THEIR WORST NIGHTMARE: Dems accept inevitability of Trump’s reelection

WASHINGTON — Despite two years of investigations geared toward unseating him as president and endless calls for impeachment, Democrats have come to a hard realization: Donald Trump will likely win a second term as president.

Even hardcore leftist publications such as The Washington Post and The New York Times have conceded the likelihood of a Trump 2020 landslide.

“The headline news from the most recent Post poll was that President Trump remains behind or tied with all major Democratic contenders. The takeaway should have been that if this poll is correct, Trump is almost a lock to win,” Henry Olsen of the Washington Post wrote in an op-ed July 8.

“There are two reasons that this is the case. The first has to do with the electoral college; the second has to do with the likely campaign dynamics over the next year and a half,” Olsen writes. “Trump won the electoral college in 2016 despite receiving roughly 46 percent of the popular vote because his coalition is highly tilted toward non-college-educated white voters. Those voters are shrinking as a total share of the national electorate, but they remain the largest group of voters in the electoral-vote-rich states of the Upper Midwest that he flipped from blue to red. That means Trump will get higher shares of the vote in those states than he will nationally.”

“The Post’s poll showed Trump performing nationally at levels that suggest he would get close to or more than a majority of the vote in at least four of the five key Midwestern swing states,” Olsen continued. “Take his job approval rating: The poll showed him at 47 percent approval among registered voters. The 2018 exit polls showed Trump’s job approval was higher than his national average by three points in Wisconsin and eight points in Ohio. By extrapolation, the Post poll implies his job approval is at or above 50 percent in enough states for him to carry the electoral college.”

“Trump’s standing gets stronger when we look at the mock ballot questions. He receives between 46 and 48 percent of the vote among registered voters against any Democrat except Joe Biden. In 2016, he ran about 1.5 to 2 points ahead of his national showing in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. There’s no reason to think that he won’t do the same in 2020 given the nature of his coalition. That means the Post poll implies he will get between about 48 and 50 percent in each of these states. If he does that, he almost surely will win at least one of them — and with that, he wins reelection,” he concluded.

Another primary reason Dems are already beginning to concede defeat: the economy.

“While we can argue about how meaningful and solid the current economic growth is, there is no denying that, in terms of the conventional economic indicators, the state of the US economy is excellent. Consequently, prediction models based primarily on economic indicators, which correctly predicted the 2016 elections, predict a resounding Trump victory in 2020,” writes Cas Mudde of The Guardian.

“Second,” writes Mudde, “Trump has so far delivered to his non-traditional base. The average Republican, commonly referred to as the “moderate Republican”, is still not a fan of Trump, who is seen as too confrontational and vulgar, but got the one thing they care about: a tax cut. Scared of a “socialist backlash” within the Democratic party, they will come out to protect their new gains by voting Trump.”

“Similarly, the Christian right will once again come out strong. While the support for Trump by religious voters puzzles liberals, it is pretty straightforward: the supreme court,” Mudde continued. “Here, again, Trump has delivered. He has appointed two staunchly conservative anti-abortion judges to the supreme court, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, and promised to appoint more. And with the possibility of (at least) one position possibly becoming vacant in the next presidential term, ie Ruth Bader Ginsburg (perhaps also Clarence Thomas), the Christian right mobilization will run on full cylinders again. The reward for the faithful: overturning Roe v Wade!”

While nothing is guaranteed and no one knows what will come to pass until all the votes have been counted, when even the left’s most vocal Trump critics agree that the Dems are in trouble, one thing’s for certain: Bernie had better step up his game.

trump smiling


MUELLER: Reports of draft indictment of Trump ‘false’

WASHINGTON — Robert Mueller’s office on Tuesday denied claims made by author Michael Wolff that Special Counsel had drafted an indictment for obstruction of justice against President Donald Trump.

The response comes in the wake of comments made in Wolf’s new book, “Siege: Trump Under Fire,” that Mueller had been prepared to charge the president with three counts of obstruction of justice.

Claiming to be in possession of “internal documents” to back his claims, Wolf said Trump went to “extraordinary lengths… to protect himself from legal scrutiny and accountability, and to undermine the official panels investigating his actions.”

The problem, says Mueller’s office? That never happened.

The documents that you’ve described do not exist,” Mueller spokesperson Peter Carr told The Guardian.

This isn’t the first time that Wolf has come under fire for inaccuracies in his writing.

“I investigate nothing. All I do is look and write what I see and what I hear, and my job — which has nothing to do with truth — is to take what I see and what I hear and write that in a way that readers can come [as close] as possible — as close as I came — to the experience of doing this,” Wolf told a publication for Vassar College after his last book, “Fire and Fury,” was attacked as being full of fraudulent claims. “I want to be able to turn what I see into something that a reader says ‘oh, I see that too.’”

Calls for comment to the White House were not immediately returned.


FBI targets black extremist groups as domestic terror threat

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The FBI has officially recognized black extremist groups a threat to national security.

In a newly released report by the department’s counterterrorism division ( FBI officials call out “black identity extremists” who they say are targeting law enforcement and other government groups with violence.

“The FBI judges it is very likely BIE perceptions of police brutality against African
Americans have become organizing drivers for the BIE movement since 2014, resulting in a spike of BIEs intentionally targeting law enforcement with violence,” the report states. “In all six targeted attacks since 2014, the FBI assesses it is very likely the BIE suspects acted in retaliation for perceived past police brutality incidents.”

“The FBI assesses it is very likely a few of the BIEs who have targeted law
enforcement since 2014 were influenced by more than one ideological perspective” the report continues.

“It is very likely that BIEs’ perceptions of unjust treatment of African-Americans and the perceived unchallenged illegitimate actions of law enforcement will inspire premeditated attacks against law enforcement over the next year,” the report goes on. “It is very likely additional controversial police shootings of African-Americans and the associated legal proceedings will continue to serve as drivers for violence against law enforcement.”

Black activist groups were quick to respond to the report, which they claim is proof of racial profiling.

“We knew that we were likely being watched,” DeRay Mckesson of Black Lives Matter told The Guardian ( This is confirmation that the work of social justice continues to threaten those in power.”

But experts in the fields of social trends say the FBI is right in calling out the threat to law enforcement.

“It’s not racial profiling, it’s violence profiling,” Scott Walter, president of Capital Research Center, said in an interview with Fox News. “Identity politics can kill, whether it’s white identity politics, which killed in Charlottesville, or black identity politics, which kills cops.”

“We have to be able to distinguish between free speech and violence,” Walter said.
“[Many] longtime [black] activist groups were not obsessed with violence.”