President the rich asshole’s approval rating has dropped to its lowest level in months, according to a poll released Tuesday. 
Public Policy Polling found the rich asshole has an approval rating of 39 percent, while 54 percent of voters disapprove of his job performance. The approval number is one of the rich asshole’s lowest since taking office, the left-leaning firm noted. 
Forty-four percent of respondents approved of the president's job performance last month, one of his highest ratings.
A majority of voters disapproved of the rich asshole’s handling of various issues in the latest poll. For example, 52 percent said they believe the president is a liar, 57 percent want to see his tax returns and 54 percent said the rich asshole has not delivered on his promise to “Make America Great Again.”
Public Policy Polling’s results were released a day after a CNN poll found the rich asshole received his highest approval rating in nearly a year. Forty-two percent of voters gave the rich asshole positive marks in that poll.
The latest poll numbers come amid a string of personnel changes in the rich asshole's Cabinet. Gary Cohn, the rich asshole's top economic adviser, resigned earlier this month, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was forced out a short time later. the rich asshole has since announced national security adviser H.R. McMaster is leaving early next month, and Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin is reportedly set to be the next to go.
Public Policy Polling also found the rich asshole trailed nearly every hypothetical 2020 opponent, including former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Democratic Sens. Kamala Harris (Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.).
Stephanie Clifford, who acts in porn films under the name Stormy Daniels and has alleged an affair with the president ten years ago, topped the rich asshole by 1 point, 42-41, in a hypothetical 2020 election match-up. When asked the same question using the "Daniels" name, respondents picked the rich asshole, 41 to 32 percent, however, according to the poll. 
the rich asshole has been the subject of recent claims he had multiple extramarital affairs around 2006.
Daniels detailed her alleged affair with the rich asshole during an interview that aired Sunday on "60 Minutes," while former Playboy model Karen McDougal shared her story late last week on CNN.
The White House has denied the women's claims.
Public Policy Polling surveyed 846 voters from March 23-25. Its findings have a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points.

Stormy Daniels's lawyer: There's no 'Monica Lewinsky type' dress

The attorney for Stormy Daniels shot down the possibility that Daniels has a "Monica Lewinsky" dress that could prove an affair between the adult film actress and President the rich asshole.
In a tweet Tuesday, attorney Michael Avenatti said that Daniels doesn't have a dress that might contain the rich asshole's DNA, but said there was progress in proving that Daniels had been threatened by a man to drop the story in 2011.
To address the rumor: We DO NOT have a “Monica Lewinsky type” dress. Thus, there is no dress to be tested for DNA. But we are making progress on the assault/stalking that occurred around the same time that Mr. Cohen threatened @intouchweekly magazine in May 2011.

Avenatti's tweet follows a remark from Alana Evans, a friend of Daniels, who told CNN's Jim Sciutto that Daniels "still has the dress" from her alleged one-night stand with the president in 2006, shortly after his marriage to first lady Melania the rich asshole.
“All I know is that Stormy still has the dress that she wore from that night,” Evans said.
In 1997, scandal erupted when Lewinsky, then a White House intern, told friend Linda Tripp that she still had a semen-stained dress from her sexual encounter with President Clinton earlier that year.
Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, took a $130,000 payment from the rich asshole's lawyer Michael Cohen in 2016 as part of a nondisclosure agreement that she says prevented her from speaking about the alleged affair.
Cohen has admitted to making the payment but denies that the rich asshole knew anything about it, saying it came from his personal funds. The White House has repeatedly denied Daniels's claims, and has suggested that the alleged incident in 2011 in which Daniels was reportedly threatened to drop the story in a parking lot never happened.
"The president strongly, clearly and consistently has denied these underlying claims. The only one who has been inconsistent is the one making the claims," White House deputy press secretary Raj Shah said on Monday.
"The president doesn't believe that any of the claims Ms. Daniels made in the interview are accurate."

the rich asshole sets up legal fight over bump stocks

The rich asshole Administration is setting the stage for a furious legal battle over bump stocks by proposing a rule to effectively ban the devices, which allow semi-automatic weapons to fire more rapidly.
Bump stocks were catapulted to the forefront of the debate over gun control after a man in Las Vegas killed 58 people and wounded more than 500 others by opening fire with semi-automatic weapons that used the devices.
The Las Vegas killings represent the worst mass-shooting incident in modern U.S. history, and led to immediate calls for the banning of bump stocks.
But gun rights groups and other advocates say it’s outside the administration’s regulatory authority to ban bump stocks — and that doing so will provoke lawsuits.
The reason is complicated and has to do with how the law defines how a machine gun operates.
Machine guns are all but completely banned under a 1986 law passed by Congress that banned the possession or transfer of automatic weapons manufactured after that year.
A previous law from 1934 defines a machine gun as any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single pull of the trigger. It includes any combination of parts designed and intended to convert a weapon into a machine gun.
Those arguing the administration does not have the power to ban bump stocks say the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is effectively adding to and changing the definition of a machine gun.
They say the ATF does not have that power, and that only Congress can change how a machine gun is defined.
“What Congress has banned is machine guns and that’s defined as a device that fires more than one round with the single function of a trigger,” said Adam Winkler, a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law. “The bureau can only interpret that language, they can’t add to it.”
Even within the ATF, there have been doubts that it can promulgate a rule to ban bump stocks, which attach to the stock of a semi-automatic firearm and enhance the rate at which a shooter can pull the trigger on the firearm.
While the part increases the rate of fire in a way that is close to mimicking a machine gun, groups say that does not make it a machine gun and that it was specifically created by manufacturers as a way to work around the law.
Michael Bouchard, president of the ATF Association ­— a group of former and current ATF employees — argues the best and quickest way to ban bump stocks is through legislation. 
"The regulatory method takes months and is subject to legal challenges for every device made," said Bouchard, who worked at the ATF for 20 years, the last three as ATF’s assistant director.
That argument isn’t stopping the rich asshole administration.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced Friday the Department of Justice will soon start accepting public comments on a proposed rule to define machine gun to include bump stock devices — effectively banning them.
“After the senseless attack in Las Vegas, this proposed rule is a critical step in our effort to reduce the threat of gun violence that is in keeping with the Constitution and the laws passed by Congress,” Sessions said.
The ATF’s rule would clarify that " 'bump fire' stocks, slide-fire devices and devices with certain similar characteristics are 'machine guns' " under the federal law “because such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger.”
While the National Rifle Association has backed further regulations of bump stock, other groups are already mulling their options.
“We may very well do it,” Dudley Brown, president of the National Association for Gun Rights, said of a possible lawsuit.
“Even the ATF knows that it’s not really within their bounds to ban bump stocks,” he said.
Some gun control advocates, on the other hand, argue it is within the government’s right to regulate an end to bump stocks. 
In comments to the agency in January, Everytown for Gun Safety said the 1934 law was written to be a broad regulation covering automatic firearms and the ATF has the authority to clarify which bump stocks and other conversion devices qualify as “machine guns.”
“The authority has existed to regulate these devices and in fact ATF’s job is to say which devices count as machine guns and make it clear they are not legal,” said Jonas Oransky, Everytown’s deputy legal director. “They have not previously done that in a comprehensive way.”
But David Chipman, a retired ATF agent who now serves as a senior policy adviser at the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said the public is entirely missing the mark in the bump stocks debate.
He said the question is not whether the ATF has the legal authority to ban bump stocks, but why Congress has failed to act.