Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll … President Trump at 50%

HARD TO BELIEVE AFTER ALL THE NEGATIVE, BIAS NEWS COVERAGE …

According to the most recent Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking poll, President Donald Trump has a 50% approval rating among U.S likely voters. Heading into the 2018 midterm elections, Trump has wind in his sails and the American economy is roaring. After all of the bias, fake news against Trump by the liberal mainstream media, Trumps actions speak louder than their words. Trump rally is “Making America Great Again,” and the people are starting to realize it.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 50% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Forty-nine percent (49%) disapprove.

The latest figures include 35% who Strongly Approve of the way the president is performing and 40% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -5. (see trends).

Stormy Daniels’ Attention seeking Attorney Michael Avenatti in Iowa, Says ‘I’m exploring a run for the presidency of the United States’

YEAH WHATEVER AVENATTI, AND I’M EXPLORING THE LOST CITY OF ATLANTIS, BIG FOOT AND THE LOCH NESS MONSTER …

From the Des Moines Register, porn actress Stormy Daniels’ attorney Michael Avenatti  is in Iowa and says he” is exploring a run for the presidency of the United States.” Isn’t that rich. It’s more like he is exploring ways to keep himself on TV. What’s the matter Michael, have you been out of the media eye for too long a period of time and felt the need for some self-gratification? I thought he was representing Stormy Daniels or down on the border helping illegals? I guess not. Wow, what a formidable opponent Avenatti would be for the Democrat 2020 presidential primaries. Bit unlike the LEFT who look to squelch free speech, we say Run Michael, run!!! We beg you. Both you, Maxine Waters, Al Sharpton and the rest of the island of misfit toys, please run. Remember when the liberal MSM made fun of the 17 qualified GOP candidates who ran in the 2016 presidential primaries? I wonder if they will do the same when the gaggle of unqualified Democrat candidates do the same in 2020?

Michael Avenatti has arrived in Iowa.

After three canceled flights and a 700-mile road trip, the lawyer known for representing adult film actress Stormy Daniels in her case against Republican President Donald Trump, is ready to put his stake in the ground in the first-in-the-nation caucus state.

“I’m exploring a run for the presidency of the United States, and I wanted to come to Iowa and listen to people and learn about some issues that are facing the citizens of Iowa and do my homework,” Avenatti told the Des Moines Register in an interview Thursday.

Avenatti, who rose to prominence as an outspoken critic of the president, toured the Iowa State Fair Thursday posing for selfies with fans. He is scheduled to speak at the Democratic Wing Ding fundraiser Friday night in Clear Lake.

Jonathan Turley: If Trump Meeting is Illegal, then Clinton Dossier is Criminal Too … Actually Much More Criminal

SO WHY DOES THE MSM ONLY SEE THAT TRUMP’S ACTION WERE  CRIMINAL AND NOT HILLARY?

From Jonathan Turley of The Hill comes the following logic when trying to figure out why the liberal media would call one action by Donald Trump Jr. a crime, but completely dismissing the actions of Hillary Clinton and the Russian dossier. The liberal media in their efforts of “gotcha” of President Trump at any and all cost have basically described a crime, that of which Hillary Clinton did, not Donald Trump.

CNN, co-host Alisyn Camerota claims claimed that it is an “open and shut case” that taking dirt on Hillary from the Russians was a crime by the Trump campaign. Really? The CNN host does realize that no dirt was gained and the meeting was ended soon after, correct? Now compare that with what Hillary Clinton did. Dear Ms. Camerota, then what would you call it when Hillary Clinton bought and paid for the so called Russian Dossier from former British spy Christopher Steele (a foreign national) who dealt with the Russians to get info? As lawyer and legal scholar, Jonathan Turley clearly points out in a fair and unbiased manner, fi the LEFT thinks what the Trump campaign did was a crime, then the Clinton campaign was times 100! One was a meeting, end of story, the other was a bought and paid for Russian dossier by Hillary.

Take the crime being proclaimed as “open and shut.” Before Camerota came to this conclusion, the CNN anchors discussed federal election laws that make it a “crime for any person to solicit, accept, or receive, anything of value from a foreign person or U.S. political campaign for the purpose of influencing any elections for federal office.” Thus, if Trump Jr. was willing to review evidence of criminal conduct by Clinton, it must be a type of foreign campaign contribution and, therefore, a federal crime.

Such logic is so inescapable that Camerota responded, “I mean, what more really is there to talk about after that one?” The answer is “a lot more.” The Russians setting up the meeting said their government had evidence of criminal conduct connected to the Clinton Foundation soliciting illegal donations. According to witnesses, Trump Jr. asked for the promised evidence but Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya said she did not have it and only wanted to talk about Magnitsky Act limitations on Russian adoptions. The meeting ended shortly thereafter.

Consider the implications of what the critics are suggesting. It would mean treating information as a form of political contribution as no different from money, for purposes of a criminal charge, even information about criminal acts by an election candidate. That would mean administrations could prosecute political opponents for merely attending meetings with foreign individuals to discuss the criminal conduct of a sitting American president. Democratic politicians could be charged if they reviewed evidence of alleged bribes or quid pro quos by Trump.

Indeed, it could be any foreign source, since the law is ambiguous. Does that not include foreign organizations like environmental and other public interest groups? How about journalists or lawyers sharing evidence of crimes by powerful politicians? Fortunately, courts likely would reject such an interpretation as a major threat to First Amendment freedoms of speech and even the press. So why are so many journalists and activists blind to implications of such an expansion? The answer is rage. We live in the age of rage, from Trump tweets to cable news crusades.

The latest media frenzy is part of the Newtonian principles that now guide both politics and journalism: “To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction.” However, journalists and lawyers are trained to avoid immediate involuntary reactions, particularly when the potential costs are so prohibitive. Responding to a sweeping political tweet with a sweeping legal interpretation is neither equal nor wise. In the end, the Trump Tower controversy is not based on “fake news” as claimed by the president, but the federal crime alleged by the media is based on fake law.

Emails Show 2016 Links Among Christopher Steele, Bruce Ohr, Glenn Simpson and Russian Oligarch Oleg Deripaska (VIDEO)

JUST WHO WAS THE COLLUSION WITH?

From the Washington Examiner, emails in 2016 between former British spy Christopher Steele and Justice Department official Bruce Ohr suggest Steele was deeply concerned about the legal status of a Putin-linked Russian oligarch, Oleg Deripaska, and at times seemed to be advocating on the oligarch’s behalf, in the same time period Steele worked on collecting the Russia-related allegations against Donald Trump that came to be known as the Trump dossier. Hmm. As John Solomon of The Hill (Video) states, “Fusion GPS’s work and its involvement with several FBI officials have been well reported, but a close review of these new documents shows just how closely Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, who reported to Obama-era Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, maintained contact with Fusion — and, in particular, its primary source, former British spy Christopher Steele — before, during and after the election. So just who was colluding with who? The individuals who were colluding and up to no good appear not to have been Trump, it was the deep state.

Byron York of the Washington Examiner talks about the link between Steele and DOJ official

Emails in 2016 between former British spy Christopher Steele and Justice Department official Bruce Ohr suggest Steele was deeply concerned about the legal status of a Putin-linked Russian oligarch, and at times seemed to be advocating on the oligarch’s behalf, in the same time period Steele worked on collecting the Russia-related allegations against Donald Trump that came to be known as the Trump dossier. The emails show Steele and Ohr were in frequent contact, that they intermingled talk about Steele’s research and the oligarch’s affairs, and that Glenn Simpson, head of the dirt-digging group Fusion GPS that hired Steele to compile the dossier, was also part of the ongoing conversation.

The emails, given to Congress by the Justice Department, began on Jan. 12, 2016, when Steele sent Ohr a New Year’s greeting. Steele brought up the case of Russian aluminum magnate Oleg Deripaska (referred to in various emails as both OD and OVD), who was at the time seeking a visa to attend an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in the United States. Years earlier, the U.S. revoked Deripaska’s visa, reportedly on the basis of suspected involvement with Russian organized crime. Deripaska was close to Paul Manafort, the short-term Trump campaign chairman now on trial for financial crimes, and this year was sanctioned in the wake of Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential election.

Steele also asked Ohr when he might be coming to London, or somewhere in Europe, “as I would be keen to meet up here and talk business.” Ohr replied warmly the same day and said he would likely travel to Europe, but not the U.K., at least twice in February.

Steele emailed again on Feb. 8 to alert Ohr that “our old friend OD apparently has been granted another official [emphasis in original] visa to come to the US later this month.” Steele wrote, “As far as I’m concerned, this is good news all round although as before, it would be helpful if you could monitor it and let me know if any complications arise.” Ohr replied that he knew about Deripaska’s visa, and “to the extent I can I will keep an eye on the situation.” Steele again asked to meet anytime Ohr was in the U.K. or Western Europe.

Ohio District 12 Special Election: Republican Troy Balderson Defeats Democrat Danny O’Connor 50.2% to 49.3%

Even with low GOP voter turnout, GOP candidate wins OHIO 12 Special Election … OHIO 12 Remains Republican!!!

It’s official, Republican Troy Balderson defeats Democrat Danny O’Connor 101,574 to 99,820. It was billed as a precursor to the 2018 Democrat blue wave. Oops, the Democrats lost. Of course no matter who won, the liberal MSM would call this a GOP loss whether Balderson won or lost. However, as stated at the Gateway Pundit, Republicans are going to have to do a much better job in November for the 2018 midterms as Balderson had 101,574 votes compared to Tiberi’s 251,266 votes in 2016 is only about 40% of the 2016 turnout.

Look for this same match up in the 2018 midterms. Republicans are going to have to do a much better job in showing up to vote in November.