Trump and Cruz Cartoons

GOP debate: No one trumps Trump and six other takeaways from Las Vegas

We’ll get to the GOP debate momentarily. But first, a word about the Republicans’ odyssey and oddity this past year.
Per this Fox News Poll released on Dec. 16, 2014:
Romney 19%
Bush 10%
Christie/Huckabee/Paul 8% each
Walker 7%
Carson/Ryan 6% each
Cruz 5%
Rubio 4%
The most recent Fox News Poll:
Trump 28%
Carson 18%
Cruz/Rubio 14% each
Bush 5%
Christie/Fiorina/Huckabee 3% each
Kasich Paul 2% each
Welcome to the most volatile Republican presidential race in modern times. The upper 66 percent of last year’s field is either out of the running or running on fumes. The top 74 percent in the current field is five times larger than its 15 percednt share of a year ago.
And 2016? It may only add to the confusion.
On to the main event and what transpired Tuesday night at The Venetian Las Vegas.
The good news: It was smaller grouping than the last time CNN/Salem Radio ran the show (nine candidates, down two from September’s gathering at the Reagan Presidential Library). And it was truncated – 40 minutes less than September’s three-hour debate from hell).
Still, CNN was plagued by the same problems as before: a candidates’ forum that was too long, too lumbering, and too laxly herded.
Here are seven observations from this, the final Republican debate of 2015:
1. No One Trumped Trump. It wasn’t for a lack of effort. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul ripped into Donald Trump less than 30 seconds into the debate’s start over Internet policy. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush tut-tutted: “You’re not going to insult your way to the presidency.”
What they don’t get: Trump didn’t earn the center spot on the stage courtesy of profound thinking or refined elegance. Better to construct one’s own case, rather than try to deconstruct The Donald.
Blame it on the candidates’ approach and Wolf Blitzer’s herky-jerky style of questioning (like watching a 16-year-old drive a stick-shift for the first time): how many of Trump’s rivals made a lasting impression as to how they’d defeat ISIS and protect the homeland?
2. The Cage Match.  At various points, Paul took swings at Trump, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. The libertarians in the crowd loved it, but the candidate came across as desperate – for attention and a lifeline for a campaign struggling to stay afloat.
The dust-up that the media wanted but didn’t get: Trump and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. Both were too smart to take the bait.
Cruz didn’t expound on his differences with Trump over the Muslim immigration ban or a previous comment suggesting he thought Trump lacked a presidential temperament. Trump expressed “great respect” for the other candidates on the stage and ruled out an independent run (the night’s biggest news).
Time will tell whether what Trump said in Vegas stayed in Vegas.
Cruz did have some momentary tussles – with Rubio over Senate votes (always a good way to put an audience to sleep). And Trump: his testiest moments came in a personal back-and-forth with Bush over demeanor and poll numbers.
3.  Executive Order. It was a national security debate long on tough talk about leadership skills, which would seem an opening for the two sitting governors looking for a leg-up in this race: Christie and Ohio Gov. John Kasich.
Did either succeed? Not quite.
For Christie, the problem was numbers. Yes, he had some good moments connecting national security to his New Jersey heritage. However, nine candidates and a round-robin style of Q&A too often reduced Christie to interjecting himself into the debate to remind viewers of just how vapid senators can be (Carly Fiorina also went down this path, at several points jumping into the cross-talk to bemoan the awfulness of the political class).
As for Kasich, it’s a matter of rhetorical substance abuse. Three governors past and present have departed the race. A fourth, Bush, is struggling to stay relevant. It’s a political climate in which the Republican base isn’t impressed by resumes, yet Kasich continues to recite a long Washington biography. Oh(io) the humanity.
4. Auld Lang Syne. And so ends the GOP’s debate circuit for 2015. Next up: a Jan. 14 debate in North Charleston, S.C., hosted by the Fox Business Network.
5. At a time when many a college student is taking semester finals, this debate had the vibe of that last exam of the week before an extended break. Tempers were short; the candidates seemed tired of sharing the same oxygen.
6.  Debate winners, if we must: Trump and Cruz, for playing mostly error-free ball.
7. Debate losers: anyone who lost their place in line for the “Star Wars” premiere by staying home to watch a mostly uneventful debate.

Cruz-Rubio feud flares as GOP candidates battle for tough-on-terror mantle

The rivalry between Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio flared Tuesday at the final Republican primary debate of the year, as all the leading GOP candidates battled to show their tough-on-terror credentials.

Donald Trump, as in past debates, sparred sharply with his rivals on stage over his controversial proposals, notably his call to ban Muslims from entering the country. But the changing dynamics in the race appeared to drive frequent clashes between the senators from Texas and Florida – who are now battling to be the Trump alternative in the race as Ben Carson slides in the polls.

With the terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif., refocusing the race squarely on security issues, Cruz from the outset tried to sound a tough message against radical Islam.

“We will utterly destroy ISIS,” Cruz vowed, later adding: “ISIS and radical Islamic terrorism will face no more determined foe than I will be.”

But he repeatedly was challenged by Rubio over his Senate positions – including for legislation reining in NSA metadata collection. Rubio accused Cruz of helping take away a “valuable tool” for security officials, while Cruz said: “Marco knows what he’s saying isn’t true.”

Rubio later cited a budget vote by Cruz to say: “You can’t carpet bomb ISIS if you don’t have planes and bombs to attack them with.”

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie used the arguing to contrast his own executive experience against the senators’ legislative history. He described their jobs as “endless debates about how many angels on the head of a pin from people who have never had to make a consequential decision.”

But Rubio and Cruz returned to the fray later on as they tried to cast each other as soft on illegal immigration. “I led the fight against [Rubio’s] legalization-amnesty bill,” Cruz charged.

Some analysts had expected the tensions Tuesday to flare between Trump and Cruz, as the Texas senator surpasses Trump in Iowa polls and is surging nationally. But Cruz avoided taking on Trump in favor of Rubio – he even jokingly backed Trump’s plan to build a border wall.

“We will build a wall that works, and I’ll get Donald Trump to pay for it,” Cruz said.

Later on, Trump backed off comments where he said Cruz acted in Congress like “a bit of a maniac.” Trump said Tuesday, “He’s just fine, don’t worry about it.”

Instead, Trump took heat mostly from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who slammed Trump’s plan to ban Muslims from entering the United States as “not a serious proposal.”

“He’s a chaos candidate, and he’d be a chaos president,” Bush said.

Trump fired back that “Jeb doesn’t really believe I’m unhinged” and only went after him because he’s “failed in this campaign.”

The Trump-Bush acrimony simmered throughout the debate, with Bush later telling Trump he can’t “insult your way to the presidency,” and Trump once again reminding Bush that his poll numbers have plummeted while Trump is leading.

Whether Bush’s attacks will help the struggling candidate remains to be seen. Perhaps more consequential is whether Rubio or Cruz can present himself as more capable of taking on the country’s security challenges.

All the leading candidates, though, focused on the terror threat throughout the CNN-hosted primary debate Tuesday night in Las Vegas – an event held just hours after Los Angeles closed its school system over a terror threat.

Citing that closure, which is now thought to have been prompted by a hoax threat, Christie said children will be going back to school filled with anxiety. And he said the country’s overall security environment has been hurt by President Obama and Hillary Clinton’s policies.

“America has been betrayed,” he said.

Christie cited his experience as a federal prosecutor, and governor, in saying that under a Christie presidency, “America will be safe.”

Carson also dismissed “PC” concerns about some of his own plans for taking on the terror threat.

“We are at war … We need to be on a war footing,” Carson said, while later making an argument against toppling foreign dictators. He compared the situation to being on a plane, where passengers in an emergency are advised to use oxygen masks themselves before helping others.

“We need oxygen right now,” Carson said, adding the government needs to think of the needs of the American people before solving everyone else’s problems.

Trump also sparred at times with other lower-polling candidates.

As before, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul questioned Trump’s policy proposals, including to restrict the Internet to clamp down on ISIS’ social media use. “Do you believe in the Constitution?” Paul said of Trump supporters. Trump clarified he’s only talking about restricting the Internet in parts of Iraq and Syria.

And when Trump suggested that the money spent toppling Mideast dictators could have been better spent on building America’s roads and bridges, former HP CEO Carly Fiorina compared him to Obama.

“That’s exactly what President Obama has said. I’m amazed to hear that from a Republican presidential candidate,” she said.
Ohio Gov. John Kasich also took issue with suggestions from Cruz and Trump that the priority in Syria is not to remove Bashar Assad.

“We can’t back off of this,” Kasich said. “He must go.”

CNN also hosted a debate Tuesday for the second-tier GOP candidates -- former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and former New York Gov. George Pataki. Graham was particularly critical of Trump’s Muslim ban plan at that debate, accusing him of declaring war on Islam and delivering a “coup” for ISIS.

Graham: Trump's proposed ban on Muslims a 'coup' for ISIS

The GOP presidential candidates in the lower tier debate Tuesday pounced on frontrunner Donald Trump’s plan to ban foreign Muslims from the U.S., with Lindsey Graham calling it a 'coup' for the Islamic State.
Graham and the others argued that targeting the Islam religion will only fulfill the terror group’s prophecy of fighting a future holy war.
“ISIS would be dancing in the streets, but they don’t dance,” said the South Carolina senator. “Declaring war on a religion will only help ISIS.”
Graham’s comment follows a series of deadly bombing attacks last month in Paris and the Dec. 2 massacre in San Bernardino, Calif., in which the attackers appear to have at least been inspired by the Islamic State.
Trump, in response, last week called for a temporary ban on Muslims coming into the country, at least until the U.S. intelligence community can improve its screening process.
Rick Santorum, another GOP White House candidate and former Pennsylvania senator, said in the lower tier debate that he disagrees with Trump’s sweeping plan, but added, “We also have to take this country from those who want to harm us.”

A debate with tough terror talk: Trump deflects while Cruz and Rubio clash

From the opening moments of the Las Vegas debate, Wolf Blitzer tried to make it about Donald Trump, whether he wants to isolate America, and whether he is “unhinged.”
Jeb Bush, languishing in the polls, took the bait. Ted Cruz, surging into second place, did not. Marco Rubio, doing well in the polls, also did not.
And Trump, with a huge lead in the national polls, calmly deflected the first attack. As I had predicted on the air, Trump generally avoids bonking his rivals over the head in debate settings, saving his tougher language for interviews and speeches.
The CNN moderators gave the candidates every opportunity to bash each other, and the two Cuban-American senators were happy to answer the call, starting with a spat over NSA surveillance. Trump, defying some pundits’ predictions that he would smack Cruz around, didn’t engage in fisticuffs.
Some takeaways: Blitzer did a solid job in keeping the debate firmly focused on terrorism, a reflection of how fundamentally the Paris and San Bernardino attacks have transformed the presidential campaign. This was a high-stakes encounter on dead-serious subjects.
The entire debate was about projecting strength: against ISIS, against lone-wolf killers, against the Obama administration’s approach.
The debate did nothing to dent Trump’s lead, and Cruz and Rubio lived up to their reputations as the best orators in the field, probably fighting to a draw. Jeb got in a few licks, and Ben Carson wasn’t much of a presence.
After Trump finessed Blitzer’s opening question about his plan to temporarily bar Muslims from entering the country—he shifted to attacking the Iran nuclear deal as “horrible” and “disgusting”—Wolf tried again. Why, he asked Bush, did you call Trump’s plan “unhinged?”
Jeb, rather than seize the moment, began with a wordy response, but then delivered his practiced line: “Donald is a chaos candidate, he’d be a chaos president.” But he looks slightly uncomfortable taking such swings.
Trump was almost dismissive in response, saying “Jeb doesn’t really believe I’m unhinged,” and adding that the former Florida governor was only trying to revive his failing campaign.
Conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt tried, and failed, to entice Cruz into criticizing Trump’s Muslim plan. The senator shifted to President Obama engaging in “double-speak” on Islamic terrorism. Hewitt tried again, but Cruz stuck to his game plan of speaking no evil of The Donald so as not to alienate his supporters.
Cruz tried to sidestep a Dana Bash question on his vote to limit NSA surveillance by saying “the premise of your question is not accurate.” When Rubio criticized Cruz’s vote, the Texan hit back: “Marco knows what he’s saying isn’t true.”
Rand Paul, who barely made the debate cutoff, also whacked Rubio by saying he has more of an allegiance to Sen. Chuck Schumer and his fellow liberals.
That gave Chris Christie, back on the main stage, an opening to take on the squabbling senators, saying: “If your eyes are glazed over like mine…”
Trump’s only moment of agitation came when he scolded Bush for interrupting him, then said he was “a very nice person, but we need toughness.”
“Donald, you’re not going to be able to insult your way to the presidency,” Jeb said, sounding annoyed.
“With Jeb’s attitude, we will never be great again,” Trump said evenly.
The Donald chided CNN in the second hour, though not with Newt Gingrich-like force, calling it “very sad” that the moderators kept feeding the others lines that “Mr. Trump said this”—and were doing it for ratings. He seemed annoyed only when Bush said he doesn’t get his information “from the shows,” Saturday morning or Sunday morning—a reference that most of the audience missed because Jeb didn’t explain it was an old Trump comment.
“I’m at 42 and you’re at 3!” Trump proclaimed, wielding polling numbers as a weapon.
No question the CNN team asked could get the GOP candidates to retreat a centimeter from the tough terror talk.
Would Trump close down the Internet to stop ISIS?
He said it wasn’t a question of freedom of speech: “I don’t want them using our media,” before clarifying that the efforts would be narrowly targeted.
Had Cruz said he would carpet-bomb ISIS until the sand glows in the dark?
He would bomb until we “utterly and completely destroy ISIS,” Cruz said, before clarifying he didn’t mean cities.
Even Carson didn’t flinch when Hewitt, in a question that drew boos, asked: “You are okay with the deaths of thousands of innocent children?”
At times, there was so much tough talk that the rivals’ rhetoric seemed to blur and they canceled each other out.
No one dominated the stage, as in some past debates. Trump went to Las Vegas with a huge lead and leaves the same way. Cruz and Rubio showed up in second and third place, and if their counterpunching changed that equation, it was not immediately evident. None of the other contenders had a breakout moment. And the country got a powerful reminder that we are at war.

Watters' World: Traffic edition

Humbug, indeed

For Christians, this is the season of Advent – an intentionally somber period of preparation before the fat geese and goodies of Christmas. It’s something like a low-key Lent. Think of the haunting strains of "O come, O come, Emmanuel” for Advent versus the sonic blast of George Frideric Handel’s “Messiah” for Christmas. Even though Christians know that these are just thought exercises and spiritual disciplines, the spreading gloom still sometimes seems real. Ash Wednesday or Advent vespers can leave believers in a fog of gloom. The tomb is full. The manger is empty.

But Christmas always comes. Easter always comes. The fog will be burned away. Christians intellectually understand what has happened and what will come, but emotions overawe intellect.

For Republicans, December of every fourth year acts as something of a secular Advent. There will be a brokered convention. The party will rupture and break. The House and Senate are doomed. The divisions are so deep that they cannot be overcome. A third-party candidate will arise and hand the election to the Democrats. Woe betide!

The gloom is gloomier this year than most. And the political press leans in to whisper into anguished ears, “Doomed, doomed, doomed…”

There is silly talk from party leaders about how to deny Donald Trump the nomination at the Republican National Convention – wishful thinking born of desperation. They shouldn’t kid themselves. If Trump gets the delegates, he will get the nomination and there’s nothing any “establishment” can or will do about it.

And if Trump doesn’t get enough delegates, somebody else almost certainly will. The idea that the convention will be deadlocked is (for now) exclusively the province of political journalists that would love to cover it and long-shot candidates who need some reason (beyond vainglory) to continue their campaigns.

Now, predictions of a re-united party and an orderly convention can hardly be delivered with the same certitude with which Christians can await December 25. Trump’s wealth and celebrity do afford him the chance to play spoiler if he chooses. The overpopulated GOP field does make it harder for the party to sort itself out. And the chaotic, dangerous condition of the world certainly creates a scenario in which dark Advent dreams could become real.

But in every year past, the deep angst of December has faded and Republicans have found some way to survive, endure and, occasionally, win elections.

So if you are one of the GOPers caught in the December fog, give yourself a break. The Halleluiah Chorus is almost certainly still to come.

Chris Stirewalt

• Twitter

Chris Stirewalt joined Fox News Channel (FNC) in July of 2010 and serves as digital politics editor based in Washington, D.C.  Additionally, he serves as the host of "Power Play" on FoxNews.com and makes daily appearances on the network including "America Live with Megyn Kelly," "Special Report with Bret Baier," and "Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace." Most recently, Stirewalt provided expert political analysis during the 2012 presidential election.

Prior to joining FNC, Stirewalt served as political editor for The Washington Examiner where he wrote a twice-weekly column and led political coverage for the newspaper. He also served as politics editor at the Charleston Daily Mail and West Virginia Media. Stirewalt began his career at the Wheeling Intelligencer in West Virginia.

He is a graduate of Hampden-Sydney College in Hampden-Sydney, Virginia.

Agents reportedly blocked by secret US policy from looking at social media of visa applicants

If it been a American Citizen the government would have been all over it!

A secret U.S. policy that prohibits immigration officials from reviewing the social media messages of foreign citizens applying for U.S. visas was reportedly kept in place over fears of a civil liberties backlash and “bad public relations.”
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson refused in early 2014 to end the policy, even though several other officials in the organization pressed for such a policy change, ABC News reported Monday.
John Cohen, a former acting under-secretary at the Department of Homeland Security and currently a national security consultant for ABC News, said he pushed for a change in 2014 that would allow a review of social media messages posted publically as terror group followers increasingly turned to Twitter and Facebook.
"Immigration, security, law enforcement officials recognized at the time that it was important to more extensively review public social media postings because they offered potential insights into whether somebody was an extremist or potentially connected to a terrorist organization or a supporter of the movement," Cohen, who left DHS in June 2014, told ABC News.
Cohen’s account comes as members of Congress question why U.S. officials failed to review the social media posts of San Bernardino terrorist Tashfeen Malik.
Malik received a U.S. visa in May 2014, despite what the FBI said were extensive social media messages about jihad and martyrdom.
Cohen said that officials from United States Citizenship and Immigration Services and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement both pressed for a change in policy, which eventually became the subject of a meeting in 2014 chaired by Homeland Security Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, other top deputies and representatives of the DHS Office of Civil Liberties and the Office of Privacy.
"The primary concern was that it would be viewed negatively if it was disclosed publicly and there were concerns that it would be embarrassing," Cohen told ABC’s Good Morning America on Monday.
Cohen added that he and other officials were deeply disappointed that the senior leadership would not approve a review of what were publicly-posted online messages.
"There is no excuse for not using every resource at our disposal to fully vet individuals before they come to the United States," told ABC News.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest said on Monday the Homeland Security and State departments have been asked to review the process for screening people who apply for visas and to return with specific recommendations.
"I think the president's top priority here is the national security and safety of the American people," Earnest said. "And that will continue to be the case with ensuring that this K-1 visa program is effectively implemented."
Malik came to the United States in 2014 on a K-1, or fiancé, visa.
Earnest did not provide specifics of the security review for visas, but said one consideration going forward is resources.
The government approved more than 9.9 million visa applications during the 2014 budget year.
The department said three pilot programs to specifically incorporate "appropriate" social media reviews into its vetting process were launched in the last year and the department is looking at other ways to use social media posts.
The DHS is working on a plan to scrutinize social media posts as
part of its visa application process before certain people are allowed entry into the nation, a person familiar with the matter told the Wall Street Journal on Monday.
The move is part of a new focus on the use of social networking sites following the shooting rampage in San Bernardino, Calif., the person told the Journal.  
The pilot programs currently used by DHS do not sweep up all social media posts, though government officials have kept details of the programs closely held, as they do not want to reveal the precise process they use to try and identify potential threats.
On Sunday, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., demanded that the U.S. immediately initiate a program that would check the social media sites of those admitted on visas.
"Had they checked out Tashfeen Malik," he said, "maybe those people in San Bernardino would be alive."
Sen. Richard Burr, a North Carolina Republican who heads the Senate Intelligence Committee, told CBS' "Face the Nation" on Sunday that Farook was radicalized as early as 2010 and Malik as far back as 2012, which would have been years before her visa was processed.
"We want to look at how our immigration process for a visa for a spouse broke down, that they didn't notice the radicalization," Burr said.
Rep. Bob Goodlatte, a Republican from Virginia who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, said Monday that the committee is working on legislation that would require online information, including social media accounts, be reviewed as part of the background check for visa applicants, including K-1 visas.
Allowing visa vetters to review social media postings however is no guarantee that a would-be immigrant who has radicalized views will be discovered. Facebook and Twitter users can make their pages private and aliases are routinely employed.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., introduced legislation last week that would require social media companies to report to law enforcement any "terrorist activity" they became aware of — for example, attack planning, recruiting or the distribution of terrorist material.
Representatives with the technology industry say that would become a massive new liability for companies, chill free speech online and increase the number of reports funneled to law enforcement, making it difficult to find credible threats.