 2019

D507ONyW0AAiZe_

A Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Twitter poll asking what type of Supreme Court justices social media users would like to have on the bench apparently backfired when 71 percent of respondents selected “justices like Brett Kavanaugh” compared to just 29 percent who chose “justices like Ruth Bader Ginsburg.”

The poll, which is not scientific and open to anyone with a Twitter account, was posted on May 3 and stated it had two more days before it closed.

However, by Sunday afternoon, the tweet had vanished.

There is likely no pairing currently on the Supreme Court more dissimilar than Ginsburg and Kavanaugh.

Ginsburg is one of the longest-tenured justices on the Supreme Court and is known for her liberal dissents and refusal to step down from the post even as her health fails. She has in recent years become an icon in liberal circles for her stances on women’s rights, abortion and gender discrimination.

Kavanaugh, on the other hand, is the most recent addition to the Supreme Court – joining the bench last year following a brutal confirmation process that saw multiple women accuse him of sexual misconduct while in high school and college. A social conservative, Kavanaugh previously worked in the administration of President George W. Bush and the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, where he was ranked as one of the most conservative judges on the D.C. court, according to the Washington Post.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/de...e-court-justices-like-kavanaugh-than-ginsburg
 
Have there been any "Dr." Ford sightings? Anywhere?

Justice Kavanaugh is on the SCOTUS, so we know where he is.
 
Let’s all remember how badly democrats embarrassed themselves over this, and celebrate the coming inevitable embarrassment they make of themselves over the upcoming years.

<13>
 
Mississippi professor who went to Georgetown Prep with Brett Kavanaugh sues HuffPost
Jimmie E. Gates, Mississippi Clarion Ledger | Aug. 22, 2019

1024px-Tim_Scott_and_Brett_Kavanaugh-998x666.jpg

A Gulfport professor and advocate is suing the national news website HuffPost alleging defamation involving a September 2018 story on U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's days at Georgetown Prep school.

Derrick Evans’ lawsuit was filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Gulfport against HuffPost and its former journalist, Ashley Feinberg.

The lawsuit said HuffPost and Feinberg repeatedly defamed Evans and friend Douglas Kennedy to a nationwide audience on multiple occasions in September 2018 by falsely asserting that they helped arrange the purchase and delivery of cocaine at Georgetown Prep that resulted in the April 1984 death of David Kennedy, Douglas’ brother and the son of the late U.S. attorney general and senator, Robert F. Kennedy.

“These statements were not only false and defamatory, but outrageously so, and were published by defendants with knowledge of their actual falsity or in reckless disregard of the truth for the apparent purpose of creating a salacious story designed to drive internet traffic to HuffPost’s website,” the lawsuit said.

A HuffPost spokesperson said in a statement Wednesday that it doesn't comment on pending litigation.

In the fall of 2018, the United States Senate was holding confirmation hearings on Kavanaugh’s nomination to become a Supreme Court justice.

Kavanaugh, Evans and Douglas Kennedy were alumni of Georgetown Prep.

During the controversy surrounding Kavanaugh’s nomination, Feinberg wrote the article that Evans’ lawsuit said was sensational, depicting a wild “alcohol-and-drug-fueled” culture at Georgetown Prep in the early 1980s.

The headline of the story was “Kavanaugh’s Prep School Party Scene Was a ‘Free-For-All’.”

The lawsuit said in HuffPost’s zeal to create a sensational article about Kavanaugh’s years at Georgetown Prep and thereby drive traffic to its website, it fabricated the claim that Kennedy and Evans “helped score” the illegal narcotics that killed Douglas Kennedy’s older brother, David, in April 1984.

“Defendants had no sources to support their outrageously false and defamatory statements about Derrick Evans and Douglas Kennedy. Nor did Defendants make any effort whatsoever to contact Mr. Evans for comment before accusing him of not only of committing a crime, but of being responsible for the death of David Kennedy,” the lawsuit said. “Indeed, if Ms. Feinberg or her HuffPost editors had done even the most basic research of publicly available sources, she and they would have known, if they did not already know, that Mr. Evans actively assisted law enforcement in identifying and prosecuting the individuals who actually sold the illegal narcotics.”

The lawsuit said HuffPost ran a correction, but the correction also contained false information. HuffPost eventually changed the story removing any reference to Evans and the Kennedy brothers.

“Defendants’ statements were false, malicious and fabricated, and were published with a knowing, intentional, subjective awareness of, and/or reckless disregard of, their falsity,” Evans’ attorney, John Sneed, said. “Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of the Defendants’ statements, including emotional distress and harm to his reputation.“

The lawsuit is seeking damages, including punitive, but doesn’t state an amount sought.

Evans, who is African American, obtained a full academic scholarship to Georgetown Preparatory School in North Bethesda, Maryland, in 1982. He was one of the small number of black students at Georgetown Prep at the time.

After earning bachelors and masters degrees from Boston College, Evans became a history professor and lecturer on American social history and the civil rights movement. In 1992, he was awarded Harvard and Radcliffe Colleges’ Certificate of Distinction in Teaching.

In 2005, in the direct wake of Hurricane Katrina, Evans co-founded the Gulf Coast Fund for Community Renewal and Ecological Health, which has directed over $5 million in critical funding to groups in coastal Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Texas and Florida, according to his lawsuit.

https://www.clarionledger.com/story...illegal-drugs-party-david-kennedy/2078341001/
 
Last edited:
Christine Blasey Ford’s Father Supported Brett Kavanaugh’s Confirmation
By Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino | September 12, 2019

CBF2-998x613.jpg

Last year, when Christine Blasey Ford emerged after then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings to accuse him of attempted rape at a house party when both were teenagers, there were many unanswered questions both about her story and her credibility.

She offered no proof that she and Kavanaugh had ever even met. She couldn’t remember where it happened, when it happened, or how she arrived at or departed from the party. None of the four alleged witnesses she eventually named, including one of her closest lifelong friends, corroborated her accusations. Prior to airing her allegations with the media, she scrubbed her entire social media history that indicated she was a liberal activist.

To this day, there is zero evidence beyond her claims that the alleged assault ever happened. One detail, however, remains particularly intriguing. The Blasey family stayed conspicuously silent about the veracity of her allegations. A public letter of support for Ford that began “As members of Christine Blasey Ford’s family . . .” wasn’t signed by a single blood relative. Reached for comment by the Washington Post, her father simply said, “I think all of the Blasey family would support her. I think her record stands for itself. Her schooling, her jobs and so on,” before hanging up.

Privately, however, it appears the Blasey family had significant doubts about what Ford was trying to accomplish by coming forward and making unsubstantiated allegations against Brett Kavanaugh. Within days of Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, a fascinating encounter took place. Brett Kavanaugh’s father was approached by Ford’s father at the golf club where they are both members.

Ralph Blasey, Ford’s father, went out of his way to offer to Ed Kavanaugh his support of Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, according to multiple people familiar with the conversation that took place at Burning Tree Club in Bethesda, Maryland. “I’m glad Brett was confirmed,” Ralph Blasey told Ed Kavanaugh, shaking his hand. Blasey added that the ordeal had been tough for both families.

The encounter immediately caused a stir at the close-knit private golf club as staff and members shared the news. The conversation between the two men echoed a letter that Blasey had previously sent to the elder Kavanaugh. Neither man returned requests for comment about the exchanges.

Blasey never explicitly addressed the credibility of his daughter’s allegations, but he presumably wouldn’t have supported the nomination of a man he believed tried to rape his daughter.

It wasn’t just Ford’s father. The national drama played out on a decidedly local scale as the D.C.-based family and friends of Ford’s quietly apologized to friends and family of Kavanaugh, even as the toxic political environment made it punitive for them to speak up publicly.

One friend who was subjected to both public scrutiny and private pressure because she cast doubt on Ford’s story was Leland Keyser, one of Ford’s closest friends at the time of the alleged attack. Keyser wanted to support her but nevertheless had no recollection of the event.

Keyser’s son noted on a GoFundMe page for his mother that she put “everything in her life at risk” in order to tell the truth about Ford’s allegations. Son Alex Beckel wrote that his mom “resisted immense personal pressure and courageously came forward with the truth,” adding that she “stood up and did what was right when she had everything to lose and nothing to gain.”

While there was no evidence to support Ford’s claim other than her testimony, some believed her because they said she would have no motivation to lie. Critics point to the nearly $1 million she raised in GoFundMe accounts and the honors that Sports Illustrated and Time Magazine bestowed on her. New books featuring her cooperation downplay the copious problems with her account.



So what was the point of the cavalcade of unsubstantiated allegations? Ford’s attorney Debra Katz offered not so much a hint as a confession. Ford testified that she had no political motivation. But in remarks captured on video, Katz admitted that Ford’s allegations against Kavanaugh were at least in part driven by fear he might not sufficiently support unregulated abortion on the court.

“We were going to have a conservative” justice, she said, “but he will always have an asterisk next to his name” that will discredit any decision he makes regarding abortion. What’s more, she added, “that is part of what motivated Christine.”


https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/1...ther-supported-brett-kavanaughs-confirmation/
 
Last edited:
NYT deletes bizarre tweet referencing Brett Kavanaugh’s ‘harmless’ penis
By Laura Italiano | September 15, 2019https://nypost.com/author/laura-italiano/

nyt-kavanaugh-tweets.jpg


In a bizarre series of tweets and retractions on @nytopinion on Saturday, The New York Times cringingly opined on its latest Brett Kavanaugh story, then retracted the tweet, then retracted the retraction, then posted an apology.

The missteps began at 5:13 p.m., when a reckless tweet posted to @nytopinion opined, “Having a penis thrust in your face at a drunken dorm party may seem like harmless fun…”

The misfire was apparent commentary on the paper’s latest story on the new Supreme Court justice, which revisits accusations by fellow Yalie Deborah Ramirez, who has said a pantsless Kavanaugh assaulted her at a party during freshman year.

Two minutes after that first tweet posted, at 5:16 p.m., a retraction posted reading, “We have deleted an earlier tweet to this article that was poorly phrased.”

Soon after, that retraction also vanished.



Finally, at 11 p.m., the paper apologized and left it at that.

“We deleted a previous tweet regarding this article,” the final tweet read. “It was offensive, and we apologize.”

Still, the internet is forever, and screengrabs of the first offending tweet and its retraction drew fire well into Sunday morning.

https://nypost.com/2019/09/15/nyt-d...eet-about-having-a-penis-thrust-in-your-face/
 
Presidential hopefuls trying to capitalize on the NYT's latest "bombshell":



 
Last edited:
NYT updates Kavanaugh 'bombshell' to note accuser doesn't recall alleged assault
By Gregg Re | Sept 15, 2019



The New York Times suddenly made a major revision to a supposed bombshell piece late Sunday concerning a resurfaced allegation of sexual assault by Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh -- hours after virtually all 2020 Democratic presidential candidates had cited the original article as a reason to impeach Kavanaugh.

The update included the significant detail that several friends of the alleged victim said she did not recall the supposed sexual assault in question at all. The Times also stated for the first time that the alleged victim refused to be interviewed, and has made no comment about the episode.

The only first-hand statement concerning the supposed attack in the original piece came from a Clinton-connected lawyer who claimed to have witnessed it.

The Times' revision says: "Editors' Note: An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book's account regarding an assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party. The book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article."

The update came only after conservative commentators who had reviewed an early release copy of the book, starting with The Federalist's Mollie Hemingway, first flagged the omission on Twitter.

The Times did not immediately respond to an email from Fox News seeking comment.

That explanation didn't sit well with conservative commentators, who unloaded a torrent of criticism on the left-leaning newspaper.

"Should I be surprised at this point that the NYT would make such an unforgivable oversight?" asked RealClearInvestigation's Mark Hemingway.

Wrote the Washington Examiner's Jerry Dunleavy: "Crazy how the 'one element' that wasn’t included in the original article was the part where the alleged victim’s friends said she doesn’t remember it happening."

"It’s important to point out that this correction almost certainly would have never occurred if conservative media folks like @MZHemingway and others hadn’t obtained the copy of the actual book itself the same day the excerpt/article was released," author James Hasson said.

Throughout the day on Sunday, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Beto O'Rourke, Cory Booker and Julian Castro, among others, declared that Kavanaugh "must be impeached," citing the allegation.

The revitalized, longshot push to get Kavanaugh removed from the high court came as Democrats' apparent effort to impeach President Trump has largely stalled. Trump, for his part, suggested Sunday that Kavanaugh should sue for defamation.

The Times piece by Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, adapted from their forthcoming book, asserted that a Kavanaugh classmate, Clinton-connected nonprofit CEO Max Stier, "saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student."

The Times did not mention Stier's work as a Clinton defense attorney, or Stier's legal battles with Kavanaugh during the Whitewater investigation, and simply called him a "respected thought leader."

According to the Times, Stier "notified senators and the FBI about this account" last year during the Kavanaugh hearings, "but the FBI did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly."

However, the Times' article also conspicuously did not mention that Pogrebin and Kelly's book found that the female student in question had denied any knowledge of the alleged episode.

"The book notes, quietly, that the woman Max Stier named as having been supposedly victimized by Kavanaugh and friends denies any memory of the alleged event," observed Mollie Hemingway. "Seems, I don’t know, significant."

The book reads: "[Tracy] Harmon, whose surname is now Harmon Joyce, has also refused to discuss the incident, though several of her friends said she does not recall it."

"Omitting these facts from the @nytimes story is one of worst cases of journalistic malpractice that I can recall," wrote the National Review's Washington correspondent, John McCormack on Twitter.

McCormack wrote separately: "If Kavanaugh’s 'friends pushed his penis,' then isn’t it an allegation of wrongdoing against Kavanaugh’s 'friends,' not Kavanaugh himself? Surely even a modern liberal Yalie who’s been to one of those weird non-sexual 'naked parties' would recognize both the female student and Kavanaugh are both alleged victims in this alleged incident, barring an additional allegation that a college-aged Kavanaugh asked his 'friends' to 'push his penis.'"

The Times went on to note in the article that it had "corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier," but the article apparently meant only that the Times had corroborated that Stier made his claim to the FBI. No first-hand corroboration of the alleged episode was apparently obtained.

Nevertheless, Democrats announced a new effort to topple Kavanaugh. Hawaii Democratic Sen. Mazie Hirono -- who infamously said last year that Kavanaugh did not deserve a fair hearing because he might be pro-life -- said the Senate Judiciary Committee should begin an impeachment inquiry to determine whether Kavanaugh lied to Congress.

Impeaching Kavanaugh would require a majority vote in the Democratic-controlled House, and a highly unlikely two-thirds vote in the GOP-majority Senate would then be needed to remove him from the bench. No Supreme Court justice or president has ever been convicted by the Senate, although eight lower-level federal judges have been.

The long odds didn't stop 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls from joining in on the effort.

"I sat through those hearings," Harris wrote on Twitter. "Brett Kavanaugh lied to the U.S. Senate and most importantly to the American people. He was put on the Court through a sham process and his place on the Court is an insult to the pursuit of truth and justice. He must be impeached."

During the hearings, Harris strongly implied that she knew Kavanaugh had improperly discussed Special Counsel Robert Mueller's then-ongoing probe with a Trump-connected lawyer.

Harris provided no evidence for the bombshell insinuation, which went viral on social media and sent the hearing room into stunned silence, even as she directly accused Kavanaugh of lying under oath.

Castro and Warren echoed that sentiment and said Kavanaugh had committed perjury.

"It’s more clear than ever that Brett Kavanaugh lied under oath," Castro wrote. "He should be impeached. And Congress should review the failure of the Department of Justice to properly investigate the matter."

Warren wrote: "Last year the Kavanaugh nomination was rammed through the Senate without a thorough examination of the allegations against him. Confirmation is not exoneration, and these newest revelations are disturbing. Like the man who appointed him, Kavanaugh should be impeached."

O'Rourke claimed to "know" that Kavanaugh had lied under oath, and falsely said that the new accuser was not known to Senate Democrats or the FBI last year.

"Yesterday, we learned of another accusation against Brett Kavanaugh—one we didn't find out about before he was confirmed because the Senate forced the F.B.I. to rush its investigation to save his nomination," O'Rourke said. "We know he lied under oath. He should be impeached."

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., tweeted in part, "This new allegation and additional corroborating evidence adds to a long list of reasons why Brett Kavanaugh should not be a Supreme Court justice. I stand with survivors and countless other Americans in calling for impeachment proceedings to begin."

Amy Klobuchar stopped short of calling for impeachment, and instead posted a picture of Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford with the words, "Let us never forget what courage looks like."

Bernie Sanders, meanwhile, said he backed getting rid of Kavanaugh by any legal means available: "The revelations today confirm what we already knew: During his hearing, Kavanaugh faced credible accusations and likely lied to Congress. I support any appropriate constitutional mechanism to hold him accountable."

As the calls mounted, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., shot back Sunday afternoon on Twitter -- and made clear that Kavanaugh wasn't going anywhere.

"The far left’s willingness to seize on completely uncorroborated and unsubstantiated allegations during last year’s confirmation process was a dark and embarrassing chapter for the Senate," McConnell wrote.

He added: "Fortunately a majority of Senators and the American people rallied behind timeless principles such as due process and the presumption of innocence. I look forward to many years of service to come from Justice Kavanaugh."

The Times' piece also stated that well before Kavanaugh became a federal judge, "at least seven people" had heard about how he allegedly exposed himself to Deborah Ramirez at a party.

Ramirez had called classmates at Yale seeking corroboration for her story, and even told some of her classmates that she could not remember the culprit in the alleged episode -- before changing her mind and publicly blaming Kavanaugh "after six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney," the New Yorker reported last year in a widely derided piece.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, then led by Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, wrote in an executive summary of its investigation that it contacted Ramirez’s counsel "seven times seeking evidence to support claims made in the New Yorker," but that "Ms. Ramirez produced nothing in response and refused a Committee request for an interview."

Late Sunday, Grassley's office called out the Times for omitting key details in the story published this weekend.

"@NYTimes did not contact Sen. Grassley’s office for this story. If they had, we would've reminded them of a few key public facts they omitted," Grassley's team wrote. "Despite 7 attempts by staff, Ms. Ramirez' lawyers declined to provide documentary evidence referenced in the article/witness accounts to support the claims. They also declined invitations for Ms. Ramirez to speak with committee investigators or to provide a written statement."

Additionally, the FBI separately reached out to nearly a dozen individuals to corroborate the allegations by Ford and Ramirez, and ultimately spoke to ten individuals and two eyewitnesses, but apparently found no corroboration.

The agency's investigation began after then-Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., called for a one-week delay in Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings so an independent agency could look into the claims against him. Flake said the FBI's probe needed to be limited in length to avoid derailing the proceedings with endless claims and probes going back to Kavanaugh's high school years.

Kavanaugh, predicted by Democrats during his confirmation process to be a hardline conservative, often sided with liberal justices during the Supreme Court's last term.

The president, meanwhile, accused the media of trying to influence Kavanaugh. He also went on to say that Kavanaugh should go on the offensive and take on the media for false statements.

"Brett Kavanaugh should start suing people for libel, or the Justice Department should come to his rescue. The lies being told about him are unbelievable. False Accusations without recrimination. When does it stop? They are trying to influence his opinions. Can’t let that happen!" he tweeted.

Grassley sent several criminal referrals to the Justice Department related to alleged lies submitted to Senate investigators during Kavanaugh's confirmation process -- which could be what the president meant when he wrote Sunday that the DOJ "should come to [Kavanuagh's] rescue."

One of those referrals was for now-disgraced attorney Michael Avenatti and one of his clients, Julie Swetnick, regarding a potential "conspiracy" to provide false statements to Congress and obstruct its investigation. Swetnick's credibility took a hit as she changed her story about Kavanaugh's purported gang-rape trains, and her ex-boyfriend went public to say she was known for "exaggerating everything."

Swetnick and Ramirez were just two of several women who had accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct during his confirmation process. Ford most notably testified that Kavanaugh attempted to sexually assault her at a party when they were teens, and dubiously asserted that the memory was "indelible" in her "hippocampus" -- although no witnesses could corroborate her ever-changing story -- even her close lifelong friend, Leland Keyser, who Ford said had attended the party.

Keyser, according to the Times reporters' new book, did not believe Ford's story -- and refused to change her mind, despite pressure from progressive activists and Ford's friends.

"It just didn't make any sense," Keyser said, referring to Ford's explanation of how she was assaulted at a party that Keyser attended, but could not recall how she got home.

Ford's attorney, Debra Katz, was quoted in a new book as saying that Ford was motivated to come forward in part by a desire to tag Kavanaugh's reputation with an "asterisk" before he could start ruling on abortion-related cases.

"In the aftermath of these hearings, I believe that Christine’s testimony brought about more good than the harm misogynist Republicans caused by allowing Kavanaugh on the court," Katz said. "He will always have an asterisk next to his name. When he takes a scalpel to Roe v. Wade, we will know who he is, we know his character, and we know what motivates him, and that is important.

"It is important that we know, and that is part of what motivated Christine."

The Federalist reported last week that Ford's father privately supported Kavanaugh's confirmation, and approached Ed Kavanaugh on a golf course to make his support clear.

Some claims that surfaced during Kavanaugh's confirmation fell apart within days. For example, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., received a call from an anonymous constituent who claimed that in 1985, two "heavily inebriated men" referred to as "Brett and Mark" had sexually assaulted a friend of hers on a boat.

The Twitter account belonging to the accuser apparently advocated for a military coup against the Trump administration. The constituent recanted the sexual assault claim on the social media site days later.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ny...fter-2020-dems-use-it-to-call-for-impeachment
 
Last edited:


These morons never learn. Kavanaugh should take Trump's advice and sue the shit out of them. These aren't randoms on Twitter. These are elected officials engaging in pure slander.
 
These morons never learn. Kavanaugh should take Trump's advice and sue the shit out of them. These aren't randoms on Twitter. These are elected officials engaging in pure slander.

I think these presidential hopefuls will soon realize that pandering to the extremists aren't going to help their quest for the White House at all.







 
Last edited:
These morons never learn. Kavanaugh should take Trump's advice and sue the shit out of them. These aren't randoms on Twitter. These are elected officials engaging in pure slander.
during the 2020 election, if one of those dem's are the nominee Trump should bring that up how they were so quick to called for action and had judgement without the facts and say this is who you want to control your nukes? lol coming from Trump that would be awesome
 
Back
Top