Thursday, February 4, 2016

Megyn Kelly Cheap Shots at Trump in Gush interview with Rubio

The 5 Basic Questions Megyn Kelly Forgot to Ask Marco Rubio

by JULIA HAHN3 Feb 2016Washington D.C.2,959

In her Tuesday night interview of donor-class favorite Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), Fox News’s Megyn Kelly gushed over the young Senator’s ability to deliver a memorized speech without a teleprompter.

However, throughout the interview, Kelly failed to ask the candidate a single substantive question about his desire to enact the open-borders trade and immigration policies endorsed by Fox News’s founder Rupert Murdoch. Instead, Kelly began her interview with Marco Rubio by playing a clip of Rush Limbaugh praising Rubio as a conservative, in spite of Rubio’s push for open borders.

Kelly then asked Rubio these hard-hitting questions:

Let’s start with Rush Limbaugh’s comment, do you agree that you are no moderate centrist?

One of your competitors took a shot at you today, Gov. Chris Christie, who is really hoping to perform better in New Hampshire than he did in Iowa… do you take offense to that, sir, him calling you ‘a boy, a boy in a bubble’?

He says you’re too scripted. You are very smooth. Your acceptance– well, not acceptance [speech]– but your remarks last night were amazing. You were so articulate. There was no teleprompter. To those who say, ‘Oh he’s scripted’– is that scripted or is that just how you talk?

So now that you’re—you know— we got the marco-mentum, as they call it, you know who’s going to come after you both guns blazing. His name starts with D, his last name starts with T. And you’re going to be right in the middle of the cross-hairs for him now that you’re giving him a run for his money. How are you going to handle Donald Trump’s attacks on you?

Do you think it’s time for Jeb Bush to drop out?

What is winning for you in New Hampshire?


Kelly also added: “I will vouch for you — that you have come on the Kelly Fileregularly and you always sit for the tough questions. And I’ll note for the record, you never complain, never once — even if we ask really tough questions, which I appreciate.”

Noticeably, Kelly’s “tough questions” in last night’s interview did not include a single mention of his support for globalist immigration and trade policies.  Below are some questions Kelly did not ask Rubio:

Your 2013 immigration bill would have tripled green card issuances, doubled foreign worker dispensations, and granted citizenship to illegal immigrants. Can you identify a single policy outlined in your Gang of Eight bill that you no longer support?

A supermajority of GOP voters want immigration reduced, but you have repeatedly called for more immigration. Why do you reject what most GOP voters want: less immigration?

You have said you joined the Gang of Eight to get the most conservative bill out of the Senate, but your bill was endorsed by every Senate Democrat,Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and La Raza. So that does mean you are an incompetent negotiator, or that you misrepresented the contents of your bill to the American people?

You continue to insist that your 2013 immigration bill—which would have granted citizenship, and by extension, welfare access and voting privileges, to illegal immigrants— is not amnesty. Why do you believe that every single Republican who campaigned in the 2014 midterm elections against the Gang of Eight bill and called it amnesty–such as Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR)– is wrong and that your bill did not in fact grant amnesty? Under your definition of amnesty, could a President Rubio enact the same legalization provisions of the Gang of Eight bill and still tell voters that you did not grant “amnesty” to illegal immigrants.

You have previously said the Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement would be a “pillar” of you presidency. Do you stand by that statement?


Kelly’s questions to Rubio in last night’s interview are reminiscent of her treatment of Rubio during the first FOX News debate, in which she and the moderators asked the following questions. In one question, Kelly essentially asked Rubio if he could put God and veterans in the same sentence.

Chris Wallace asked Rubio: “Could you please address Governor Bush across the stage here, and explain to him why you… are better prepared to be president than he is?”

On immigration, Wallace asked Rubio: “Is it as simple as our leaders are stupid, their leaders are smart, and all of these illegals coming over are criminals?”

Bret Baier asked Rubio: “Why is Governor Bush wrong on Common Core?”

One Facebook questioner asked Rubio to: “Describe one action you would do to make the economic environment more favorable for small businesses and entrepreneurs and anyone dreaming of opening their own business.”

Kelly asked Rubio: “How do you justify ending a life just because it begins violently, through no fault of the baby?”

Kelly also asked: “So I put the question to you about God and the veterans, which you may find to be related.”


As Donald Trump’s campaign has pointed out, Fox News’s vice president of news and Washington managing editor, Bill Sammon, is the father of Marco Rubio’s press secretary, Brooke Sammon.

“The Fox News executive who oversees the debate process, [his] daughter is a senior executive on the Marco Rubio campaign,” Trump’s campaign manager told CNN. “He’s one of the executives on Fox that writes the debate questions so maybe he has his own ulterior motives… maybe he should disclose that before he’s writing the debate questions for Fox.”

Fox News’s founder, Rupert Murdoch, is a co-chair of what is arguably one of the biggest immigration lobbying firms in the country, The Partnership for a New American Economy. Via his lobbying firm, Murdoch has endorsed Rubio’s 2013 amnesty bill, as well as Rubio’s 2015 immigration expansion bill. Murdoch has also endorsed President Obama’s trade agenda, which Rubio has said would be the “second pillar” of a President Rubio’s three-pillar foreign policy strategy.

Interestingly, the name of Murdoch’s immigration lobbying firm relies on the “New American” euphemism commonly used to describe the demographic transformation brought on by immigration. For instance, The National Journal has launched “The Next America” project to chronicle America’s becoming a majority-minority country. Similarly, the White House’s immigration initiative is called the “New Americans Project.” And the Latino Victory Foundation and the “National Partnership for New Americans” recently launched the “New American Democracy Campaign” to get as many immigrants as possible to vote.

Marco Rubio’s campaign theme is “A New American Century.”

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,Rush LimbaughRupert MurdochTrans Pacific PartnershipTom Cottongang of eightLa RazaBrooke SammonNew Americanamnesty bill

BORDER AGENTS TOLD TO STAND DOWN

Border agent: 'We might as well abolish our immigration laws altogether'

www.washingtonexaminer.com
In a shocking reversal of policy, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents are being told to release illegal immigrants and no longer order them to appear at deportation hearings, essentially a license to stay in the United States, a key agent testified Thursday.
What's more, the stand down order includes a requirement that the whereabouts of illegals released are not to be tracked.
"We might as well abolish our immigration laws altogether,"suggested agent Brandon Judd,president of the National Border Patrol Council.
Testifying on the two-year border surge of immigrant youths, Judd said the policy shift was prompted by Obama administration "embarrassment" that just over half of illegals ordered to appear in court actually do.
"The willful failure to show up for court appearances by persons that were arrested and released by the Border Patrol has become an extreme embarrassment for the Department of Homeland Security. It has been so embarrassing that DHS and the U.S. Attorney's office has come up with a new policy," he testified before the immigration subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee.
The biggest change: Undocumented immigrants are no longer given a "notice to appear" order, because they simply ignore them. Judd said that Border agents jokingly refer to the NTAs as "notices to disappear."
He said the the new policy "makes mandatory the release, without an NTA, of any person arrested by the Border Patrol for being in the country illegally, as long as they do not have a previous felony arrest conviction and as long as they claim to have been continuously in the United States since January of 2014. The operative word in this policy is 'claim.' The policy does not require the person to prove they have been here which is the same burden placed on them during deportation proceedings. Instead, it simply requires them to claim to have been here since January of 2014."
But even then, he added, the agency has been told not to track the illegals.
"Not only do we release these individuals that by law are subject to removal proceedings, we do it without any means of tracking their whereabouts. Agents believe this exploitable policy was set in place because DHS was embarrassed at the sheer number of those who choose not to follow the law by showing up for their court appearances. In essence, we pull these persons out of the shadows and into the light just to release them right back to those same shadows from whence they came," he said.
The go free policy, he said, has prompted thousands of Latinos to cross the border, and among them are hundreds of criminal foot soldiers, according to other testimony.
"Immigration laws today appear to be mere suggestions. There are little or no consequences for
breaking the laws and that fact is well known in other countries. If government agencies like
DHS or CBP are allowed to bypass Congress by legislating through policy, we might as well
abolish our immigration laws altogether," Judd concluded.
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted atpbedard@washingtonexaminer.com.
COMMENTS

National Prayer Breakfast: Obama Preaches "Jesus is a good cure for fear"

Shawn Thew - Pool/Getty Images

by CHARLIE SPIERING4 Feb 201679

President Obama warned Americans to stay away from fear, as the world grows more troubled under his leadership.

During his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington D.C. this morning, Obama spoke about the dangers of the “primal emotion” of fear – and how to combat it with faith.

“Fear does funny things. Fear can lead us to lash out against those who are different, or lead us to try to get some sinister ‘other’ under control,” he said, alluding to anti-Muslim and anti-refugee sentiment in the country.

Obama added that fear was a “primal emotion” that could destroy community and feed mankind’s “selfish impulses.”

“If we let it consume us, the consequences of that fear can be worse than any outward threat,” he said.

Obama announced that faith was the best way to defeat fear.

“For me, and I know for so many of you, faith is a great cure for fear,” he said. “Jesus is a good cure for fear.”

He declared that Jesus helped Americans stand up “not just to our enemies but to our friends” and helped Christians to be more tolerant and accepting.

Obama cited the recent terrorist attacks and the mass shootings in America as proof that evil was in the world, striking fear into hearts of many.

“Like every president, like every leader, like every person, I’ve known fear,” Obama said. “But my faith tells me that I need not fear death, that acceptance of Christ promises everlasting life and the washing away of sins.”

As he concluded his speech, Obama prayed for more humble politicians, perhaps referring to his presidential successor.

“I pray that our leaders will always act with humility and generosity,” he said.

Read More Stories About:

Big Government2016 Presidential Race,barack obamafaithJesusNational Prayer Breakfastfear

US layoffs surge to 6-month high: Challenger

www.cnbc.com

Layoffs surged in January to the highest levels since July as employers in the retail and energy sectors pulled out the pink slips, according to a private survey out Thursday.

U.S.-based companies announced 75,114 planned job cuts last month, up more than 200 percent from a 15-year low in December, according to global outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas. That figure was also 42 percent higher from a year ago.

Retailers were the biggest job cutter, despite a nearly 8 percent bump in U.S. holiday sales in 2015. The sector slashed 22,246 positions, a seven-year high.

Wal-Mart accounted for much of the payroll reductions. The nation's largest retailer said it plans to close 269 stores and expects to let go 16,000 workers.

Macy's said it will also shutter some locations this year, costing 4,820 employees their jobs.

Challenger, Gray & Christmas CEO John A.Challenger said the shift from in-store selling to online transactions is playing a major part in the scaling back of retail work forces.

Macy's "had a 25 percent jump in their online sales, but their retail sales at bricks and mortars fell by 5 percent, so they are cutting stores," he told CNBC's "Squawk Box" on Thursday.

January delivered a fresh round of energy sector layoffs, as well. Announced payroll reductions of 20,246 marked the highest monthly total since the start of the oil price rout in mid-2014 that has sent crude prices spiraling about 70 percent and led to massive cost-cutting in the U.S. oil patch.

"HalliburtonBaker Hughes,Schlumberger — all the big oil producers of equipment — are continuing to cut jobs. That suggests that the big … oil and gas companies are cutting production and exploration," Challenger said.

The report was released a day before the Labor Department releases its jobs data for January. On Wednesday, ADP and Moody's Analytics reported that that job growth in the private sector slowed in January.

Challenger said the United States has not yet reached the point at which employers can no longer find skilled workers to expand their business, a condition that could contribute to a recession. However, he said that possibility is now visible on the horizon.

Morning Squawk:CNBC's before the bell news roundup

Sign up to get Morning Squawk each weekday

Please enter a valid email address To learn more about how we use your information, please read our Privacy Policy.

COMMENTS

ALERT: Hillary Clinton Wear Blackface Costume??

Hillary Clinton

HOAX?

 by: Perry Sanders III  17 days ago

39

Lead Stories' Trendolizer has detected a photo that has been circulating social media recently which supposedly shows Hillary and Bill Clinton at a costume party, with Hillary as a Blackface and Bill as a country hillbilly.

The above image is the one supposedly of Hillary and Bill Clinton, but after Lead Stories' research into the matter we have debunked this story and proved it to be a hoax. The image featured above traces back to a Twitter account (@BrianTourville) from 2015, in response to a Huffington Post tweet.

Although a well attemtpted bit of humor and satire by @Brian_Tourville, Hillary is obviously not the BlackFace as shown in the alleged costume party photo, as can be seen by the difference in eye color. Hillary has blue eyes, not brown as shown in the costumed photo. In addition, it is highly unlikely for a photo of that is so politically detrimental to go unnoticed for all these years.

As can be seen in the comparison above, the height difference between Hillary and Bill are way off in the costumed picture.

Despite the attempt to show Hillary Clinton dressed with a blackface, we regret to inform you that this is absolutely a hoax. Nice try, internet!

Hiller Instinct: 7News/UMass Lowell New Hampshire tracking poll day 4

www.whdh.com

MANCHESTER, N.H. (WHDH) -

It's not an earthquake, yet...But the political ground in New Hampshire is moving.

We're seeing more of Iowa's impact, and the war of words underway here.

Hillary Clinton is coming back; and Marco Rubio is coming up.

Watch 7News streaming live onmobile / desktop.

Donald Trump stays in first, with 36%; Rubio takes over second place, with 15%. Ted Cruz, now in third, has 14%. Jeb Bush, 8%; and John Kasich 7%.

Other news: Trump calls for Iowa election do-over as Cruz campaigns in NH

For the rest of the Republicans: Chris Christie, 5 %, Ben Carson, 4%; Carly Fiorina 3% and undecided 8%.

Our tracking poll show its all: Trump on top, but down two points-- the first time he's dropped in our poll. 

Marco Rubio shoots into second place, with 15%, a gain of three points overnight.

Ted Cruz holds his support, but slips into third place.

Jeb Bush lost a point; no change for John Kasich.

In the Democratic race, Hillary Clinton can start thinking about a comeback, and Bernie Sanders is coming down.

Sanders still has a significant lead over Clinton-- 58% to 36%-- a 22 point margin.

But look at the direction of the tracks: Sanders is down three and Clinton is up four, our biggest single gain since we started this poll.

Related: Clinton defends progressive record against Sanders critique

You see the trends, and so will the candidates.

They're good for Rubio and Clinton... and not very good for anyone else.

Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders need to win big here, and our tracking poll shows both are losing ground right now.

This time next week, we'll know the winners.

Between now and then, this is the best way to see who's going to win.

'Like' 7News on Facebook for latest NH Primary coverage

(Copyright (c) 2016 Sunbeam Television. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)

COMMENTS

Ted Cruz Will Get Crushed In New Hampshire

Brian Frank / Reuters

TIM MAK

02.04.161:00 AM ET

Republican operatives from inside and outside New Hampshire agree: Sen. Ted Cruz is all but doomed to finish below the top tier in the Granite State.

The winning coalition Cruz put together in Iowa won’t work in New Hampshire, they say, pointing to the fact New Hampshire has the second-lowest rate of church attendance in the country. So the edge that Cruz had amongst evangelicals isn’t particularly applicable there. 

“I would advise Cruz to skip New Hampshire and go to South Carolina. I believe you shouldn’t compete anywhere where it’s not a favorable battlefield to win,” said Stuart Stevens, a top advisor to Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign.

“History suggests there isn’t much of a momentum carryover from Iowa to New Hampshire,” added Fergus Cullen, the author of a book on the New Hampshire primary and a former chairman of the New Hampshire Republican Party (Cullen is personally supporting Gov. John Kasich, but holds no formal role). “Cruz doesn’t need to do well in New Hampshire. He has earned a bye week.”

While Cruz has a held a similar number of events in New Hampshire as, say, Sen. Marco Rubio, he has visited the state fewer times. For a period of two months, from Nov. 12 to Jan. 12, Cruz didn’t hold any events in the state, according to a New England Cable News tracker.

“Cruz cannot [recreate his Iowa coalition there],” said Charlie Black, who has served as a political advisor to Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and John McCain. New Hampshire, he said, “could be a traffic jam among four or five candidates.”

As of now, the Real Clear Politicspolling average has Cruz in second in the Granite State. But observers say Cruz’s in-state organization is noticeably weaker in New Hampshire than in Iowa.

“The Cruz ground game in Iowa is not evident in New Hampshire,” said Bob Walker, a lobbyist and former GOP Congressman.

Cruz’s team is already tamping down expectations of a win: “I would be thrilled with second place in New Hampshire,” Cruz spokesman Rick Tyler said on PBS. “And third would certainly be acceptable.”

However, Ari Fleischer, former White House press secretary for George W. Bush, said he wouldn’t rule out a scenario in which non-Cruz candidates divide the vote so much that Cruz wins a tight plurality in the state.

“What Ted possibly could do is win the lion’s share of the very conservative voters. If Trump and Rubio and Bush and Christie and Kasich divide the remaining moderate and liberal [Republican] voters, Ted can squeak in a victory,” said Fleischer. “That’s the only way Ted could win a state like New Hampshire.”

Veterans of the state’s primary say the contest unfolding over the next week won’t really come down to conversations about policy issues, but rather personality—with the exception of heroin addiction, which is a serious problem in the state.

“A lot of it depends on personal engagement with the candidate [and] if you like that candidate,” Sen. John McCain, a two-time New Hampshire primary victor, told The Daily Beast. “It’s more about their impressions.”

Not to mention that the candidates remaining in the race are generally similar on the issues that matter most to New Hampshire Republicans.

“There’s not a lot of difference on the issues: Who is in favor of opioid addiction? Who is in favor of leaving ISIS alone?” Cullen said. “I don’t think there’s going to be a substantive policy disagreement that’s going to move a lot of voters that is different with what’s been talked about over the last few months.”

The next few days are going to be brutal for voters and candidates alike—the New Hampshire primary is to be held next Tuesday.

“If someone has a bomb to throw against their opponent, this is the week to throw it,” Cullen said