I have never defended Trump as an objectively moral candidate.
I have, however, argued that his election was the correct moral option when given the choice of a person who supports the killing of babies moments before birth (as Hillary did during the debate) and someone who is less evil than that.
I never argued that the actions you list were moral, so I have done no picking and choosing. Your accusation is way off base.
When faced with a heinously evil candidate and a less evil candidate, it is morally permissible to choose the less evil candidate. I assume you agree with that. Please correct me if I am wrong. But, if you do agree with that principle, then your post makes no sense. The morally correct option can be to support Trump, even if he is not 100% morally correct himself.