ComplexDataLab/Misinfo_Datasets · Datasets at Hugging Face

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

<u+201c>just to be grossly generalistic, you could put half of trump<u+2019>s supporters into what i call the basket of deplorables,<u+201d> said clinton at a new york fundraiser<u+00a0>on friday night, where access was purchased at a price of $1,200 to<u+00a0>$250,000. <u+201c>they<u+2019>re racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, islamaphobic <u+2014> you name it,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>but the other basket<u+00a0>. . .<u+00a0>of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they<u+2019>re just desperate for change,<u+201d> clinton added. <u+201c>those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.<u+201d> trump, feigning outrage, has gleefully seized on clinton<u+2019>s comments, and most observers believe they were impolitic. this is all, however, missing an important<u+00a0>point: clinton was wrong to divide trump voters between the bigoted and economically anxious because many are both, and the two things are interrelated. for many, it<u+2019>s just one big basket. clinton, in drawing a distinction between the racists and the justly upset, echoes a broader and mostly unhelpful debate about whether trump supporters are motivated by economic anxiety or bigotry: the clear<u+00a0>answer, contrary to matthew yglesias and company, is <u+201c>often both.<u+201d> yes, trump is getting a lot of support from professional racists on the white supremacist and alt-right, and reducing his base of support to any single constituency is a fool<u+2019>s errand. but for many trump voters, anger and anxiety over economic decline and precarity, the rising status of women and people of color, demographic change caused by immigration, and the country<u+2019>s waning global power after more than a decade of costly and futile global warfare, are all wrapped into one big sense of foreboding terror. trump promises relief and a reversion to something that was, in senses both real and imagined, better. there is a lot that<u+2019>s new about trump. but the intersection of exploitative economics and white supremacy certainly isn<u+2019>t: white economic anxiety is<u+00a0>used to foment racism, and racism is manipulated<u+00a0>to further elite economic interests. as michelle alexander has written, america<u+2019>s racial caste system has long been perpetuated by <u+201c>appealing to the racism and vulnerability of lower-class whites, a group of people who are understandably eager to ensure that they never find themselves trapped at the bottom of the american totem pole.<u+201d> the southern slave-owning aristocracy and the jim crow governments that took power after reconstruction<u+2019>s defeat peddled white supremacy to protect a political-economic order that not only terrorized blacks but that also kept poor whites on the margins. as historian ira katznelson detailed in <u+201c>fear itself: the new deal and the origins of our time,<u+201d> southern democrats during the new deal era used their hold on congress to leverage this divide and conquer logic on the national scene. they blocked<u+00a0>civil rights measures<u+00a0>and also<u+00a0>obstructed the growth of<u+00a0>a<u+00a0>labor movement poised to improve the condition of workers across the racial divide and in doing so<u+00a0>threaten jim crow. later, the modern conservative movement once again used racism toward economically reactionary ends, employing <u+201c>racial dog whistles to transmute white anxiety into support for conservative economic policies that have harmed us all,<u+201d> as ian haney-l<u+00f3>pez and heather mcghee wrote<u+00a0>for<u+00a0>the nation. <u+201c>beginning in the 1970s, conservatives deployed a highly racialized strategy that relentlessly linked public institutions to undeserving minorities in order to undo the country<u+2019>s social contract,<u+201d> haney-l<u+00f3>pez and mcghee continued. <u+201c>the reactionary economic agenda made possible by dog-whistle politics is responsible not just for the devaluing of black lives but for the declining fortunes of the majority of white families.<u+201d> talking about poor and working class people like they are research specimens and not human beings to very wealthy people at an exclusive fundraiser tends to not be a good look, as barack obama and mitt romney both discovered. but it<u+2019>s not just bad optics. it<u+2019>s crummy politics. the business-friendly agenda historically embraced by the clintons fails to answer working-class white people<u+2019>s economic concerns and in doing so actually fuels the fires of racism. opposing racism as some transcendent and ahistorical force obscures the fact that racism functions to not only keep people of color down but also to keep the 1<u+00a0>percent in charge. america<u+2019>s racial caste system depends on white supremacy to ensure white privileges and<u+00a0>oligarchic prerogatives. and so clinton is right: we should understand and empathize with many trump voters <u+2014> not because establishment liberalism has much to offer them but because<u+00a0>their problems are bound up with<u+00a0>those of the people whom they hate.

actually, many trump voters are in one basket and it<u+2019>s both racist and economically frustrated

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

94.0

8.0

4823.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

311.0

0.0

80.0

1.0

0.0

50.0

15.0

19.0

6.0

17.0

11.0

13.0

7.0

21.0

35.0

30.0

316.0

80.0

51.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

with only about 70 days left until the election, presidential campaign politics have hit a new low. democratic candidate hillary clinton has released a new attack ad claiming republican rival donald trump is a candidate of racists. the new ad released by clinton attempts to depict trump as a racist, a candidate supported by white supremacists and the ku klux klan. in the campaign commercial, a kkk member is heard saying, "the reason a lot of klan members like donald trump is because a lot of what he believes we believe in." clinton said trump and republicans are reinforcing harmful stereotypes, calling it a disturbing preview of the kind of president trump would be. "he is taking hate groups mainstream and helping a radical fringe take over the republican party," she said. trump said the allegations are the oldest ploy in the democratic playbook. "when democratic policies fail, they are left with only this one, tired argument: 'you're racist, you're racist, you're racist!' trump insisted. trump said clinton was not only attacking him, but millions of good americans who support him. "she lies, she smears, she paints decent americans as racists," said trump, who then defended the core ideas of his candidacy. but clinton isn't backing down. in a speech in the swing state of nevada, she also tried to tie trump to the so-called "altright" or "alternative right," a very vocal group whose nationalist beliefs push beyond mainstream conservatism. "he's taking hate groups mainstream and helping a radical fringe take over one of america's two major political parties," she said. trump's campaign said he's never used the term "alt-right" and disavows "any groups or individuals associated with a message of hate." "hillary clinton's short speech is pandering to the worst instincts in our society. she should be ashamed of herself!" trump tweeted. in new hampshire thursday, the gop candidate said he doesn't want white supremacists to vote for him -- his campaign is about love for america, not hate. and although clinton still leads in national polls, it may become more difficult for her in the days ahead to restore voter trust and deflect attention away from her email scandal. the battle over race took the spotlight temporarily off of clinton's ongoing problems over her e-mails and the controversy over her connections between the clinton foundation and the u.s. state department when she was secretary of state. but the issue will be coming back. a federal judge has ordered the state department to begin releasing additional emails starting sept. 13. they're among the nearly 15,000 messages clinton did not turn over, but were discovered on her personal server by the fbi.

clinton cries racism tagging trump with kkk; trump says 'she lies'

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

3.0

66.0

8.0

2714.0

0.0

2.0

6.0

0.0

193.0

1.0

0.0

60.0

1.0

0.0

13.0

9.0

5.0

4.0

6.0

5.0

8.0

12.0

17.0

199.0

61.0

14.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

bill o'reilly wants to know what's in the iran nuclear program deal, but he doesn't want to hear about it from the media. speaking on his fox news channel show "the o'reilly factor" on monday night, the conservative host said he doesn't trust the american media to tell the public what's really in the deal reached last week. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t trust the press," o'reilly told fox news senior political analyst brit hume in remarks posted online by mediaite. "i think i trust iran more than i trust the american press. i don<u+2019>t want the american press interpreting this for me. i want to see it in the committee hearings on television, i want to see the debate.<u+201d> trust was a major theme on monday night's program. during the "talking points memo" segment, o'reilly also said americans don't trust the president. "simply put, millions of americans do not trust president obama to protect us from the deranged (iranian) mullahs who have committed atrocities for decades," he said.

there's something o'reilly trusts even less than iran

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

53.0

8.0

971.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

85.0

1.0

0.0

24.0

0.0

9.0

1.0

3.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

8.0

1.0

9.0

90.0

25.0

9.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

one of the <u+201c>few regrets<u+201d> of his presidency, president obama said dolefully in his state of the union speech, was <u+201c>that the rancor and suspicion between the parties has gotten worse instead of better.<u+201d> were he endowed with <u+201c>the gifts of lincoln or roosevelt,<u+201d> he remarked, he could have done more to bridge the partisan divide. but he pledged to <u+201c>keep trying to be better so long as i hold this office.<u+201d> did you experience a touch of d<u+00e9>j<u+00e0> vu when the president said that? four years ago, when he was in the home stretch of his first term and running for a second, he said much the same thing. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m the first one to confess that the spirit that i brought to washington, that i wanted to see instituted, where we weren<u+2019>t constantly in a political slugfest . . . i haven<u+2019>t fully accomplished that,<u+201d> obama told an interviewer in 2012. <u+201c>my biggest disappointment is that we haven<u+2019>t changed the tone in washington as much as i would have liked.<u+201d> did he even try? from his earliest days as a presidential contender, obama had held himself out as a healer <u+2014> as a visionary who would never <u+201c>pit red america against blue america,<u+201d> who committed himself to ending <u+201c>a politics that breeds division and conflict and cynicism.<u+201d> that uplifting promise was at the very heart of obama<u+2019>s appeal; it was what led so many voters to invest so much hope and faith <u+2014> even love <u+2014> in the prospect of an obama presidency. yet in his first term, american political life grew more bitter, not less. unity and goodwill receded even further. as measured by gallup, obama supplanted george w. bush as the most polarizing president ever. democrats and republicans blamed each other for the nastiness and distrust. the president often took the low road; his opponents often did too. deeply controversial legislation, especially obamacare, was rammed through on party-line votes. the rise of the tea party prefigured sweeping republican gains in the 2010 midterm elections, which led both parties into an even more toxic relationship. by the time obama ran for reelection in 2012, little remained of 2008<u+2019>s optimistic candidate of hope. in his place was a snappish incumbent grimly focused on winning a second term by any means necessary. even liberal media outlets remarked on the disparity. <u+201c>obama and his top campaign aides have engaged far more frequently in character attacks and personal insults,<u+201d> politico reported. but when voters renewed obama<u+2019>s lease on the white house, they also gave him a fresh opportunity to make good on the signal promise of his rise to power. a second term offered this most polarizing of presidents a chance to extend olive branches <u+2014> and to eschew the ad hominem attacks that so infuriate his critics. democracy doesn<u+2019>t work <u+201c>if we think the people who disagree with us are all motivated by malice,<u+201d> the president said in his address to congress this month. <u+201c>it doesn<u+2019>t work if we think that our political opponents are unpatriotic or trying to weaken america.<u+201d> that<u+2019>s exactly the right message. if only obama had heeded it. let<u+2019>s be clear: the president is not to blame for the polarization of american life. the <u+201c>mushy middle<u+201d> has been dwindling for years. with democrats moving to the left and republicans moving to the right, there is far less overlap between the parties than there was a generation ago. in a recent study, the pew research center found that 92 percent of republicans are now to the right of the median democrat, and 94 percent of democrats are to the left of the median republican. worse <u+2014> much worse <u+2014> is how intensely hostile the antipathy between right and left has become. large swaths of each camp say the opposing party is not merely misguided, but an explicit threat to the nation<u+2019>s well-being. obama could have led the way in suppressing this corrosive tendency. instead he inflamed it. it would not have required <u+201c>the gifts of lincoln or roosevelt<u+201d> to eschew the ridicule and taunts that so pollute modern political discourse. the gifts of gerald ford would have done nicely. like all presidents, obama has been frustrated by partisan opponents. but no chief executive in modern times has been so quick to impugn his critics<u+2019> motives, or to resort to mockery and demonization when amicable persuasion would serve so much better. obama routinely speaks of his critics as if their motives couldn<u+2019>t possibly be rational or decent. when republicans balked at his proposal to allow 10,000 syrian refugees to enter the united states (a proposal i favor), obama jeered. <u+201c>apparently they<u+2019>re scared of widows and orphans,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>that doesn<u+2019>t sound very tough to me.<u+201d> when gop lawmakers resisted raising the debt limit, obama tweeted: <u+201c>are they really willing to hurt people just to score political points?<u+201d> efforts to repeal obamacare he attributed to cruelty <u+2014> the <u+201c>one unifying principle<u+201d> for republicans, the president told reporters, is <u+201c>making sure that 30 million people don<u+2019>t have health care.<u+201d> with obama, there seems to be no possibility of honorable disagreement. oppose something he wants, and you are a bought-and-paid-for stooge, or a denier of science, or a peddler of fiction, or a scoundrel who puts party ahead of country. he isn<u+2019>t the only one who talks this way, not by a long shot. but he is our only president, and how he expresses himself matters. when presidential rhetoric is mean and contemptuous, the whole public square is befouled. it can always get worse, as donald trump demonstrates daily. but an awful lot of americans, republicans and democrats both, want it to get better. obama insisted he was going to heal the divide, but never even made the effort. he still has a year in office. it<u+2019>s not too late to start.

obama vowed to be the healer-in-chief. he never made the effort - the boston globe

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

82.0

8.0

5686.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

380.0

5.0

0.0

123.0

0.0

41.0

21.0

17.0

16.0

14.0

16.0

7.0

29.0

36.0

43.0

382.0

128.0

41.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the far left is up in arms again, this time over a hacked tape of hillary clinton at a fundraiser in a wealthy virginia suburb. there i was, watching college football and the ryder cup as my daughter sat next to me on the couch drawing rapunzel and ariel. halftime of the game i was watching came so i moseyed over to my office to look in on the political world, expecting not much new at<u+00a0> 5 o<u+2019>clock on a saturday. didn<u+2019>t see much at first. and then... oh, what<u+2019>s this? something about basement dwellers. and hillary. making fun of people living in basements? what? oh christ. here we go again. backstory: the intercept, the (i think it<u+2019>s fair to say) anti-clinton-though-by-no-means-pro-trump web site, got a tape<u+00a0>of a talk clinton gave at a private fundraiser in mclean, virginia, back in february. no, check that. it looks like the washington free beacon got it first and posted it tuesday. but the conservative beacon, reflecting house priorities, led with the fact that clinton evidently said on the tape that she wouldn<u+2019>t upgrade the nuclear arsenal, which for the beacon indicates of course that she wants america to lose. after that i<u+2019>m not certain what happened but it seems as if after the beacon published the audio, a couple intercept reporters were the first people on the left who got around to listening to it. the intercept account, as you might guess, didn<u+2019>t give a rat<u+2019>s pooper about the nuclear arsenal but led with the fact that clinton said, somewhat unfortunately<u+2014>but in context only somewhat, for reasons i<u+2019>ll explain<u+2014>that she occupies the <u+201c>center-left to the center-right.<u+201d> that was a responsible and, for the intercept, predictable and understandable way to play the story. but then, by the time it got to the twittersphere, clinton was somehow making fun of sanderistas, mocking them for being such losers that they<u+2019>re living in their parent<u+2019>s basements. the hashtag #basementdwellers was trending like mad when i checked in, and i<u+2019>d imagine it<u+2019>ll be going strong all night. i read a few of them, which boiled down to fuck you, hillary, you corporate hack, this is why we need the revolution and you<u+2019>re going to be the first to face the firing squad (although i thought i smelled a lot of trolling from the deplorable caucus too). of all the arrant bullshit i<u+2019>ve seen on twitter this election, this is easily the bullshittiest. she insulted no one. in fact quite the opposite<u+2014>for someone speaking behind closed doors to ardent supporters, she was not only restrained, but she openly and directly asked her supporters to be patient with the impatient; that is, to understand the views and motivations of the younger people who wanted more radical change. it is important to recognize what<u+2019>s going on in this election. everybody who<u+2019>s ever been in an election that i<u+2019>m aware of is quite bewildered because there is a strain of, on the one hand, the kind of populist, nationalist, xenophobic, discriminatory kind of approach that we hear too much of from the republican candidates. and on the other side, there<u+2019>s just a deep desire to believe that we can have free college, free healthcare, that what we<u+2019>ve done hasn<u+2019>t gone far enough, and that we just need to, you know, <u+00a0>go as far as, you know, scandinavia, whatever that means, and half the people don<u+2019>t know what that means, but it<u+2019>s something that they deeply feel. so as a friend of mine said the other day, i am occupying from the center-left to the center-right. and i don<u+2019>t have much company there. because it is difficult when you<u+2019>re running to be president, and you understand how hard the job is<u+2014>i don<u+2019>t want to overpromise. i don<u+2019>t want to tell people things that i know we cannot do. some are new to politics completely. they<u+2019>re children of the great recession. and they are living in their parents<u+2019> basement. they feel they got their education and the jobs that are available to them are not at all what they envisioned for themselves. and they don<u+2019>t see much of a future. i met with a group of young black millennials today and you know one of the young women said, <u+201c>you know, none of us feel that we have the job that we should have gotten out of college. and we don<u+2019>t believe the job market is going to give us much of a chance.<u+201d> so that is a mindset that is really affecting their politics. and so if<u+00a0>you<u+2019>re feeling like you<u+2019>re consigned to, you know, being a barista, or you know, some other job that doesn<u+2019>t pay a lot, and doesn<u+2019>t have some other ladder of opportunity attached to it, then the idea that maybe, just maybe, you could be part of a political revolution is pretty appealing. so i think we should all be really understanding of that and should try to do the best we can not to be, you know, a wet blanket on idealism. we want people to be idealistic. we want them to set big goals. but to take what we can achieve now and try to present them as bigger goals. all right. let<u+2019>s parse them. in the first quote, the first sentence is just an opener, and the second critiques the trump movement. the third sentence critiques the sanders people, but there<u+2019>s nothing condescending in it. maybe that <u+201c>whatever that means<u+201d> after the mention of scandinavia is a little dismissive. but really. now we<u+2019>re at the point where we<u+2019>re not permitting people speaking in private the occasional verbal tic of the sort we all employ? then comes center-left and center-right. it<u+2019>s the mention of <u+201c>center-right<u+201d> that the intercept meant to rub in her face, and in a perfect world i<u+2019>d rather she<u+2019>d not said it. but it<u+2019>s quite obvious that she is contrasting herself with the movements to her left and to her right<u+2014>the very two movements she had just described. so she was really just saying, i<u+2019>m in between those two. and who knows<u+2014>there were probably republicans in the room. it was mclean. she may have been trying to reassure them and get them to tell their friends, <u+201c>you know, we can live with her.<u+201d> no, that<u+2019>s not pandering. it<u+2019>s politics. if she weren<u+2019>t chasing responsible republican votes, she<u+2019>d be an idiot. now, the second and <u+201c>offending<u+201d> graf. how in the world these words can offend anyone is just absurd. ok, baristas. but i<u+2019>m sure even most baristas have higher aspirations in life. but the main thing is that when she says <u+201c>they are living in their parents<u+2019> basement,<u+201d> she<u+2019>s obviously not making fun of them. she<u+2019>s just describing them. indeed, she is explaining to these rich people in one of america<u+2019>s richest towns, hey, take a minute to understand where these folks are coming from. and she<u+2019>s doing so the week after sanders throttled her in new hampshire<u+2014>a point in time when, if anything, she<u+2019>d have been prone to lash out at them. there<u+2019>s nothing patronizing about any of this. i also saw a bunch of people on twitter saying in effect for the life of me, i don<u+2019>t see what the big deal is here. i retweeted a guy who said the #basementdwellers <u+201c>controversy<u+201d> is proof enough of the reason why she didn<u+2019>t release her speech transcripts. amen to that.

did hillary insult sanderistas as <u+2018>basement dwellers<u+2019>? no<u+2014>just the opposite

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

75.0

8.0

6962.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

453.0

1.0

0.0

175.0

1.0

0.0

72.0

13.0

21.0

11.0

13.0

15.0

11.0

13.0

24.0

22.0

37.0

460.0

176.0

73.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

sen. rand paul said saturday that he thinks the issue of sexuality is one that should be left behind closed doors. <u+201c>and i think if we did a little more of that then maybe the law doesn<u+2019>t have to engage in stuff that<u+2019>s really personal, and the law could be more neutral, but i think the law ought to be fair to people and ought to provide equal protection for everybody,<u+201d> he said. paul was asked about bruce jenner coming out as a woman named caitlyn.<u+00a0>social conservatives in the republican party have felt isolated by the nation<u+2019>s acceptance of jenner, a change they see as immoral. paul said he hasn't given jenner's transition much thought but said that sexuality should remain private. [read:<u+00a0>caitlyn jenner comes out, and social conservatives take an apocalyptic view] <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve exposed so much of our lives that were at one time private, and if it were private, than maybe the law wouldn<u+2019>t have to take a position on it, you know what i mean?<u+201d> paul said in an interview here. paul said that if he goes to a cocktail party, <u+201c>most of us don<u+2019>t talk about our personal sexuality, our sex lives, why does it have to be part of public discourse?<u+201d>

paul: laws on sexuality could be more <u+2018>neutral,<u+2019> but all should be protected

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

76.0

8.0

1147.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

71.0

0.0

14.0

1.0

0.0

12.0

1.0

7.0

1.0

3.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

9.0

3.0

7.0

72.0

14.0

13.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

(cnn) hillary clinton might be on the way to the democratic presidential nomination but she enters territory that could be considered more favorable to bernie sanders on tuesday with the west virginia primary. and for the first time on the republican side, there's only one candidate in the race -- but that doesn't mean there's consensus. republicans in west virginia and nebraska will offer the first glimpse at whether the gop can rally behind donald trump in a general election. for democrats, only west virginia offers binding results. in nebraska, democrats caucused in early march, favoring sanders by nearly 15 points . though democrats will still be voting in a primary on tuesday, the results for the presidential race will have no binding effect on delegate allocation. here's what to watch in tuesday's contests: though clinton won west virginia over barack obama in 2008, she has been in far more hostile territory this time around after comments she made about putting coal miners "out of business." but her critics on the left and right have seized on the remarks, with sanders campaigning in west virginia on taking care of coal workers and donald trump bringing up her remarks in rallies in the state. the electorate in the last presidential democratic primary was overwhelmingly white and working class. the state also has a primary that allows unaffiliated voters to cast ballots in either contest, meaning sanders can turn out independents. both of those factors have tended to favor him in past contests. though nebraska's results are non-binding, if the electorate resembles the pro-sanders crowd in march, he'll have another result to tout on what could be a rough night for clinton. the proportional allocation rules in the democratic primary won't help sanders catch clinton -- but he could spend the next month delivering some embarrassing losses to clinton in states favorable to his campaign. trump may be the only gop candidate with an active campaign, but he won't be the only candidate on the ballot in either state on tuesday. both west virginia and nebraska will have candidates who have dropped out of the race on the ballot, giving voters a chance to cast protest ballots against trump should they choose. candidates with suspended campaigns have picked up a handful of votes in states after they left the race, but never in large margins. tuesday will test whether the discomfort with trump as the gop nominee can drive voters to the polls to vote against the mogul. in west virginia, in addition to casting ballots for trump, voters will also select individual delegates to go to the convention. delegate hopefuls will be marked with their chosen candidate or as uncommitted when voters make up their minds. to be sure, the trump campaign in west virginia sent supporters on monday a guide to which delegates to select. trump has been viewed unfavorably by upwards of two-thirds of women in general election polling, but has done marginally better with women in the republican electorate. he won 47% of women in the indiana primary last week, according to exit polls. but he won 59% of men. his chances in november will improve should he be able to close that gender gap. democrats have been hammering trump with some of his comments about women, trying to continue to keep those unfavorables high among the key voting demographic. without alternative republicans in the race, trump's returns among women could be telling. republicans hope that trump could put rust belt states like ohio, pennsylvania and michigan in play for the party. democrats, on the other hand, hope that rising demographic trends in states like arizona, north carolina and georgia coupled with trump's inflammatory statements about minorities could give democrats an edge in states they have traditionally lost. with trump and clinton holding tight grips on their party's nominations, tuesday will begin to show signs of what the general electorate could look like, and what issues are motivating them to the polls.

what to watch in tuesday's primaries

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

36.0

8.0

4043.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

267.0

0.0

78.0

0.0

29.0

4.0

12.0

1.0

5.0

6.0

3.0

6.0

12.0

9.0

21.0

270.0

78.0

29.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

top republican senators friday demanded answers after a military official revealed <u+201c>detailed operational information<u+201d> about a looming iraqi mission to retake mosul from the islamic state, saying the disclosure has put the mission at risk. <u+201c>never in our memory can we recall an instance in which our military has knowingly briefed our own war plans to our enemies,<u+201d> sens. john mccain, r-ariz., and lindsey graham, r-s.c., said in a letter to president obama. <u+201c>these disclosures not only risk the success of our mission, but could also cost the lives of u.s., iraqi, and coalition forces.<u+201d> the senators asked who was responsible for the briefing, conducted thursday by a military official, and whether they had white house approval. <u+201c>those responsible have jeopardized our national security interests and must be held accountable,<u+201d> they wrote. the letter follows criticism in other corners that the military may have revealed too much detail in previewing the operation. on thursday, the u.s. military official outlined plans to retake mosul and said the <u+201c>shaping<u+201d> for the battle is currently underway. he said the iraqi military hopes to begin operations in the <u+201c>april, may timeframe<u+201d> with the goal of retaking mosul before ramadan begins on june 17. the official then went a step further and leaked that five iraqi army brigades will be used in the fight, as well as several smaller brigades, composing a total force of up to 25,000 iraqi troops. three brigades of kurdish peshmerga fighters will participate as well. but the details, disclosed at the close of a white house summit on combating violent extremism, raised some concerns. "that is pretty amazing that that information's out there," retired gen. jack keane, former army vice chief of staff and a fox news military analyst, said friday. a current and former military intelligence officer also told fox news that the decision to publicly announce the plan was counterintuitive because it "telegraphs" the timing and number of units involved. the officers said it would allow islamic state, also known as isis, or isil, to prepare for the battle by laying improvised explosive devices. both officers questioned whether political considerations on the part of the obama administration factored into the decision to announce the offensive. the obama administration wasn't the first to discuss plans to retake mosul, however. iraqi government leaders previously had talked about the looming offensive, and defense officials are pushing back on the notion that anything tactical was revealed on thursday. centcom sources also stressed that the briefing on thursday came from the military, not the white house. keane suggested there should be nothing surprising about the fact that iraqi forces are looking to retake mosul before ramadan. "isis is not stupid," he said, adding that their fighters already know that mosul is the key to any counteroffensive and have likely been preparing for weeks. "this is not something new to isis." however, keane said the details about the force size and other elements were "surprising" to hear. isis militants overtook mosul last june, as the group marched across large sections of iraq and syria, sending iraqi forces fleeing. at this point, officials estimate there are between 1,000 to 2,000 isis insurgents in the city of mosul. military leaders have been talking about retaking the city for some time, but they have said they won't launch the operation until the iraqi troops are ready. included in the force would be a brigade of iraqi counterterrorism forces who have been trained by u.s. special operations forces. the brigades include roughly 2,000 troops each. the centcom official said the u.s. will provide military support for the operation, including training, air support, intelligence and surveillance. the official said there has been no decision made yet on whether to send in some u.s. ground troops to help call in airstrikes. "but by the same token, if they're not ready, if the conditions are not set, if all the equipment they need is not physically there and they (aren't) trained to a degree in which they will be successful, we have not closed the door on continuing to slide that to the right," he said. the official also revealed for the first time that qatar has agreed to host a training site for coalition forces to train moderate syrian rebels who would return to syria to fight the islamic state forces there. other sites are in turkey, jordan and saudi arabia.

gop senators demand answers over disclosure of mission to oust isis from mosul

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

2.0

0.0

8.0

78.0

8.0

4508.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

360.0

0.0

95.0

0.0

40.0

10.0

15.0

3.0

13.0

6.0

2.0

3.0

17.0

16.0

26.0

366.0

95.0

40.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

brooklyn <u+2014> new york is supposed to be a magical city that extracts <u+201c>authenticity<u+201d> out of its presidential candidates <u+2014> you know, the rubes who tote wallets in back pockets, can<u+2019>t quite swipe a metrocard, or stand there like flap-hatted vermont tourists fishing around for subway tokens left over from their last trip to the big city in 1960. the 2016 primary here <u+2014> for all its hype <u+2014> provided few new insights into the character of the candidates <u+2014> but it did clarify both the republican and democratic races, delivering the expected victories to the expected hometown front-runners, donald trump and, especially hillary clinton. the 10-day new york campaign was dumber, more scripted and meaner (at least on the democratic side) than a great state deserved. each candidate embraced the most self-serving empire state clich<u+00e9> they could glom <u+2014> bernie sanders trumpeted his spaldeen-stoopball 1950s brooklyn upbringing (while eliding the endemic segregation in his fiercely divided neighborhood), hillary touted her 2000 upstate listening tour (downplaying her coziness with wall street), while actual americans ted cruz and john kasich seemed mesmerized by the wild exoticism of half-sour pickles and matzas. only donald trump <u+2014> a <u+201c>bonfire of the vanities<u+201d> character who has busted out of his tabloid 1980s cage to devour 2016 basic-cable america <u+2014> seemed to really get what new yorkers wanted. which was to be momentarily amused, then left the hell alone. by necessity (no riots, please!) and instinct (he has jeter-esque name recognition already) the donald lay lower than in any previous contest and triumphed resoundingly. it was semi-fun while it lasted. here are five takeaways from the new york primary. 1. <u+201c>momentum<u+201d> is for losers. bernie sanders cruised into new york riding a wave of victories: he won eight out of the past nine nominating contests. which all added up to not very much <u+2014> he cut clinton<u+2019>s lead in pledged delegates from about 240 to under 200. the sanders campaign <u+2014> taking a page from clinton<u+2019>s own effort in 2008 <u+2014> has been pushing the idea that the vermont senator was surging past the mathematical impediments to his nomination. clinton nearly erased that run with one big win in new york, a victory that her staff expected to net her about 20 to 25 pledged delegates. it also robbed sanders of a core (if flawed) rationale for his candidacy: that clinton couldn<u+2019>t win consistently in big, northern states <u+2014> she can add new york to a column of wins that includes florida, texas, virginia and ohio. and late in the day came news that electrified clinton<u+2019>s already-jazzed staff: that sanders had unexpectedly flown back to vermont to recharge his political batteries. 2. trump: the mouth that didn<u+2019>t roar. turns out that shutting up, lying low and reorganizing your amateurish campaign ain<u+2019>t such a bad idea. trump, who kicked off his candidacy at trump tower on fifth took the fifth during his home-state primary <u+2014> steering clear of perilously liberal manhattan to hold rallies in patchogue on long island and rochester upstate. it may be too late to showcase restraint, but trump (who attempted rapprochement with megyn kelly during the primary sprint) used his dead-certain win here as cover to reset his campaign <u+2014> layering over bar-bouncer campaign manager corey lewandowski with seasoned gop pro paul manafort and flack hope hicks with former scott walker aide rick wiley. 3. bernie and hillary officially hate each other<u+2019>s guts. here was a hometown contest destined to sow bitterness. sanders (like so many other brooklynites) professes to be proud of the moxie and street toughness instilled by the borough of his birth, but his first-ever vote was with his feet <u+2014> and he got out, first to chicago, then to the braying-guernsey environs of burlington. still, he feels pride of ownership and bragged (in wyoming) that he would make new york transplant clinton quake; clinton, who parked her carpetbag in chappaqua 15 years ago, wanted to crush his upstart challenge in her chappaqua backyard <u+2014> and she did. clinton won by a wide margin<u+2014> and there was much eff-you high-fiving in the ballroom of the sheraton new york. but sanders<u+2019> defeat (accompanied, as always by the big crowds and even bigger torrent of online donations) was the bitterest one yet and deepened the already yawning fault lines between the bernie stalwarts and a clinton team increasingly itchy to see him gone. not going to happen anytime soon, apparently: the tweet being incredulously digested at a clinton victory party was an msnbc report quoting sanders campaign manager jeff weaver defiantly claiming his candidate would take the fight to the convention floor <u+2014> even if clinton secured an overwhelming lead among pledged delegates and supers. <u+201c>we kicked his ass tonight,<u+201d> a senior clinton aide told me tuesday night. <u+201c>i hope this convinces bernie to tone it down. if not, f--- him.<u+201d> 4. why is john kasich still running? sure, donald trump built (or branded himself on) over half of manhattan. but ohio gov. john kasich, the closest thing to a moderate remaining in the republican field should have appealed to voters here <u+2014> and he couldn<u+2019>t make the sale in critical areas like nassau county or suburban buffalo. at 11 p.m. he was clocking in at a modest 25 percent <u+2014> less than half of trump<u+2019>s commanding 60 percent level of victory. kasich stands no chance of catching either trump or ted cruz in the delegate hunt<u+2014> so his core rationale is that he fares far better than either man in a general election match-up against hillary clinton. losing so badly in her home state, however, does little to bolster that case <u+2014> and the trickle of cash coming to his campaign is likely to dry up as he heads into the homestretch. 5. whiteout. clinton managed to fight sanders to a virtual draw among white voters statewide (and won 60-to-40 among whites in the five boroughs) <u+2014> but the big story, for the umpteenth time in 2016 was sanders<u+2019> inability to make significant inroads with black voters. spike lee made a nice ad for the vermont senator <u+2014> but it couldn<u+2019>t compensate for the candidate<u+2019>s repeated (and inexplicable) dismissal of clinton<u+2019>s huge wins in the <u+201c>deep south<u+201d> <u+2014> which blacks interpreted as a slight.

5 takeaways from the new york primary

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

37.0

8.0

6229.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

407.0

1.0

0.0

116.0

0.0

39.0

13.0

19.0

9.0

16.0

12.0

18.0

13.0

19.0

32.0

40.0

408.0

117.0

39.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

two weeks ago, as nick gillespie reported in this space, libertarian party presidential nominee gary johnson said that it was "game over" if he was not included in the first 2016 presidential debate on sept. 26. given that the democratic/republican-controlled "nonpartisan" commission on presidential debates (cpd) will choose the debate roster in mid-september based on a five-agency polling average that currently sits at 8.8 percent, well short of the required 15 percent, for johnson, the irresistible force of the lp's debate-centric focus has been on a collision course with the immovable object of the cpd's unreasonably high threshold. until, it seems, this afternoon. no matter how much independent-bent political celebrities such as mitt romney, arnold schwarzenegger, and mitch daniels support the l.p. ticket being included in the debates, and no matter how much that motion is seconded by solid majorities of the american voting public, rules are rules, and when said rules are written by the republican and democratic parties, libertarians are screwed. unless, vice presidential nominee william weld told me this afternoon, the mounting outrage at the "rigged" system is married to the sight of the two candidates outside every debate venue, making a mockery of the proceedings inside by answering every question simultaneously, only better: "so i'm no longer so sure that it's game over if we're not in the debates," weld told me. "i think there's going to be kind of a national uproar if we're not in the debates, and we will join in that uproar, and be standing together on the street corner outside every debate venue answering the same questions as in the debate in real time, you know, putting it out on facebook live." weld made the same promise during his address at a midtown manhattan rally this afternoon, which was attended by 500-plus enthusiastic supporters. "we've seen that the little videos that we record in 90 seconds are seen by 15, 18 million people in a matter of less than two weeks," he told me, "so that kind of free media attention might continue all the way from now until november 8th as a result of our exclusion. that would be a substitute, at least in part, for being in the debates, and it would give us the high ground. it's ground that i think we could occupy with some happiness."

gary johnson and bill weld shift focus to answering questions outside of debates

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

80.0

8.0

2333.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

169.0

0.0

37.0

0.0

17.0

4.0

6.0

3.0

2.0

3.0

1.0

0.0

8.0

9.0

17.0

175.0

37.0

17.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

after his shotgun wedding to the presumptive gop nominee last week, the house speaker is getting a glimpse of his future with a man who puts his dreams before anyone else<u+2019>s. there<u+2019>s no currently available evidence showing that donald trump<u+2019>s entire campaign is just one big, deliberate effort to troll paul ryan. since ryan allied himself with the mogul, trump has engaged in some of his worst behavior of the cycle, and his backers show no restraint in their eagerness to malign and mock the speaker of the house. any hoped-for trump/ryan era of good feelings? on june 2, ryan endorsed trump. he said he made that decision because he believes a president trump will help pass his forthcoming agenda. <u+201c>through these conversations, i feel confident he would help us turn the ideas in this agenda into laws to help improve people<u+2019>s lives,<u+201d> ryan said. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s why i<u+2019>ll be voting for him this fall.<u+201d> one day later, donald trump welcomed paul ryan to the rest of his life by saying the federal judge overseeing a civil case against the now-defunct trump university is unsuited for the job because he<u+2019>s of mexican ancestry (said judge, gonzalo curiel, was born in indiana). ryan responded to the comments in a press conference he held in southeast d.c. to roll out the first item on his policy agenda, a series of proposals to fight poverty. the focus of the morning could have been on the fact that house republicans finally decided to start talking about poverty<u+2014>an issue their party has long declined to focus on. but the biggest news paul ryan made was his response to trump. <u+201c>saying a person can<u+2019>t do their job because of their race is sort of the textbook definition of racist comments,<u+201d> he said, saying trump<u+2019>s comments on curiel <u+201c>should be absolutely disavowed.<u+201d> <u+201c>i<u+2019>m not going to even pretend to defend them,<u+201d> he added. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m going to defend our ideas. i<u+2019>m going to defend our agenda. what matters to us most is our principles and the policies that come from those principles, and our ability to give the people of this country a better way forward.<u+201d> tuesday<u+2019>s press conference, was suppose to highlight ryan<u+2019>s latest attempt to turn the page away from the insanity of the presidential election and back to the serious business of lawmaking. he has spent the past few weeks cutting campaign-style videos teasing the release of a series of proposals from house republicans. the sad irony of all this is that trump actually paid lip service to ryan<u+2019>s anti-poverty plan when he appeared on cbs<u+2019>s face the nation on june 5. <u+201c>paul ryan<u+2014>well, i think we will agree on<u+2014>as an example, he really focuses on poverty,<u+201d> trump told host john dickerson. <u+201c>he wants to take people out of poverty. so do i. and we<u+2019>re going to come up with a plan.<u+201d> but that comment was totally drowned out by the criticism trump drew for saying on the same show that a muslim judge would probably be just as unfair to him as a judge of mexican ancestry.

ryan endorses trump, trump crushes ryan<u+2019>s dreams

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

48.0

8.0

2934.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

189.0

1.0

0.0

71.0

0.0

15.0

9.0

10.0

7.0

8.0

7.0

8.0

4.0

13.0

15.0

22.0

190.0

72.0

15.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a verdict in 2017 could have sweeping consequences for tech startups.

the reinvention of mitt romney

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

30.0

8.0

69.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

3.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

6.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump is going to be the republican nominee. the only way he won't is if something unthinkable happens. he could be struck by lightning. he could pull off his trump mask and reveal that he's actually been impossible mission force agent ethan hunt this whole time. short of that, i dunno. you never want to say never in american politics, but this is the exception. he is way up in the polls in indiana, which will net him a bunch of delegates. then he's set to dominate west virginia and new jersey further down the road, and after that he looks likely to<u+00a0>win most of california's delegates. all this means he will probably secure a majority of delegates by early june when the last states have voted <u+2014> and so he'll win on the first ballot at the republican national convention. but even more to the point, there is simply no sign that even if he does fall slightly short of an outright delegate majority, the party will try to meaningfully contest the convention. there are a handful of republican party leaders who are fundamentally opposed to trump, but they are genuinely few and far between. the vast majority of gop elected officials don't think nominating trump is a good idea, but they have no intention at this point of doing anything to stop it from happening. the short-lived cruz-kasich pact, in which john kasich would throw the race in indiana and ted cruz would do likewise in oregon, illustrates the fundamental problem <u+2014> there are steps through which republican party actors could have stopped trump, but none of them have ever really come together, and now they are out of time. an indiana pact was just about the lowest-cost form of collaboration imaginable. the reason is that for kasich to instruct his supporters to vote for cruz in indiana would be a zero-cost move. right now it is mathematically impossible for either kasich or cruz to secure a majority of delegates. the only way for either one of them to win the nomination is through a contested convention. and to get a contested convention, they need to stop trump from getting a majority. indiana allocates a large share of votes to whoever wins a statewide plurality. therefore, far and away the best hope for kasich is to prevent trump from gaining a plurality in indiana. and to do that, he needs people who want kasich to be president to vote for cruz, who is currently in second place. there was a brief moment when kasich pulled resources out of indiana, but even during the heyday of the "alliance" he wasn't willing to actually tell his supporters to vote cruz <u+2014> even though the benefits to kasich of a strategic vote for cruz exist even if cruz doesn't make any concessions to cruz. that's all below the radar of normal people watching the election from the sidelines, but it's crucially important because it shows the extent to which there is genuinely no anti-trump movement in the republican party. there's a twitter hashtag and a fair amount of talk from conservative intellectuals, but the vast majority of the party's elected officials, donors, and grassroots leaders have been watching nervously and not saying much. there are lots of people out there, ranging from true conservatives like cruz's supporters to moderates like kasich's supporters, who don't really want trump to be the nominee. but nobody is doing anything to stop him, and the closer he gets to winning the more people join his bandwagon. the trump phenomenon is confounding many people because, on the one hand, it seems impossible to many that the republican party would nominate such a weak general election candidate, while it seems impossible to many others that donald trump could be such a strong candidate. so let's be clear about this. trump is, by every sign available, a historically weak general election candidate. his unfavorable numbers are off the charts, he is losing to hillary clinton in every head-to-head poll, and his policy proposals are going to attract a level of media scrutiny that republican nominees normally avoid because conservative intellectuals have spent a lot of time dumping on them over the past five months. at the same time, republicans aren't going to let these facts stop him from being their nominee. it turns out that party elites have less sway over the nominating process than many of us thought 12 months ago. in particular, i would say it turns out that the commercial right-of-center mass media <u+2014> especially fox news and talk radio but also the breitbart corner of the internet <u+2014> is simply not that invested in what party elites think or want. trump is not liked by a majority of americans, but he is certainly a compelling television character, and catering to the minority taste for trumpism has proven to be an effective business strategy. given his ability to attract copious quantities of free media and his personal wealth, trump can overcome the disadvantages of being disliked by the party's professional operative class and leverage his grassroots popularity to victory. video: this is how much conservatives hate trump if you want to understand what's going on with trump, i think you can't do much better than to look at this 2015 poll from the public religion research institute, which reveals a huge partisan gap on a pretty basic question <u+2014> is racism against white people a bigger problem than racism against racial minority groups? republicans said yes; democrats and independents said no: this is why trump's republican opponents haven't made the obvious criticism of him that he's running a campaign based on racial demagoguery. to republican primary voters, it's not obvious that racist demagoguery is a bad thing. or, at a minimum, it seems like a less pernicious thing than the apparently pervasive discrimination against white people in american society. typically political parties try to emphasize hot-button wedge issues where a majority of the public is on their side, and deemphasize ones where they are in the minority. on the question of racism, republicans are distinctly in the minority. but party elites' ability to prevent a campaign from being waged on this issue has been checked by trump. so he's going to be the nominee. not because he's an unstoppable juggernaut, but because it's going to take a democrat to stop him.

donald trump is really going to be the nominee. this is actually happening.

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

75.0

8.0

6296.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

434.0

2.0

0.0

132.0

0.0

55.0

15.0

13.0

7.0

12.0

13.0

14.0

7.0

36.0

25.0

46.0

440.0

134.0

55.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

you've probably seen this chart. it uses analysis from voteview to show how the house has grown more polarized over time. democrats in the house have become more liberal; republicans have become much more conservative. you may also have seen this chart -- but if you haven't, you probably at least are familiar with the concept. it shows the ranges of weekly approval ratings for president obama over the course of his administration. in other words, each time 82 percent of democrats approve of obama, the 82 percent bar gets a little higher. for the most part, opinions of obama haven't changed much among democrats or republicans; his overall approval rating is usually a function of how independents feel about him. obama isn't the first president to see such polarization in his approval ratings. the first president to do so was the guy before him, george w. bush. ronald reagan and bill clinton each had some polarization in their second terms, but it wasn't nearly as wide a gap. which leads us to a natural question: how does the polarization of congress -- which is a measure of the behavior of members of congress -- compare with the polarization of approval of the president, a measure of public opinion? that's a question we can answer. over time, the gap between the political leaning of republican and democratic caucuses on capitol hill has widened steadily (though not continuously). this compares dw-nominate scores from voteview, which is a measure of how liberal or conservative each member of congress is against a baseline. the figures below essentially measure the distance between the two lines in the first graph above. over that same period, opinions of the president have similarly widened -- again, with some fits and starts. there are two lines here, one using the first gallup approval rating of the new year and the other averaging the ratings over the year. you can see how attitudes shift; the gap plummets as a president becomes equally popular or unpopular with each party. anyway, this suggests that as congress has gotten more polarized, so too have opinions of the presidents. but there's a clearer way to look at this. plotting the gap in how democrats and republicans look at the president on one axis and the gap between the two parties in congress on the other, you can see clearly how both the former and latter have grown more extreme. (the higher and further to the right a dot, the greater the polarization.) in other words, this polarization isn't only a function of congress and gerrymandering. there's been a broader polarization that's taken place, reflected in how each party views the president. what it doesn't tell us is the cause. as complicated as these data are, this was the easier part of the analysis.

political polarization is getting worse. everywhere.

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

52.0

8.0

2774.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

181.0

1.0

0.0

67.0

1.0

0.0

14.0

3.0

2.0

3.0

1.0

3.0

0.0

8.0

9.0

187.0

68.0

15.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

marco rubio was on a mission on thursday night: destroy the donald. how much damage did he really do? the florida senator delivered what was easily his best debate performance yet thursday night, hammering frontrunner donald trump repeatedly on his character, his business record, and his claims to being a conservative. it was the performance he needed. the question now is whether it will matter at all. fresh off a three-state winning streak, trump is close to being anointed the presumptive nominee by the media. with just days to go before the crucial sting of super tuesday primaries, trump appears to be leading in most if not every state on the verge of a contest. he has the momentum. he has the math on his side. <u+201c>in 2011, he talked about the need for a pathway to citizenship,<u+201d> rubio said. <u+201c>in 2012, donald criticized mitt romney, saying that mitt lost his election because of self-deportation. and so even today, we saw a report... that donald, you<u+2019>ve hired a significant number of people from other countries to take jobs that americans could have filled.<u+201d> rubio then referenced trump<u+2019>s<u+00a0>use of polish workers to construct trump tower, which cost the real estate mogul a major settlement in the early 1980s. <u+201c>my mom was a maid at a hotel,<u+201d> rubio continued. <u+201c>and instead of hiring an american like her, you have brought in over a thousand people from all over the world to fill those jobs instead. so i think this is an important issue. and i think we are realizing that it<u+2019>s an important issue for the country that<u+2019>s been debated for 30 years, but finally needs to be solved once and for all.<u+201d> trump continued, <u+201c>as far as the people i<u+2019>ve hired in various parts of florida during the absolute prime season, like palm beach and other locations, you could not get help. it<u+2019>s the up season. people didn<u+2019>t want to have part-time jobs. they were part-time jobs, very seasonal, 90-day jobs, 120-day jobs, and you couldn<u+2019>t get. everybody agrees with me on that. they were part-time jobs. you needed them, or we just might as well close the doors, because you couldn<u+2019>t get help in those hot, hot sections of florida.<u+201d> trump, who had yet to really be attacked by rubio<u+2014>or, really, anyone else<u+2014>this way, didn<u+2019>t have much of a response when put on the spot. trump seemed caught off guard by a candidate with whom he<u+2019>d enjoyed a kind of d<u+00e9>tente for some time. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s not a sound bite,<u+201d> rubio said, sticking to his guns. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s a fact. again, go online and google it. donald trump, polish workers. the second thing about the trade war, i don<u+2019>t understand, because your clothes and the ties you wear are made in mexico and in china. you<u+2019>ll be starting a trade war against your own clothes and suits.<u+201d> the old political rule is to attack your enemy<u+2019>s strengths. and that<u+2019>s exactly what rubio was doing. trump has framed himself as a brilliant businessman animated by his concern for the common man, the little guy, the silent majority. he<u+2019>s never marketed himself as an orthodox conservative, but that<u+2019>s where his opponents have hit him again and again with no result. but rubio tried something different with his attacks thursday night. he tried to prove trump is a huckster, a charlatan who doesn<u+2019>t know what he<u+2019>s talking about when pressed for specifics, a trust-fund baby looking to rip off hard-working americans in order to make a dishonest buck. it went to the heart of trump<u+2019>s appeal, and for that reason it just might stick. rubio looked and sounded different from how we<u+2019>ve ever seen him. but so did trump. for a man who makes so many facial expressions, he rarely displays any recognizable human emotion, preferring instead to stay aloof and dismissive. thursday night was different. he was, at turns, deeply frustrated and consumed by abject terror. things were going very wrong, very quickly<u+2014>and right before his squinty eyes. trump let out an exhausted sigh. his head seemed to sink into his shoulder pads. he grabbed the microphone with his left hand and wagged his finger with rubio with his right. <u+201c>no, no. i<u+2019>m the only one on this stage that<u+2019>s hired people,<u+201d> he threw his arms out, <u+201c>you haven<u+2019>t hired anybody.<u+201d> after trump reminded the audience that rubio had recently been roasted by erstwhile candidate chris christie, rubio pressed trump for specifics on his health-care plan. trump talked in circles, claiming he would magically create competition by <u+201c>removing<u+201d> the <u+201c>lines around the states,<u+201d> and then claiming it over and over again. the audience cheered. they got the joke<u+2014>rubio<u+2019>s robot reputation stems from his habit, most clearly shown at his disastrous pre-new hampshire primary debate, of hewing to his talking points when flustered. trump stuck his finger in the air in defiance, <u+201c>no, no, no!<u+201d> he said, <u+201c>no no no! i don<u+2019>t repeat myself! i don<u+2019>t repeat myself!<u+201d>

rubio goes from robot to terminator against donald trump

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

56.0

8.0

4797.0

0.0

4.0

3.0

0.0

318.0

0.0

104.0

0.0

34.0

11.0

12.0

7.0

13.0

9.0

7.0

5.0

19.0

23.0

31.0

321.0

104.0

34.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

about 90 minutes before the vice-presidential debate started, the republican national committee posted a press release claiming that donald trump's running mate, mike pence, "was the clear winner of the debate." that sort of stunt and tim kaine's painfully unfunny and hyper-scripted one-liners help explain why the republican and democratic candidates are disliked by large majorities and why party identification is at or near historic lows. full debate transcript here. we don't simply need politicians talking over one another like guests on a public-access cable show, we need more voices on the stage having substantive discussions about the future of the country. we didn't get that with the vice-presidential debate and it's unlikely we'll get it in next week's presidential debate either. produced by paul detrick, nick gillespie, and joshua swain. narrated by gillespie. about 50 seconds. updated: for those keeping score, a cnn/orc poll taken immediately following the debate had pence winning the debate, 48 percent to 42 percent for kaine.

nobody won the vp debate, least of all the american electorate

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

2.0

62.0

8.0

1056.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

73.0

2.0

0.0

16.0

0.0

7.0

2.0

5.0

2.0

1.0

3.0

4.0

8.0

5.0

11.0

75.0

18.0

7.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the republican national committee triumphantly seized control of the debates last year, saying it would not allow a repeat of 2012, when <u+201c>the liberal media interrogated our candidates on issues that were often not a priority to most americans. <u+2026> we need more conservatives <u+2026> in the moderator<u+2019>s chair.<u+201d> but what was a play to keep their candidates safe inside a conservative cocoon now looks like a trap. the first republican presidential debate will air on fox news and will be moderated by bret baier, megyn kelly and chris wallace<u+2014>who happen to be the same three anchors that have provoked three republican candidates into embarrassing gaffes this month. turns out fox news<u+2019> anchors can make republican candidates look just as bad as msnbc<u+2019>s. the rnc sought to install more <u+201c>conservatives in the moderator<u+2019>s chair<u+201d> because conservatives still are nursing grudges against some of the 2012 primary debate moderators. when abc<u+2019>s george stephanopoulos pressed mitt romney on whether <u+201c>states have the right to ban contraception,<u+201d> conservatives blamed the <u+201c>liberal media<u+201d> for asking an irrelevant question. when cnn<u+2019>s john king opened a debate by asking newt gingrich about allegations leveled by his ex-wife, gingrich brought the crowd to its feet by chastising king and lambasting <u+201c>the elite media protecting barack obama by attacking republicans.<u+201d> at least in those instances, republicans could try the <u+201c>blame the media<u+201d> strategy to limit the damage. this year, when republicans shoot themselves in the foot on the debate stage, they won<u+2019>t have that option. the recent gaffes on fox news by republican candidates are not because fox news journalists are suddenly out to get republicans. it<u+2019>s because even a softball question can trip up a candidate not ready for prime time. megyn kelly<u+2019>s interview of jeb bush was the journalistic equivalent of a warm hug. her simple iraq question<u+2014><u+201c>knowing what we know now, would you have authorized the invasion?<u+201d><u+2014>was only a couple of notches tougher than katie couric<u+2019>s <u+201c>what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read?<u+201d> after jeb<u+2019>s initial answer, which skipped past the hindsight premise, kelly conversationally and neutrally asked for a clarification, <u+201c>you don't think it was a mistake?<u+201d> when jeb was done, she breezily moved on to a new line of questioning well-suited for fox: <u+201c>do you feel that america's place in the world has diminished under president obama?<u+201d> but fox news teased the iraq clip before the full interview aired, sparking a media firestorm. rivals chris christie and ted cruz, both fervent hawks, jumped in front of the microphone to proclaim they would not have invaded. influential conservative radio talker laura ingraham was incredulous: <u+201c>you have to have [a nominee] who says, <u+2018>look, i<u+2019>m a republican but i<u+2019>m not an idiot <u+2026> i learn from the past.<u+2019><u+201d> trying to clean up his mess a couple of days later, bush ran to what should have been safe ground, fox news<u+2019> sean hannity. the host functioned less as a journalist than as a friend helping a friend in need. he first suggested <u+201c>the media<u+201d> interpreted bush wrong and so <u+201c>i wanted to see if i could clarify that.<u+201d> after bush failed to actually clarify, hannity threw him a second lifeline, <u+201c>so in other words, with 20/20 hindsight, you would make a different decision.<u+201d> bush whiffed the softball, saying, <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t know what that decision would have been.<u+201d> unlike the kelly and hannity chats, chris wallace<u+2019>s recent interview with marco rubio was truly aggressive. he wouldn<u+2019>t let up over rubio<u+2019>s abandonment of the senate immigration bill for which he voted: <u+201c>you bailed on comprehensive immigration reform. <u+2026> aren't leaders supposed to shape public opinion rather than just follow it? <u+2026> shouldn't you have campaigned for this?<u+201d> he also busted rubio for a <u+201c>dramatic shift<u+201d> in his foreign policy rhetoric, backing off his 2012 support for iran negotiations and forgoing earlier assurances he was <u+201c>not a saber-rattling person.<u+201d> and those barbs were just the warm-up for the three-minute raking over iraq. as wallace bore into rubio<u+2019>s varying responses, the unprepared senate freshman dug himself into a hole by pleading semantic differences regarding questions about whether iraq was a mistake and whether he<u+2019>d have invaded knowing what we know now. relentless, wallace asked rubio about seven times <u+201c>was it a mistake?<u+201d> and he refused to let rubio answer it with caveats, cutting him off with <u+201c>i'm not asking you that.<u+201d> if wallace were not working for rupert murdoch, the loaded questions, opinionated assertions and repeated interruptions would earn wallace a lifetime membership in the liberal media elite club. you can expect wallace to be similarly unforgiving at the inaugural debate. in fact it was four augusts ago when wallace was the foil for gingrich<u+2019>s first public haranguing of a debate moderator. (he did not care for what he called a <u+201c>gotcha question<u+201d>: <u+201c>how do you respond to people who say that your campaign has been a mess so far?<u+201d>) gingrich was not alone. wallace dredged up mitt romney<u+2019>s record of layoffs and herman cain<u+2019>s litany of amateurish remarks. candidates who expect to get a free ride from wallace will quickly become debate roadkill.

fox news eats its own

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

21.0

8.0

5187.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

360.0

0.0

85.0

1.0

0.0

29.0

15.0

8.0

9.0

8.0

5.0

8.0

5.0

16.0

29.0

32.0

361.0

85.0

30.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump dominated the night, but ohio gov. john kasich kept him from a clean sweep. on the democratic side, hillary clinton formidably extended her lead over sen. bernie sanders. how snl's 'the bubble' sketch about polarization is all too true a woman gestures to the news media at a campaign event for republican presidential candidate donald trump in tampa, fla., monday. trump extended his lead tuesday, winning the winner-take-all florida primary and two other contests. but he lost ohio to gov. john kasich, preventing a clean sweep. missouri remained too close to call as of deadline. the once-improbable prospect of a trump-clinton general election showdown just got stronger. democratic front-runner hillary clinton dealt a crushing blow to bernie sanders<u+2019>s presidential hopes in tuesday<u+2019>s primaries, beating him in four contests, and leading in the fifth <u+2013> missouri <u+2013> which remains too close to call. on the republican side, donald trump boosted his front-runner status, winning the most delegates at stake tuesday and forcing florida sen. marco rubio out of the race by handing him a humiliating defeat in his home state. but mr. trump failed to sweep, losing in ohio to the state<u+2019>s governor, john kasich. it was governor kasich<u+2019>s first win of primary season, giving him cause to stay in the race <u+2013> even as he was mathematically eliminated from contention. kasich<u+2019>s only hope is for a contested national convention in july, where he somehow emerges as a <u+201c>unity<u+201d> candidate. for now, though, trump dominates in the delegate race, with 621 of the 1,237 needed to secure the nomination, as of early wednesday. texas sen. ted cruz sits in second place, with 396. to reach the magic number of 1,237 before the republican convention in cleveland, trump would need to win some 58 percent of the remaining delegates, a tough task in a three-person race, but not impossible. <u+201c>a contested convention remains a 50-50 proposition, but should trump fall just shy of the magic number, the gop will be contesting him at its own peril,<u+201d> says republican strategist ford o<u+2019>connell. tuesday<u+2019>s results revealed and reinforced several points about the strength of both trump and clinton. for trump, tuesday<u+2019>s victories came in spite of the front-runner<u+2019>s unwillingness to condemn acts of violence by supporters at his rallies, which party leaders have urged him to do. last weekend, trump canceled a rally in chicago after anti-trump protesters infiltrated the venue and threatened to shut it down <u+2013> leading to skirmishes between pro- and anti-trump activists. trump went on to win the illinois primary tuesday by 9 points, beating senator cruz 39 percent to 30 percent. trump supporters are known to back him early, and not budge from their position. and on tuesday, exit polls showed continued popularity for his views. some 52 percent of voters said they wanted an <u+201c>outsider<u+201d> for president, and of those, trump won 69 percent of the vote. trump also won the majority of voters who want to deport undocumented immigrants, are <u+201c>angry<u+201d> at the federal government, favor a temporary ban on muslims entering the united states, and are falling behind financially. he also won 47 percent of voters who oppose free trade. <u+201c>all are impressive results in a multi-candidate race,<u+201d> writes pollster gary langer in an <u+00a0>analysis for abc news. in remarks tuesday night to reporters and invited guests at his mar-a-lago estate in palm beach, fla., trump highlighted the millions of dollars of negative ads that his primary opponents and outside groups funded by the republican <u+201c>establishment<u+201d> have run against him, to seemingly little effect. still, trump remains a deeply divisive figure in the republican party, as tuesday<u+2019>s exit polls showed. <u+201c>among republicans who did not vote for him this tuesday night, 61 percent said they<u+2019>d seriously consider a third party candidate if it were trump vs. clinton in november,<u+201d> mr. langer notes. <u+201c>indeed, in another question, 45 percent of non-trump supporters flatly said they would not vote for him in november if he were the party<u+2019>s nominee.<u+201d> the prospect of trump causing a formal split in the republican party seems as real as ever, if he goes into the convention with a majority of delegates <u+2013> or close to a majority. but party regulars are at a loss over how to resolve the issue. advisers to trump and cruz categorically rule out the idea of even allowing kasich to compete in a contested convention, according to politico. <u+201c>if trump has hundreds more delegates than the runner-up (almost certainly, cruz) and he is over 1,000 delegates, it will be exceedingly difficult to deny him the nomination,<u+201d> write analysts at <u+00a0>sabato<u+2019>s crystal ball. <u+201c>in fact, to do so would be to guarantee a meltdown of historic proportions in cleveland.<u+201d> in tuesday<u+2019>s democratic contests, former secretary of state clinton beat senator sanders handily in florida, ohio, and north carolina, beat him narrowly in her native state of illinois, and fought him to a virtual tie in missouri. most important, she recovered her balance after losing to the vermonter the week before in a stunning upset in michigan. sanders had hoped to continue his rust belt incursion with victories in illinois, ohio, and missouri with his message of economic populism and opposition to free trade but he failed. clinton won big among racial and ethnic minorities, as usual, but in ohio, also won big among white voters, a cohort she had lost in michigan. among white women in ohio, she won 61 percent to 39 percent, langer notes. <u+201c>clinton found her footing in ohio on issues, as well, to some extent defanging sanders on free trade <u+2013> she won antitrade voters, a group sanders took in michigan,<u+201d> langer writes. <u+201c>as many saw him as too anti-business as saw her as too pro-business. and four in 10 called his policies unrealistic, twice as many as said so about hers.<u+201d> in her victory speech tuesday evening, clinton pivoted toward a general election message that echoed both sanders and trump, repeatedly promising creation of <u+201c>good jobs.<u+201d> <u+201c>good paying jobs are the tickets to the middle class and we're going to stand up for the american middle class again,<u+201d> clinton said. <u+201c>we're going to stand up for american workers and make sure no one takes advantage of us, not china, not wall street, and not overpaid corporate executives.<u+201d> still, despite a big deficit in pledged delegates, sanders is certain to take his fight for the democratic nomination all the way to the party<u+2019>s convention in philadelphia in july. he is still drawing large crowds, and money is still pouring into his campaign. the bottom line rule for candidates in both races is this: have money, will campaign.

new math: where trump, clinton stand after primary victories

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

60.0

8.0

6683.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

462.0

1.0

0.0

106.0

0.0

41.0

15.0

11.0

6.0

14.0

13.0

17.0

8.0

30.0

38.0

43.0

466.0

107.0

41.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the pair noted that although legislators are allowed to look at the text of the tpp in a secure room, they are only allowed to do so under restrictions that make it nearly impossible to understand what they are reading. first, they can't bring expert staffers with them unless they have the right clearances, and the aides who have expertise in various relevant areas -- for instance on the impacts on the environment or labor law -- generally are not cleared. "we are unable to take any notes or consider what we just saw unless we have a photographic memory and, unfortunately, i do not," manchin said. "i've tried to remember and look at things i knew i was looking for, but still it's almost impossible to walk out of there having the ability to sit down and evaluate what you just saw." "i taught the uniform commercial code and the bankruptcy code. i am not afraid of hollow, technical language. but you've got to be able to dig into it, you've got to be able to spend time and figure out the cross-references and the terms of art," warren said. "it's difficult, thick stuff to read, and it's set up to minimize your capacity to track all the pieces about what's happening." "right now if you<u+2019>re a staff member of the [finance] committee you can look at it. but if you<u+2019>re one of my people who works for my intelligence staff that has clearance to see what<u+2019>s going on with nukes or weapons anyplace in the world, or what<u+2019>s going on with the cia, they can do that, but they can<u+2019>t look at that real precious agreement that they<u+2019>ve drawn up," he said. hatch admitted somewhat uncomfortably on thursday that it's hard to know what's in the deal. "look, i don't know fully what's in tpp myself," he said. "and i'm going to be one of the most interested people on earth when that comes." but, he argued that the bill moving through the senate to give obama his fast-track authority had plenty of transparency, since it requires any trade deal such as tpp to be made public 60 days before signing it with foreign partners, and another 60 days before congress votes. hatch conveniently overlooked that fact that even if lawmakers find specific problems in a deal, there would be little they could do to stop it because fast-track allows no amendments and no filibusters. the solution of posting a partially redacted version of a deal for everyone to see -- before the president gets fast-track powers -- isn't a new idea, or even a democratic one, manchin said. he pointed out that president george w. bush released the text of the free trade of the americas agreement. "he did this months before he was granted fast-track authority," manchin said. "he wasn't afraid to let us see. he wasn't afraid of the american public to know what was in that ... it didn't squelch the deal. it didn't harm anything." manchin and warren had hoped to pass their bill as an amendment to the fast-track legislation, but it was clear after the senate advanced the measure thursday that they wouldn't get the chance. instead, they tried to get consent from hatch to vote on it separately. the administration has taken unprecedented steps to increase the transparency of our trade negotiations. that includes working with congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle to make the full text of negotiations and easy to understand summaries of each chapter available to all members of congress in the capitol for the first time ever. tpp negotiations are still ongoing. once tpp is completed the public will have months to review the text online before it is even signed by the president and then more time before a vote is ever taken.

senate debate reveals absurd level of trade deal secrecy

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

6.0

56.0

8.0

3630.0

0.0

216.0

0.0

67.0

0.0

41.0

4.0

10.0

4.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

26.0

12.0

29.0

216.0

67.0

41.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump's proposal to ban all muslims from entering the united states would go nowhere in the senate, the republican leader there says. "we're not gonna follow that suggestion that this particular candidate made," senate majority leader mitch mcconnell told cnn's jake tapper sunday on "state of the union." "it would prevent the president of afghanistan from coming to the united states. the king of jordan couldn't come to the united states," he said. "obviously we're not going to do that." mcconnell had previously criticized trump's proposal to temporarily block muslims from entering the united states in the wake of terror attacks in paris and california. despite his rebuke of trump's proposal, mcconnell wouldn't weigh in any further on the presidential race sunday.

mcconnell: trump's muslim ban wouldn't pass the senate

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

54.0

8.0

784.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

46.0

1.0

0.0

17.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

7.0

4.0

6.0

48.0

18.0

9.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

president obama named federal appeals judge merrick garland on wednesday as his pick to succeed antonin scalia on the u.s. supreme court <u+2013> setting up a showdown with republicans who have vowed to block the choice. obama, who said he went through a rigorous and comprehensive screening process, said garland would bring <u+201c>integrity, modesty and an even-handedness<u+201d> to the supreme court. <u+201c>i said i would take this process seriously, and i did,<u+201d> obama said at the rose garden ceremony. yet within minutes, republicans doubled down on their opposition to confirming any nominee in an election year, insisting that the vacant seat not be filled until a new president is sworn in. <u+201c>it is a president<u+2019>s constitutional right to nominate a supreme court justice and it is the senate<u+2019>s constitutional right to act as a check on a president and withhold its consent,<u+201d> senate majority leader mitch mcconnell said on the senate floor. obama, anticipating the swift resistance, urged republicans to reconsider, adding it would be unprecedented for garland not to at least get a hearing. <u+201c>i hope they<u+2019>re fair. that<u+2019>s all,<u+201d> obama said. <u+201c>to give him a fair hearing and up or down vote.<u+201d> obama said earlier wednesday that it was both his <u+201c>constitutional duty to nominate a justice and one of the most important decisions that i <u+2013> or any president <u+2013> will make.<u+201d> he added, <u+201c>i<u+2019>m doing my job. i hope that our senators will do their jobs, and move quickly to consider my nominee.<u+201d> a senate confirmation is required for any nominee to join the bench. before the announcement, sen. mike lee, r-utah, also told fox news that neither he nor his gop colleagues on the senate judiciary committee would back down and declared once more he would stop the nomination from going forward. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve been clear,<u+201d> lee said of his plan to reject garland<u+2019>s nomination. garland has served under both republicans and democrats. he clerked for the court<u+2019>s liberal icon, justice william j. brennan jr. in 1997, 32 republicans voted in favor of his nomination, including seven who are still members of the senate. garland was mentioned as a possible nominee when justice paul stevens retired in 2010. the vacancy ultimately went to justice elena kagan. sen. chuck schumer of new york, the no. 3 democratic leader, called garland's section, "a bipartisan choice," adding: "if the republicans can't support him, who can they support?" senate minority leader harry reid, who spoke to obama wednesday morning, said in brief remarks on the senate floor that republicans must act on the president's choice. "he's doing his job this morning, they should do theirs," said the nevada democrat. if confirmed, garland would be expected to align with the more liberal members, but he is not viewed as down-the-line liberal. particularly on criminal defense and national security cases, he's earned a reputation as centrist, and one of the few democratic-appointed judges republicans might have fast-tracked to confirmation -- under other circumstances. but in the current climate, garland remains a tough sell. republicans control the senate, which must confirm any nominee, and gop leaders want to leave the choice to the next president, denying obama a chance to alter the ideological balance of the court before he leaves office next january. republicans contend that a confirmation fight in an election year would be too politicized. ahead of obama's announcement, the republican party set up a task force that will orchestrate attack ads, petitions and media outreach. the aim is to bolster senate republicans' strategy of denying consideration of obama's nominee. the party's chairman, reince priebus, described it as the gop's most comprehensive judicial response effort ever. on the other side, obama allies have been drafted to run a democratic effort that will involve liberal groups that hope an obama nominee could pull the high court's ideological balance to the left. the effort would target states where activists believe republicans will feel political heat for opposing hearings once obama announced his nominee. for obama, garland represents a significant departure from his past two supreme court choices. in nominating sonia sotomayor and elena kagan, the president eagerly seized the chance to broaden the court's diversity and rebalance the overwhelming male institution. sotomayor was the first hispanic confirmed to the court, kagan only the fourth woman. garland -- a white, male jurist with an ivy league pedigree and career spent largely in the upper echelon of the washington's legal elite -- breaks no barriers. at 63 years old, he would be the oldest supreme court nominee since lewis powell, who was 64 when he was confirmed in late 1971. presidents tend to appoint young judges with the hope they will shape the court's direction for as long as possible. those factors had, until now, made garland something of a perpetual bridesmaid, repeatedly on obama's supreme court lists, but never chosen. but garland found his moment at time when democrats are seeking to apply maximum pressure on republicans. a key part of their strategy is casting republicans as knee-jerk obstructionists ready to shoot down a nominee that many in their own ranks once considered a consensus candidate. in 2010, utah sen. orrin hatch called garland "terrific" and said he could be confirmed "virtually unanimously." the white house planned to highlight hatch's past support, as well as other glowing comments about garland from conservatives. a native of chicago and graduate of harvard college and harvard law school, garland clerked for two appointees of republican president dwight d. eisenhower -- the liberal u.s. supreme court justice william brennan jr. and judge henry j. friendly, for whom chief justice john roberts also clerked. in 1988, he gave up a plush partner's office in a powerhouse law firms to cut his teeth in criminal cases. as an assistant u.s. attorney, he joined the team prosecuting a reagan white house aide charged with illegal lobbying and did early work on the drug case against then-d.c. mayor marion barry. he held a top-ranking post in the justice department when he was dispatched to oklahoma city the day after bombing at the federal courthouse to supervise the investigation. the case made his career and his reputation. he oversaw the convictions of timothy mcveigh and terry nichols, and went on to supervise the investigation into unabomber ted kaczynski. president bill clinton first nominated him to the d.c. circuit in 1995. his prolonged confirmation process may prove to have prepared him for the one ahead. garland waited 2 1/2 years to win confirmation to the appeals court. then, as now, one of the man blocking path was iowa sen. charles grassley, argued he had no quarrel with garland's credentials, but a beef with the notion of a democratic president trying to fill a court he argued had too many seats. grassley ultimately relented, although he was not one of the 32 republicans who voted in favor of garland's confirmation. nor was sen. mitch mcconnell, the other major hurdle for garland now. the republicans who voted in favor of confirmation are sen. dan coats, sen. thad cochran, sen. susan collins, sen. orrin hatch, sen. jim inhofe, sen. john mccain, and sen. pat roberts. the associated press contributed to this report.

obama nominates merrick garland to supreme court, sets up senate showdown

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

73.0

8.0

7364.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

501.0

0.0

147.0

0.0

48.0

17.0

24.0

4.0

14.0

12.0

10.0

9.0

34.0

28.0

63.0

506.0

147.0

48.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

an already ugly presidential campaign has descended to a new level <u+2014> one where the question is no longer whether donald trump can be stopped on his march to the republican presidential nomination, but whether it is possible to contain what he has unleashed across the country. violence at trump<u+2019>s rallies has escalated sharply, and the reality-show quality of his campaign has taken a more ominous turn in the past few days. on saturday, a man charged the stage in dayton, ohio, and a swarm of secret service agents surrounded the gop front-runner. later saturday at a trump rally in kansas city, the candidate was repeatedly interrupted by protesters, who were then removed from the venue. outside the rally, police said they used pepper spray to control crowds. kansas city police said that two protesters were arrested. the racially tinged anger that has both fueled trump<u+2019>s political rise and stoked the opposition to it has turned into a force unto itself. it has also brought a reckoning from his three remaining rivals for the republican nomination, who are shedding their fear of provoking trump and of alienating the raging slice of their party<u+2019>s base that has claimed him as its leader. but trump should not be viewed in isolation or as the product of a single election, president obama said saturday at a fundraiser in dallas. obama said those who <u+201c>feed suspicion about immigrants and muslims and poor people, and people who aren<u+2019>t like <u+2018>us,<u+2019> and say that the reason that america is in decline is because of <u+2018>those<u+2019> people. that didn<u+2019>t just happen last week. that narrative has been promoted now for years.<u+201d> this year<u+2019>s presidential campaign, however, seems to have fallen into a bottomless spiral. a low point came friday night. where trump has delighted in mocking hecklers <u+2014> and condoning attacks on them by his supporters <u+2014> he was forced to cancel a rally at the last minute after protesters turned up by the thousands. that set off a chaotic scene in the arena at the university of illinois at chicago that left a handful injured and thousands agitated. [campaign 2016 is on a dangerous descent] trump<u+2019>s continued domination of the gop race suggests that there are no guardrails left in politics. party elders and his opponents assumed that at some point, he would self-destruct. but he has defied just about every norm, and it has redounded to his benefit. his candidacy and the sentiment it provokes have also stirred disturbing historical comparisons. gop political consultant stuart stevens, who was a top strategist for 2012 nominee mitt romney, said trump<u+2019>s rhetoric is <u+201c>almost verbatim<u+201d> what segregationist george wallace was saying in his third-party 1968 presidential campaign. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t know what<u+2019>s in trump<u+2019>s heart, but i don<u+2019>t care. what he<u+2019>s saying is really hateful,<u+201d> stevens said. <u+201c>what did the democratic party do with wallace? they rejected him.<u+201d> some on the right accused the anti-trump forces who shut down the rally in chicago of being the true culprits, who denied the gop front-runner an opportunity to exercise his constitutional right to free speech. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s sad, number one, that you have protesters that resort to violence, that resort to threats of violence that resort to yelling and screaming and disruption to silence speech that they don<u+2019>t like,<u+201d> said sen. ted cruz of texas, who is running a distant second to trump in the gop primaries. but trump<u+2019>s republican opponents <u+2014> all of whom have pledged to support trump if he gets the nomination <u+2014> said that the new york billionaire cannot be held blameless. <u+201c>i think it is also true that any campaign, responsibility begins and ends at the top,<u+201d> cruz said. <u+201c>look at the rhetoric of the front-runner in the presidential campaign,<u+201d> sen. marco rubio of florida said saturday. <u+201c>this is a man who at rallies has told his supporters to basically beat up the people who are in the crowd and he<u+2019>ll pay their legal fees. someone who<u+2019>s basically encouraged the people in the audience to rough up anyone who stands up and says something he doesn<u+2019>t like. <u+201c>i still at this moment continue to intend to support the republican nominee, but it<u+2019>s getting harder every day.<u+201d> ohio gov. john kasich condemned trump for creating a <u+201c>toxic environment<u+201d> that has led supporters and protesters to <u+201c>come together in violence,<u+201d> but he, too, stopped short of saying he would not support his republican rival if trump secures the party<u+2019>s presidential nomination. their increasingly pointed criticism of trump comes at a crucial moment in the gop race, with primaries being held tuesday in five states that could either propel trump to the nomination or give life to the effort to stop him. most closely watched will be florida and ohio, which are considered must-wins for home-state candidates rubio and kasich. and for the first time in this electoral season, delegates will be awarded on a winner-take-all basis, which means that victories by trump would accelerate his efforts to secure the nomination. trump has won gop contests in 15 states, accumulating an estimated 458 republican delegates of the 1,237 he needs. on thursday, the candidates held their final debate before the next round of primaries, and they managed to remain civil to one another and focused on their substantive differences. during the debate, trump was asked about an incident in which a supporter at a rally in fayetteville, n.c., punched a protester. <u+201c>there is some anger. there<u+2019>s also great love for the country. it<u+2019>s a beautiful thing in many respects. but i certainly do not condone that at all,<u+201d> trump said. now, the outbreak of violence in chicago had again drawn focus to trump<u+2019>s temperament and character, as well as whether he has played a role in inciting his supporters. [after months of playing protesters to his advantage, donald trump is overpowered in chicago] for months, trump has been able to control <u+2014> and even employ as foils <u+2014> the hundreds of protesters who show up to his rallies to oppose what they consider divisive and racist. trump often says that he loves having protesters at his rallies, that they make his rallies fun. plus, the interruptions are an opportunity to show him bossing around and mocking liberals, often bellowing, <u+201c>get <u+2019>em out!<u+201d> in the past two weeks, however, these interruptions have increasingly eaten into trump<u+2019>s speaking time and become more violent. the trump supporter who punched the protester in north carolina was charged with assault. asked about the criticism from other republican candidates following the chicago cancellation, trump campaign manager corey lewandowski mocked them: <u+201c>do they have protesters at their events? do they have any people at their events?<u+201d> lewandowski <u+2014> who has been accused of and denies manhandling a female reporter at a trump event <u+2014> also said his candidate does not plan to do anything to calm his supporters. <u+201c>the american people are angry,<u+201d> lewandowski said. <u+201c>they<u+2019>re upset at the way this country has been run. they<u+2019>re upset that this country is being taken advantage of by every other country in the world. and they<u+2019>re tired of not being proud to be americans.<u+201d> as for trump, he insisted that his supporters had been blameless in chicago. he accused backers of democratic presidential candidate bernie sanders, a vermont senator and democratic socialist, of inciting the violence. <u+201c>my people are nice,<u+201d> trump said at his rally in dayton. <u+201c>thousands and thousands of people, they caused no problem. they were taunted, they were harassed by these other people. these other people, by the way, some represent bernie, our communist. .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. he should really get up and say to his people: <u+2018>stop. stop.<u+2019> <u+201d> sanders retorted in a statement issued by his campaign: <u+201c>as is the case virtually every day, donald trump is showing the american people that he is a pathological liar. obviously, while i appreciate that we had supporters at trump<u+2019>s rally in chicago, our campaign did not organize the protests.<u+201d> <u+201c>what caused the protests at trump<u+2019>s rally is a candidate that has promoted hatred and division against latinos, muslims, women, and people with disabilities, and his birther attacks against the legitimacy of president obama,<u+201d> sanders added, referring to trump<u+2019>s false assertions that obama was born in africa and was therefore disqualified to be president. democratic front-runner hillary clinton also jumped into the fray. <u+201c>the ugly, divisive rhetoric we are hearing from donald trump and the encouragement of violence and aggression is wrong, and it<u+2019>s dangerous,<u+201d> she said at an appearance in st. louis. <u+201c>if you play with matches, you<u+2019>re going to start a fire you can<u+2019>t control.<u+201d> the decision to cancel the rally on friday was made by the trump campaign, not the agencies charged with keeping him safe. trump requested secret service protection in october and was granted a detail of agents in early november. government officials have said their role is only to protect trump and that any decisions to throw out the hecklers and protesters at trump rallies are made by the campaign or groups hosting the events. secret service agents intervene only, officials have said, if someone verbally or physically threatens the candidate. after the man tried to breach the barricades around trump on saturday, he was charged with disorderly conduct and inciting panic by the dayton police, according to an official familiar with the matter. montgomery county sheriff phil plummer identified the man as thomas dimassimo of fairborn, ohio, the associated press reported. <u+201c>i was ready for him, but it<u+2019>s much easier if the cops do it, don<u+2019>t we agree?<u+201d> trump said after the man was hauled away. <u+201c>and to think i had such an easy life! what do i need this for, right?<u+201d> tumulty reported from washington. johnson reported from chicago and delreal from dayton. also contributing to this story were ed o<u+2019>keefe in largo, fla.; abby phillip in st. louis; philip rucker in cleveland; jim tankersley in sharonville, ohio; juliet eilperin and david weigel in washington; and katie zezima in ballwin, mo.

trump has lit a fire. can it be contained?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

7.0

42.0

8.0

10056.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

0.0

664.0

0.0

212.0

2.0

0.0

72.0

25.0

18.0

15.0

29.0

10.0

17.0

7.0

30.0

51.0

50.0

668.0

212.0

74.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the republican presidential race has often resembled the hunger games, with a crowded field of bloodthirsty candidates kept alive by the grace of their patrons on the sidelines. the story has taken a darker turn in recent weeks, with panic creeping in as donald trump continues to step over the bodies of more electable candidates. but with no clear winner emerging from new hampshire, republican donors, who were once ready to coalesce around marco rubio, have pressed pause on their money to see if a candidate will walk out of south carolina with enough strength left to take down trump (and ted cruz, who follows in his wake). while several donors indicated that they would stick with their preferred candidates for now, others<u+2014>including donors for chris christie, who dropped out of the race earlier this week<u+2014>have no idea if their investments will pan out, especially after what amounted to a three-way tie for third in new hampshire. <u+201c>the feeling after new hampshire is that it couldn<u+2019>t have gone better for donald trump and it<u+2019>s not just the margin that he won by, it<u+2019>s the finishing order,<u+201d> one republican leader who regularly speaks to donors told the hill, adding that john kasich, a candidate whom he viewed as unelectable, had only muddled things further by coming in second. (kasich did get a big boost from former christie mega-donor ken langone, who announced on thursday that he would support the ohio governor.) that feeling is magnified among bush donors, many of whom had hoped that he would have <u+201c>died quietly in new hampshire,<u+201d> the same source told the hill, but who feel pressured after his slim victory over rubio to give more money. <u+201c>i have not talked to a single bush donor who was giddy about tuesday night,<u+201d> he added. another source noted that their fund-raising outlook was so dismal that bush<u+2019>s campaign-finance chairman, woody johnson, had asked the finance committee to bring in just one $2,700 check<u+2014>the maximum amount an individual can donate to a single candidate<u+2014>per week for the next five weeks. despite the dual threat of trump and cruz, potential donors for rubio, the onetime establishment golden child, are also sitting on the sidelines after a disastrous debate performance kicked the florida senator to fifth place in new hampshire. <u+201c>the rubio team didn<u+2019>t understand the gravity of the punch he had taken and the need to correct course. that worries a lot of people,<u+201d> the republican leader added. <u+201c>[donors] are not abandoning [rubio] but they need to see him steady things this week.<u+201d> nevertheless, even as the three establishment candidates attempt to devour each other in south carolina, 85 percent of the donor class and the insiders polled by the politico caucus remain confident that trump will never get the nomination, pointing to their collective firepower (were they ever to join forces) and the fact that his popularity appears limited to roughly one-third of the population. <u+201c>that means two-thirds of the vote is <u+2018>not trump,<u+2019><u+201d> a south carolina republican told politico, insisting that the math shook out. <u+201c>if he has a ceiling, then as others drop out, cruz or one of the establishment candidates can pass him. we are down to six in south carolina<u+2014>let<u+2019>s see if he grows this time.<u+201d> but sam wang, head of the princeton election consortium, ran a more statistical analysis, and concluded that the math was not as simple as the insiders<u+2019> poll suggests. <u+201c>with the republican field so divided after new hampshire, the path for anyone other than trump requires nearly all candidates to drop out,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>however, after getting 3-4 convention delegates each on tuesday, cruz, john kasich, jeb bush, and marco rubio all have reasons to stay in. under these conditions, trump wins.<u+201d> trump's path to victory, wang suggests, would be a delegates game: though he has only one-third of the vote on average, that still gives him 50 percent of delegates through super tuesday. according to his calculations, two candidates must drop out before super tuesday, and one alternative must emerge by march 14, after several more rounds of primaries, for a <u+201c>not-trump<u+201d> victory to be possible, meaning that the republican establishment and donor class cannot afford to wait for their preferred candidates to emerge to face off against trump and cruz. <u+201c>ballpark, i would guess that if trump has a majority of delegates by march 1st and he still has two opponents afterward, his probability of securing the nomination will be about 80%,<u+201d> he wrote, adding: <u+201c>however, this is now my intuition talking.<u+201d>

donors to g.o.p. candidates: you<u+2019>re on your own

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

47.0

8.0

4537.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

288.0

0.0

89.0

0.0

32.0

8.0

14.0

4.0

7.0

9.0

7.0

8.0

19.0

14.0

28.0

290.0

89.0

32.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the european country working hardest to solve the mideast migrant crisis is now stepping back. germany has been receiving up to 10,000 migrants per day, but that can't go on for long. meanwhile, some lawmakers in the united states warn president barack obama's recent decision to receive more refugees could lead to another major terror attack. one of the top destinations for syrian refugees, germany originally opened its doors to the migrants fleeing from their countries. now, it's implementing temporary border controls, with many calling it a strong message to the rest of the european union to step up and start shouldering some of the burden. "there's a need for shelters and care and i hope it will start during the next days. munich can do a lot but we can't accomplish it all by ourselves," dieter reiter, the mayor of munich, said. stephan bauman, the head of world relief, an evangelical non-profit that cares for refugees and immigrants, is calling on the u.s. government to allow 200,000 refugees into the country. bauman is also calling on every u.s. church congregation to adopt a refugee family. watch his interview with cbn news. german interior minister thomas de maiziere said that according to eu rules, his country isn't technically responsible for the migrants. they're supposed to be registered and processed in the first eu country they arrive in. de maiziere's urging other countries to apply those rules and stop allowing the people seeking protection to choose the country they get it from. many migrants have refused to register in countries like greece or hungary because they're afraid it would keep them from being granted asylum in other eu states. germany suspended train services to and from austria for 13 hours and is now imposing strict document checks for people entering the country. officials say such measures are necessary for germany to limit the number of people coming in and reinstate a more orderly entry process. meanwhile, some american lawmakers are voicing concern that president obama's decision to allow 10,000 refugees to be brought to the united states will put the country in danger. "i take isis at its word when they said, in their words, 'we'll use and exploit the refugee crisis to infiltrate the west.' that concerns me," house homeland security committee chairman mike mccaul, r-texas, told abc's "this week." mccaul said that while the united states is a compassionate nation, this move by the president could be a very "reckless and dangerous policy." he also said the united states has already disrupted a security threat to pope francis's upcoming visit to washington. over the weekend, al qeada's leader called on young muslim men to carry out lone wolf attacks in america and other western countries.

allowing refugees in us an open door to terror?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

6.0

47.0

8.0

2785.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

186.0

0.0

49.0

0.0

30.0

4.0

11.0

1.0

12.0

5.0

4.0

15.0

14.0

26.0

189.0

49.0

30.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

ferguson, mo. -- less than 24 hours after two officers were hit by gunfire, a quieter protest took place outside police headquarters thursday night, with no problems or arrests in this city torn by racial unrest. missouri highway patrol and st. louis county police took over security for the evening. as the clock approached midnight, organizers dismissed the people who had gathered. earlier on thursday, u.s. attorney general eric holder sharply condemned the shootings of police wednesday night as a "disgusting and cowardly attack." "what happened last night was a pure ambush," holder said. "this was not someone trying to bring healing to ferguson. this was a damn punk, a punk, who was trying to sow discord." president obama, in an appearance on the jimmy kimmel live tv show thursday night, said, "we don't yet know what happened" in the shooting but offered his prayers to the wounded officers and their families. "there's no excuse for criminal acts,'' the president said. "they're criminals. they need to be arrested. and then what we need to do is make sure that like-minded, good-spirited people on both sides, law-enforcement who have a terrifically tough job and people who understand they don't want to be stopped and harassed because of their race, that we're able to work together to try and come up with some good answers." mayor john knowles was notified that the highway patrol and county would take over the security duties from the ferguson police department "until further notice," the county police department said in a statement. sgt. brian schellman, a spokesman for the st. louis county police, said investigators interviewed several people regarding the shooting but made no arrests. just after 8 p.m., clergy gathered blocks from the ferguson police department for a candlelight vigil. they prayed for the safety of the demonstrators and for the health of the two wounded police officers. missouri gov. jay nixon was in st. louis county to be briefed by local officials. he said the highway patrol and county police will be sending additional officers in anticipation of more protests thursday night. "i ask missourians to join me in calling for calm in the wake of the cowardly and reprehensible ambush of two police officers who were acting to protect the public," nixon said. "i also thank all the brave law enforcement officers who selflessly risk their lives each day to keep communities safe." routine police service remains in the hands of the embattled ferguson police department, whose chief resigned in the wake of scathing criticism of the force by the justice department for racially biased policing. st. louis county police chief jon belmar had called for a "measured response" to the shooting of the two officers around midnight wednesday, but reserved the right to beef up security as warranted. the two officers "took a very hard hit" and were seriously injured, but will not sustain long-term injuries, he said. they were released from the hospital thursday morning. "we were lucky by god's grace that we didn't lose two officers last night," belmar told reporters. "we could have buried two police officers over this. ... it's a miracle we haven't had any instances similar to this in the summer and fall." police recovered shell casings at the scene and fanned out across the city looking for the shooter. a st. louis county swat team stormed a home about four blocks from the police station thursday morning, clambering on top off the roof, ksdk-tv reported. neighbors said three people were taken from the home in handcuffs. police said they were taken in for questioning, but there were no immediate arrests. the shootings occurred as demonstrators were winding up a protest following the resignation of the city's police chief in the wake of a scathing justice department report alleging bias in the police department and court. "this is really an ambush," he said. "you can't see it coming. you don't understand that it's going to happen and you're basically defenseless from the fact that it is happening to you at the time. " belmar said one of the officers, a 32-year-old, seven-year veteran from nearby webster groves, was shot below his right eye. the bullet lodged near his right ear, he said. the second officer, a 41-year-old with 14 years on the st. louis county force, was hit in the shoulder by a bullet that came out his back. at the time of the shooting, belmar said, the number of demonstrators had dwindled from around 150 to about 75 and the number of police at the scene had dropped to about 40. he said the two wounded officers were standing in a line of 20 to 25 other officers when three or four shots were fired from about 125 feet away. "i feel very confident that whoever did this was there for the wrong reason, not the right reason, and came there for whatever nefarious reason it was," belmar said in a news conference. "but i do feel like there was an unfortunate association with that gathering." jeff roorda, who heads the st. louis police officers association, said the shooting sent a chill through the law enforcement community. he called on state and county officials to restrict protests to daytime hours. "this is a very volatile situation," roorda said. "you have outside agitators racing to be here. this isn't safe for police, community or peaceful protesters." roorda said he's spoken to the police officer who was shot in the shoulder and that he was doing remarkably well considering the circumstances. police officers at the scene last night said were jolted by the timing of the incident. the protests were breaking up and only a few dozen demonstrators were left when the shots were fired. "there's been a recurring phenomenon throughout the protests where you see the flash-points, the bad things coming ," he said. "but last night, as it was described to me by many of the cops that were here here, it wasn't that way. the crowd was just mulling around. a lot of the protesters were starting to disperse. no one saw it coming." the shootings came hours after ferguson officials announced that police chief thomas jackson, who will step down march 19. jackson, 57, became the third top city official to leave following the release of the justice department report. judge ronald brockmeyer and city manager john shaw resigned earlier this week. lt. col. al eickhoff is serving as acting chief until the city completes a nationwide search for a new police chief, the city said in a news release. jackson will receive a severance payment of approximately $100,000 and health insurance for one year. belmar said he has called for a "measured response" to the shootings, but reserved the right to call upon the highway patrol for additional help if necessary. he said police are planning to assess their security plans outside the ferguson police department and talk to protesters and community leaders about how to move forward. when asked about security in the area moving forward, belmar said it is very difficult to sustain this kind of situation without injuries to the public or police officers. "i think we need to re-evaluate that, and that's one of the things i've been doing since my phone rang at midnight tonight," said belmar. "we're going to be looking for different ways to approach this. obviously my first priority is to the community, but that's followed very very closely to my police officers and making sure that they're able to do what they're supposed to do out there in a safe manner." earlier in the day, obama condemned the shootings, saying in a tweet that "violence against police is unacceptable." "our prayers are with the officers in mo," he wrote. "path to justice is one all of us must travel together." st. louis county executive steve stenger said doesn't believe the shooting will set back any gains made in the city. "i don't consider this incident a setback toward healing," he said. "i don't believe it's going to affect any healing process that is going on in the community. i think the community at large is fully supportive of these police officers and probably wishes the very best for them." knowles and the ferguson city council released a statement thanking law enforcement agencies that have helped the city in the past seven months and reaching out the community. "while we respect the right to peacefully protest, we cannot continue to move forward under threats of violence and destruction to our community," the statement said. "we ask our residents and clergy in this area to partner with us as we make our way through this process." the shootings came as a shock to the crowds gathered outside the police department. deray mckesson, 29, one of the most visible protesters in ferguson, was sitting in his car and about to tweet that the crowd was thinning out when he heard about four gunshots to his right. "it was like pow, pow, pow, pow <u+2014> like four consistent shots," he said. "i was looking straight up at the police department and i see an officer fall and i see officers surround him." mckesson said protesters, who had been gathered at the police department since 8 p.m. wednesday, hit the ground as soon as the shots rang out and scattered trying to get to safety amid the chaos. "every single gun any officer had was drawn and they were all behind something," he said, adding that officers ran and ducked behind cars and the department building. st. louis county alderman posted a vine showing people crawling on the ground after police reacted to the gunshots. heather de mian, 44, of st. charles, mo., was live streaming the scene outside of the police department when the shots rang out. "those gunshots went right past my head," said de mian, who is in a wheelchair and tried to duck down. "i tried to go down low so my head wasn't sticking out." she said soon after the shots a swarm of st. louis county police crime scene cars showed up and later, a group of officers marched up the hill on a side street in the direction of where the sound of gunshots had come from. meanwhile, de mian is adamant that the shooters were not with demonstrators. "the shots came from a block away from the protests," she said. "it's incredibly dangerous to try to link the protesters to this without evidence. it could be someone trying to frame the protesters or someone who was aiming at the protesters and was a bad shot. whoever shot put everyone's life in danger." an aug. 9 shooting of unarmed african-american teen michael brown by white ferguson police officer darren wilson set off weeks of unrest and violence in the st. louis suburb. brown's family issued a statement thursday condemning the police shootings. "we reject any kind of violence directed toward members of law enforcement," the statement said. they also denounced the actions of "stand-alone agitators" who might try to derail the a peaceful movement addressed at police brutalit wilson was not charged in brown's killing and the justice department found no reason to bring civil rights charges against him.

holder: ferguson shooter 'disgusting,' 'punk'

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

6.0

45.0

8.0

11080.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

739.0

0.0

245.0

0.0

78.0

26.0

21.0

10.0

33.0

11.0

26.0

13.0

38.0

49.0

46.0

743.0

245.0

78.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

when the news broke that our french colleagues had been killed, a deep feeling of pain overwhelmed my newsroom<u+2014>and an immediate feeling of fear. all of a sudden it seemed possible that we might be next, that something might happen to us here in the heart of berlin, only a hundred yards or so away from checkpoint charlie. if there is any paper in europe that comes close to charlie hebdo, it is the one that i run , die tageszeitung, which means simply "the daily," or taz for short. both papers are an outcome of the student revolution founded in the spirit of the <u+201c>68 generation.<u+201d> in my country it was clearly a reaction to germany's authoritarian leaders, some of whom were holdovers and ex-nazis from the past. like charlie hebdo, taz often uses satire to challenge the so-called mainstream. we, too, have run satirical images of the prophet muhammad. we decided to republish charle hebdo<u+2019>s first post-massacre cover on wednesday not only to express our solidarity but also as a proof that terrorists won't stop us from printing whatever we want to say<u+2014>about islam or any religion. after the massacre in paris last week, it didn<u+2019>t take long before a police car was parked in front of our building. since the morning of january 8 heavily armed police have stood in front of the entrance, their machine guns at the ready. the alert has risen since the attack on a german paper in hamburg in the early sunday morning hours where, fortunately, nobody was hurt. there are some picture posts on facebook making fun of this scene at taz, which itself sounds like a satire since we are known as some of the loudest critics of the police in germany, and many of our editorials have urged police not to wear weapons in public. and yet here we are ... do not misunderstand me: we are grateful for the help. instead of throwing stones at the police<u+2014>as the founding generation of this paper might have done<u+2014>we offer hot tea and coffee in the icy winds of germany's capital as a little gesture of thankfulness. still, passing this bristling display of weapons every time we enter our building does not give us a feeling of being well-protected. for the past week i have seen my colleagues constantly gathering together and asking each other questions like: <u+201c>how do you feel? do we have to worry? are you also afraid?<u+201d> in every meeting we discuss what this fear does to us and if it influences our way of reporting or our editorial board. is the freedom of speech already hurt by the strongest weapon terrorists have: the weapon of fear? so far we resist. but the coming days and months will answer that question. this terror act in france hits europe in a crucial time. we are experiencing a huge shift in the political landscape that endangers the whole order of the last two decades. we see a strong increase of the right in many european countries, in france, but also in great britain and italy. and even in germany, which is doing financially so well, we have the new party alternative f<u+00fc>r deutschland, or afd, with its very strong anti-european attitude. all those parties have one political approach in common: they not only use the real problems of unemployment and poverty for their political goals, but they are the masters at blaming the european union, with its open markets and borders, for everything bad that is happening. their goal is to re-nationalize their countries at the cost of the eu, to strengthen the power of their own countries and parliaments, and to fight the liberalization of their societies. many of them have strong resentments against gay people and are deeply racist. they dream of the old order, when white male christians from the upper class ruled their countries. the wall fell 25 years ago. and that means that there are many people old enough to vote who never experienced the cold war, who never lived in a divided europe and therefore easily forget the beauty of our union. that makes it easier for some right-wing politicians to exploit these acts of terrorism for their goals. the blood in paris wasn<u+00b4>t even dry when the first german politician, alexander<u+00a0>gauland, one of the top candidates<u+00a0>from the alternative f<u+00fc>r deutschland party, claimed this killing as a proof that germany has the right to fear the influence of muslim culture and that germans have the right, and the obligation, to defend their christian heritage. whether they are germans, french or brits, europe is afraid of more terror from islamic terrorists. but the answer cannot be to add fuel to the so-called clash of civilizations. the answer only can be to analyze the reasons and march toward solutions. the paris terrorists were french. they were born in france, went to french schools. europe has to learn that muslims are not foreigners, not outsiders. that they are as french and german and british as christians, jews or atheists are. the european union, the house of one unified continent, is the main reason we have been living in peace for nearly 70 years. our union was the only possible way to heal the wounds of world war ii and to build trust in each other. we must understand this and urgently fight together to overcome the big challenges of these days<u+2014>especially the rise of violence perpetrated by terrorists<u+00a0>and autocratic states like russia closer to home. next week the cia torture reports will be printed in german. this report is the proof of how a country can be misled when it becomes ruled by fear. we, as european journalists, must beat back this fear and stand up for our free democracies, for taz,<u+00a0>and for the policemen outside our doors keeping us safe,<u+00a0>for the freedom to choose your own religion, and for our union here in europe.

<u+2018>are we next?<u+2019>

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

14.0

8.0

5685.0

0.0

371.0

0.0

128.0

0.0

51.0

18.0

6.0

24.0

9.0

17.0

4.0

23.0

34.0

35.0

371.0

128.0

51.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

gay rights won't fade as a political issue. the republican base won<u+2019>t let it. prominent republicans calculated that if the supreme court ruled that same-sex marriage was constitutionally protected, the issue would become settled law and disappear politically. this would be welcome, they reasoned, as the party was on the wrong side of the politics and history. then indiana enacted a religious freedom restoration act last month that critics said would allow private enterprises to discriminate against gays and lesbians. arkansas followed with a similar measure. after vehement opposition from businesses in both states, republican governors forced modifications that make it more difficult to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. but a leading indicator was the reaction of republican presidential candidates: they leapt to defend the initial indiana law. jeb bush expressed all-out support in an interview on a conservative radio talk show and then modified his position at a silicon valley fundraiser. social conservatives are determined to keep this issue alive, reasoning that the environment that produced changes in the laws last week will become more favorable after they have had time to stir up the grassroots. that will pose problems for republicans in a general election; the politics have changed dramatically compared with a decade ago, when republican political guru karl rove used the issue against democrats. crucial elements of the republican base haven't changed. most, not all, evangelical/born-again white christians are troubled by gay rights. this group accounts for more than 40 percent of the republicans nationally and for more than 50 percent of the vote in the important early iowa and south carolina republican presidential tests. that guarantees ted cruz and mike huckabee will make these issues uncomfortable for jeb bush and scott walker. nineteen states have religious freedom laws, and some go beyond the 1993 federal law. four -- connecticut, illinois, new mexico and rhode island -- have measures that include a ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation. but indiana postponed the matter of prohibiting anti-gay discrimination. in georgia recently, as the legislature drafted a measure supported by religious conservatives, a republican tried to amend it to clarify that it wouldn<u+2019>t permit discrimination against gays and lesbians; the bill<u+2019>s sponsor suggested that would defeat the law's purpose. the politically powerful religious or conservative right can be expected to set litmus tests for republican presidential candidates: opposing new anti-discrimination measures designed to protect gays and lesbians and guarding against what they warn is a slippery slope on matters including adoptions by same-sex couples. many of these social activists sincerely worry that it's white people of religion who face discrimination; some believe that same-sex marriage, gay rights in general, violate the law of god. there are parallels to race. religion was often cited as a rationale for segregation; if god intended whites and blacks to be together, why did he create different races, fundamentalists would ask. there were similar issues with discrimination in public accommodations and housing. it wasn<u+2019>t until 1967 that the supreme court gave constitutional protection to interracial marriage. today, these issues create a genuine schism among republican constituencies, with much of the business community showing support for gay rights. these aren't just west coast or high-tech firms, but companies based in middle america, such as eli lilly and wal-mart. the religious right sees this as a battle between economics and morality. politically, however, the most telling reaction to the indiana law was that of well-known athletes usually not considered part of any left-wing crusade. the basketball great charles barkley suggested the collegiate basketball tournament shouldn't be held in indiana, and pat haden, former all-star quarterback and now athletic director at the university of southern california, boycotted an athletic event in the hoosier state.

gay rights will continue to divide republicans: albert r. hunt

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

62.0

8.0

4129.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

336.0

0.0

59.0

0.0

38.0

11.0

19.0

2.0

12.0

4.0

3.0

30.0

17.0

39.0

342.0

59.0

38.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

"thank you," said the man. i was standing outside of the offices of charlie hebdo covering the aftermath of the terrorist attacks for cnn. he was thanking me just for being here, just for covering the event and its aftermath, what le monde referred to as france's september 11. and his appreciation was echoed by french citizen after french citizen. the rally sunday for unity drew 1.5 million people in paris and more than twice that nationwide; it was like nothing i've ever seen or covered. our nation's oldest ally stood firm. a young muslim frenchwoman held a sign saying "je suis juif." a man and his son came over to me holding a sign saying "i disapprove of what you say but i will defend to the death your right to say it," beseeching me to share their message with the american people. and world leaders were standing together amidst a procession that included francois hollande of france, angela merkel of germany, david cameron of great britain, mahmoud abbas of the palestinian authority and benjamin netanyahu of israel, along with the leaders of mali, jordan and turkey. it is no small thing for the king of jordan, a direct descendent of the prophet mohammed, to march in a rally prompted by the murders of people who mocked islam as well as of innocent jews -- all of whom were killed by islamic extremists. the united states, which considers itself to be the most important nation in the world, was not represented in this march -- arguably one of the most important public demonstrations in europe in the last generation -- except by u.s. ambassador jane hartley, who may have been a few rows back. i didn't see her. even russia sent foreign minister sergey lavrov. i say this as an american -- not as a journalist, not as a representative of cnn -- but as an american: i was ashamed. i certainly understand the security concerns when it comes to sending president barack obama, though i can't imagine they're necessarily any greater than sending the lineup of other world leaders, especially in aggregate. but i find it hard to believe that collectively president obama, vice president joe biden, secretary of state john kerry, secretary of defense chuck hagel, treasury secretary jack lew and attorney general eric holder -- who was actually in france that day for a conference on counterterrorism -- just had no time in their schedules on sunday. holder had time to do the sunday shows via satellite but not to show the world that he stood with the people of france? there was higher-level obama administration representation on this season's episodes of "the good wife" on cbs. i get that the president visited the french embassy in washington and that secretary of state john kerry spoke in french, and i certainly understand that the american commitment to security in europe rivals no other. but with all due respect, those are politicians spending money that they didn't earn and sending troops whom they don't know. and this is not just a matter of the current occupant of the white house. i find it hard to believe that speaker of the house john boehner and new senate majority leader mitch mcconnell had more worthy pursuits on sunday than standing side-by-side with our french brothers and sisters as they came together in an inspirational way. after september 11, the first world leader to visit the united states was france's jacques chirac, though the most forceful conversation about france in congress that i can recall came a few years later during debate over whether to invade iraq and revolved around renaming pommes frites in the u.s. house cafeteria. and i'm frankly floored that not one of the people who is contemplating running for president in 2016 has yet to even tweet on the subject of the momentous demonstration in paris, much less attend france's biggest rally in the history of the republic. i imagine that hillary clinton and her husband are kicking themselves for not hopping on a corporate jet to get here. can you picture hillary and bill walking in the front row, arm-in-arm with netanyahu and hollande? chris christie, scott walker and paul ryan attended the green bay-dallas football game sunday and at least one of them sent his potential rivals mischievous tweets as if they were contemplating running for president of beta theta pi. why? i hope it's not american arrogance, a belief that everyone should express shock when something bad happens to us but that our presence at an international rally is worth less than a ticket to the green bay game when the victims speak in accents we don't understand. i suppose there's always the risk that coming to an event like this as an american leader and getting stuck in the third row could be embarrassing or could lead to accusations that you're trying to capitalize on a tragedy. but that's not how it would have been interpreted in france. people here are happy that americans care. they're eager and appreciative of any evidence of that. and i know it exists -- although american twitter seemed much more focused on the golden globes than anything else sunday night. i only wish our leaders had done a better job of showing solidarity with the passion for the freedoms exemplified by the rally.

jake tapper: where were u.s. leaders in paris march?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

52.0

8.0

5211.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

343.0

1.0

0.0

93.0

0.0

50.0

12.0

18.0

8.0

12.0

15.0

9.0

10.0

33.0

21.0

50.0

345.0

94.0

50.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump appeared to use his foundation to launch his presidential campaign ambitions, according to filings analyzed by realclearpolitics. from 2011 to 2014, trump sent at least $286,000 to conservative or policy groups. the contributions corresponded to speaking engagements and endorsements as trump cast himself as a potential presidential candidate, according to the analysis. if the contributions were solely to benefit trump, they could be in violation of irs laws that prohibit private foundations from self-dealing. one source with trump ties told realclearpolitics, "he was politically active starting in 2011," and started to make "strategic donations" then. most of the donations came from trump personally to campaigns and political parties. donations sent to nonprofit arms of conservative policy groups were sent through trump's foundation. "if he could do 501(c)(3) to 501(c)(3), he did it that way," the source said, referring to the tax code designation for nonprofit organizations. realclearpolitics' analysis found that in 2013, trump's foundation donated to the family leader, 501(c) 4 established to "develop, advocate, and support legislative agenda at the state level." organizations with 501(c ) 4 designation can engage in limited political activity. trump's filing was not properly noted, if it was sent as a donation to the group's nonprofit or to the organization. "improper reporting is still a violation of tax law," charity law specialist rosemary fei told realclearpolitics. the report pointed to other examples that appear to show trump using his foundation to curry political favor, such as trump's foundation donating $100,000 to the citizens united foundation ahead of a "cattle call" of possible republican presidential candidates sponsored by the group, which trump attended. in 2013, trump's foundation donated $50,000 to the american conservative union foundation. one source said, "everyone's too smart to say, 'donate and we'll let you speak.' it was kind of understood." trump spoke at the economic club in washington, d.c. dec. 15, 2015, and his foundation sent a check to that group for $6,000 that appeared on its 2014 filing. "if what he talked about was promoting his candidacy or fundraising for his campaign, it is not only self-dealing, but potentially involves the foundation in making a grant to support political activity. that's prohibited," fei said. voters appear concerned about the trump foundation, according to a morning consult poll. by comparison, democratic presidential candidate hillary clinton's clinton foundation has more support. voters in the poll believe the trump foundation's purpose is: the poll was taken before new york's attorney general ordered the trump foundation to stop soliciting in the state.

report: trump used foundation money to launch presidential campaign

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

67.0

8.0

2793.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

199.0

0.0

39.0

0.0

31.0

5.0

6.0

1.0

4.0

7.0

4.0

5.0

18.0

5.0

23.0

204.0

39.0

31.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

republican leaders have yet to spell out their strategy for tackling obamacare now that they control congress, and so far have pursued a piecemeal approach -- but are crossing their fingers that a looming supreme court case will give them an opening to unravel the law. gop leaders huddled this week at a retreat in hershey, pa., where the affordable care act was a chief topic. wisconsin rep. paul ryan, chairman of the house ways and means committee, on thursday called obamacare a "terrible law" that needs to be replaced because it's "beyond repair." but ryan also said he did not have a "timeline" for doing so. leaders still say they want to repeal the law. but while the 114th congress kicked off with major statements on energy and immigration -- the house voted recently to approve the keystone xl pipeline and reverse president obama's immigration actions -- proposals pertaining to obamacare have been far more modest. last week, the house passed a bill that would define a full-time worker under the health law as working 40 hours per week. the law currently uses a lower threshold -- part of a formula that determines which businesses have to provide health insurance to workers. lawmakers are concerned the provision is leading businesses to cut back hours to skirt the mandate. and legislation has been proposed in both chambers to repeal the law's 2.3 percent tax on medical devices such as x-ray equipment and artificial joints. the senate version has bipartisan support and could get a vote in the coming weeks. critics of the law say the two provisions hurt the economy and job growth, though president obama would likely veto both. sen. john mccain, r-ariz., is also trying again to pass a bill that would allow americans to opt out of the law's individual requirement to buy insurance -- a more sweeping measure. republicans still want to do more. ryan said thursday that obamacare would be replaced with something that gives americans more choices and lowers costs, improves their access to care and is "truly patient centered" -- an apparent reference to gop planning for the wild card in all this, the supreme court case. the case, called king v. burwell, could impact the legality of billions of dollars' worth of subsidies through the law. and republicans want to be ready with a plan if the ruling goes against the administration. plaintiffs argue the law doesn't allow the federal government to offer subsidies to customers in states that don't operate their own insurance exchanges. the white house has downplayed the case, saying such lawsuits "won't stand in the way of the affordable care act and the millions of americans who can now afford health insurance because of it." the white house argues the subsidies are being directed in accordance with the "intent of the law." earlier thursday, a republican aide who attended a session on obamacare said the discussions centered on the best strategy in the context of that high court case. the aide said ryan told fellow lawmakers they must move quickly to show the country that republicans have a patient-focused response to the case. opening arguments are scheduled to start in march with a decision expected in june. a victory for the plaintiffs could have a huge impact on the law, sending enrollment plummeting. ryan also updated fellow lawmakers about upcoming obamacare deadlines and gave them an overview of the law since it took effect in january 2014 -- including updates on subsidies, exchange programs and cuts to medicare and medicaid. later thursday, house speaker john boehner emerged from the close-door meetings at the retreat to echo ryan's remarks. "our challenge, our opportunity is to pass common-sense solutions ... that repeal obamacare and replace it with patient-centered reforms that will help our constituents have better access to high-quality health care in america," he said at a joint press conference with senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. earlier this year, mcconnell made clear that congress will vote on either repealing or "taking out pieces" of obamacare, but he and fellow senators had little to say at the retreat about a unified strategy. to be sure, the gop senate caucus' most conservative members will be pushing for full repeal. texas sen. ted cruz, a potential white house candidate, said on monday that republicans will get "walloped" in the 2016 elections if they ignore voter mandates after midterms that gave them senate control, which includes the push to repeal obamacare. at least one republican senator, bill cassidy of louisiana, has proposed legislation to repeal the law. and this week, the influential conservative group club for growth sent a letter to mcconnell and boehner urging them to "continue to be diligent" in their repeal efforts.

republicans start small on obamacare, cross fingers for court intervention

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

74.0

8.0

4806.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

301.0

0.0

84.0

0.0

38.0

10.0

18.0

3.0

10.0

5.0

9.0

2.0

25.0

16.0

35.0

306.0

84.0

38.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

killing obama administration rules, dismantling obamacare and pushing through tax reform are on the early to-do list.

trump relents after withholding medical records

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

47.0

8.0

117.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

10.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

14.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

<u+201c>rules are made to be broken<u+201d> is a saying that has many variations, but perhaps no one has summed up hillary clinton<u+2019>s attitude (and bill<u+2019>s, too) about rules more than the late science-fiction writer, robert a. heinlein, who said: <u+201c>i am free, no matter what rules surround me. if i find them tolerable, i tolerate them; if i find them too obnoxious, i break them. i am free because i know that i alone am morally responsible for everything i do.<u+201d> in its report on how hillary clinton handled her <u+201c>private<u+201d> emails while serving as secretary of state, the state department<u+2019>s inspector general (ig) has found that hillary clinton disregarded cyber security guidelines when she used a private computer server. she continues to deny she did anything wrong and falsely claims she turned over <u+201c>all<u+201d> of her emails to the state department after she left office. in fact, she, or members of her team, deleted about 30,000 of them before an investigation of her practices began. the ig<u+2019>s report chides her, saying she should have <u+201c>preserved any federal records she created and received on her personal account by printing and filing those records with the related files in the office of the secretary. at a minimum, secretary clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with department business before leaving government service and, because she did not do so, she did not comply with the department<u+2019>s policies that were implemented in accordance with the federal records act.<u+201d> there are federal penalties for tampering with a smoke detector on an airplane and disobeying flight attendants that can include fines and even jail time. isn<u+2019>t what hillary clinton did far worse than that, if she potentially compromised u.s. secrets? the ig also says she stonewalled requests by the government for access to her server, which was in her chappaqua, n.y., home, with another discovered at an unsecured location in a denver bathroom closet. marcel lazar, the romanian computer hacker calling himself <u+201c>guccifer,<u+201d> claims to have hacked into clinton<u+2019>s servers. he pled guilty to the charge before a virginia judge this week. might there also be chinese and russian hackers out there who<u+2019>ve also had a look at clinton<u+2019>s emails? hillary clinton has claimed she only used private email for her daughter<u+2019>s wedding and yoga classes. who believes that, other than her partisan supporters and uninformed voters? high-ranking government officials are aware of the regulations governing their tenure while in office and their responsibilities for the handling of records once they leave it. will hillary clinton<u+2019>s failure to comply with the state department<u+2019>s policies on records necessarily lead to an indictment? that is what an fbi investigation is attempting to determine. hillary clinton has invoked the <u+201c>everybody has done it<u+201d> defense, but again that<u+2019>s not true. she often cites former secretary of state colin powell, who also used a private email server, but as a wall street journal editorial notes, mr. powell<u+2019>s use of private email was limited, and he never set up an unsecure server in his home, not to mention a denver bathroom. something else from the ig<u+2019>s report that firmly rebuts hillary clinton<u+2019>s defense: <u+201c>notification is required when a user suspects compromise of, among other things, a personally owned device containing personally identifiable information.<u+201d> but the ig found <u+201c>no evidence<u+201d> that she or her aides complied. for years the clintons have skirted laws and practiced disinformation, rhetorical gymnastics (<u+201c>it depends on what the meaning of the word <u+2018>is<u+2019> is.<u+201d>) obfuscation, changing the subject, non sequiturs and anything else that might block their enrichment or achievement of political goals. this time, hillary clinton should not be allowed to get away with it, nor should she have her incidents of malfeasance rewarded by being elected president of the united states. cal thomas is america's most widely syndicated op-ed columnist. he joined fox news channel in 1997 as a political contributor.<u+00a0>his latest book is "what works: common sense solutions for a stronger america" is available in bookstores now. readers may email cal thomas at [email protected].

we can't reward hillary clinton with the white house for breaking all the rules

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

6.0

79.0

8.0

4188.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

309.0

2.0

0.0

79.0

2.0

0.0

34.0

8.0

4.0

8.0

7.0

10.0

4.0

18.0

23.0

315.0

81.0

36.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

what an amazing and weird moment in political history we<u+2019>re living through. we all saw something on thursday night that, in over 200 years of american existence, no one had ever seen before: a woman accept a major-party nomination for the presidency. that<u+2019>s an incredible achievement, attained by the nominee through years of struggle, setbacks, and steady forward motion. the magnitude of hillary clinton<u+2019>s accomplishment guarantees her a spot in the history books, and those of us who witnessed her make that history won<u+2019>t soon forget the impression it left. the weird counterpoint to the democrats<u+2019> elevation of a candidate who represents continued social progress is, of course, the republicans<u+2019> nomination of donald trump. the democratic convention was intended to serve both as a response to the fear and disunity offered by trumpism, and a push to steal from the republicans all the themes and campaign messages trumpism eschews: optimism, patriotism, and a sense of shared purpose. clinton<u+2019>s speech accepting the democratic party<u+2019>s nomination was the capstone of that effort, serving as a call to unity, offering an outstretched hand to those alienated by trump, and sketching out an optimistic vision of america<u+2019>s future. hillary<u+2019>s provocations of trump were relentless. she said he <u+201c>wants to divide us from the rest of the world and from each other.<u+201d> she quipped that <u+201c>he<u+2019>s taken the republican party a long way: from <u+2018>morning in america<u+2019> to <u+2018>midnight in america.<u+2019><u+201d> trump<u+2019>s megalomaniacal declaration that <u+201c>i alone can fix it<u+201d> was slung around his neck as clinton framed it as fundamentally alien to the american tradition. <u+201c>he<u+2019>s forgetting every last one of us,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>americans don<u+2019>t say: <u+2018>i alone can fix it.<u+2019> we say: <u+2018>we<u+2019>ll fix it together.<u+2019><u+201d> in tackling trump<u+2019>s fitness for the office, clinton made enthusiastic use of the zinger. <u+201c>imagine him in the oval office facing a real crisis,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>a man you can bait with a tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons.<u+201d> the obvious intent behind all this was to goad trump into responding and validating the attack. (his surrogates tried responding to the speech in real time, and they faceplanted in characteristic fashion.) the trump flensing also provided the necessary contrast for hillary to sketch out her bright-and-happy vision for the country. after ticking off a laundry list of intractable problems <u+2013> rising inequality, decreased social mobility, stagnant wages, and persistent gridlock <u+2013> hillary went long on optimism: but just look at the strengths we bring to meet these challenges. we have the most dynamic and diverse people in the world. we have the most tolerant and generous young people we<u+2019>ve ever had. we have the most powerful military. the most innovative entrepreneurs. the most enduring values. freedom and equality, justice and opportunity. we should be so proud that these words are associated with us. that when people hear them, they hear america. so don<u+2019>t let anyone tell you that our country is weak. we<u+2019>re not. don<u+2019>t let anyone tell you we don<u+2019>t have what it takes. we do. no one heard anything like that at the republican convention, and voters didn<u+2019>t hear much in the way of sustained optimism from any republican candidate this cycle. so hillary grabbed that ball and ran with it, making a direct appeal to voters who<u+2019>ve been left cold by the gop<u+2019>s embrace of trump: <u+201c>whatever party you belong to, or if you belong to no party at all, if you share these beliefs, this is your campaign.<u+201d> it was a bold move on clinton<u+2019>s part, not least because there are a lot<u+00a0>of voters who don<u+2019>t feel especially optimistic right at this moment for all the reasons hillary laid out in her speech: stuck wages, limited mobility, and exclusion from economic growth. as an answer to these frustrations, clinton<u+00a0>explicitly acknowledged that the democrats have been kinda terrible at speaking to those concerns. <u+201c>some of you are frustrated, even furious. and you know what? you<u+2019>re right,<u+201d> she said. <u+201c>democrats are the party of working people, but we haven<u+2019>t done a good enough job showing that we get what you<u+2019>re going through, and that we<u+2019>re going to do something about it.<u+201d> all told, hillary clinton<u+2019>s speech to the 2016 democratic national convention was a singular moment in american politics. we saw the first female presidential nominee from a major party telling voters that things will be better, and that we can all do better, and that the best way to get there is to reject the allure of a would-be strongman and work together. we saw a woman reach an unprecedented height in american politics and offer herself as the alternative to a candidate who busily plumbs new depths. it was quite a thing to see.

hillary accepts the nomination: a bold speech for a singular moment in american history

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

87.0

8.0

4708.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

314.0

2.0

0.0

89.0

0.0

37.0

14.0

20.0

6.0

13.0

17.0

9.0

23.0

50.0

323.0

91.0

37.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

george p. bush, the son of former florida governor jeb bush (r), said sunday on abc's "this week" that his father is seriously considering a presidential run in 2016. "i think it's more than likely that he's giving this serious thought in moving forward ... that he'll run," he said. bush also said the family "would be behind [jeb bush]<u+00a0>100 percent if he decides to" run.

george p. bush says father jeb bush is <u+2018>seriously considering<u+2019> 2016 run

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

71.0

8.0

374.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

34.0

1.0

0.0

10.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

2.0

41.0

11.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

ben carson has had a very strange couple of weeks. let<u+2019>s take a moment to review precisely what the arguable front-runner for the 2016 republican presidential nomination has undergone since the cnbc debate in late october. at that debate, he was challenged on his relationship with a shady nutritional supplement company that sells fart pills to very sick people. carson denied any relationship existed, despite the many paid speeches and promotional videos he did for the group. in the days that followed, it was revealed that carson thinks the great pyramids of egypt were built by joseph to store grain <u+2013> a biblical literalist view that is supported by precisely zero historical or archaeological evidence. but hey we<u+2019>re not done yet. the day after the pyramid thing, carson got into a fight with cnn when the network reported that childhood friends and acquaintances of the candidate don<u+2019>t remember carson being the violent and troubled youth he claims to have been. this led to the bizarre spectacle of carson, a candidate for the presidency, forcefully insisting that he did in fact try to stab a person, and any suggestion that he didn<u+2019>t try to murder someone with a knife is a <u+201c>smear.<u+201d> this string of scarcely believable events culminated on friday with a politico report that carson<u+2019>s oft-repeated claim to have been offered a <u+201c>full scholarship<u+201d> to west point was untrue. west point doesn<u+2019>t offer <u+201c>full scholarships.<u+201d> everyone accepted to west point has their entire room, board and tuition covered. but saying you were enticed with a <u+201c>full scholarship<u+201d> is a great, almost-honest way to make it look like the military academy was beating down your door. all this follows months and months of other weird carson behaviors <u+2013> his repeated and inappropriate invocations of the nazis and slavery to attack policies he doesn<u+2019>t like, his bible-based tax plan, his <u+201c>book tour<u+201d> in the middle of the campaign, his insistence that a muslim should not be president, his ignorance of basic economic matters, his plan to have the government investigate <u+201c>propaganda<u+201d> on college campuses, and the fact that his <u+201c>campaign<u+201d> increasingly resembles an elaborate direct-marketing scam. and that<u+2019>s only a few select tiles from the rich mosaic of ben carson<u+2019>s strangeness. one might think that a candidate with this many warning lights and trouble signs would have crashed fairly quickly, or never even taken off in the first place. but the republican party and its voters have declared war on the very concept of competent, reliable governance, which has provided space for <u+201c>outsider<u+201d> candidates who are manifestly unfit for the office of the presidency to seize the gop electorate and retain a firm hold on it. now that he<u+2019>s at the top of the gop 2016 polling, he<u+2019>s facing a great deal more scrutiny, and people are starting to wonder whether carson will survive as a front-runner for the presidential nomination. the obvious impulse for conservatives is to rally around carson and protect him from the nasty liberal media and its pernicious biases. the derpier corners of the conservative media are already doing exactly that, arguing that media scrutiny of carson<u+2019>s past is motivated by racial hatred and part of a broader scheme to attack black conservatives. others found themselves harshly criticizing carson after the politico story and predicting his demise, only to reverse course and turn their fire back on politico for overselling the story and toning down some of the more incendiary language in its initial report. it would be very easy for carson to escape from this in the minds of conservatives as just another victim of what they see as a biased and antagonistic press. but when you look at the entire ben carson experience to date, what<u+2019>s really needed is more scrutiny, and more and better explanations for why, exactly, he thinks he<u+2019>s ready to serve as president. carson rose to prominence based on his inspiring life story and his willingness to be harshly critical of president obama. but, as paul waldman notes, the more we hear from carson on policy matters and issue of national importance, the more it becomes clear that he frequently has no idea what he<u+2019>s talking about, is <u+201c>impervious to evidence,<u+201d> and is unwilling to entertain the notion that his convictions may be wrong. his policy platform is stuffed with grandiose and insane proposals that are completely untethered to the reality of how governments work and violate principles of basic mathematics, but he argues that he<u+2019>ll accomplish them anyway because he believes in himself. it feels safe to assume, given the mood of the republican electorate, that carson won<u+2019>t have too difficult a time enduring these unwelcome probes into his background and bugnuts worldview. donald trump<u+2019>s enduring popularity in the republican primary already stands as a stinging indictment of the direction the gop has taken. the ben carson phenomenon has thus far endured in spite of his whacky ideas, offensive remarks, flirtations with authoritarianism, and shady campaign practices. i wouldn<u+2019>t be at all surprised if he continues his rise, abetted by conservatives who want to shield him from the scrutiny he deserves. watch to find out what we know about carson<u+2019>s alleged violent incidents:

ben carson<u+2019>s harsh spotlight: an unfit candidate struggles under intense scrutiny

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

81.0

8.0

5256.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

360.0

0.0

113.0

1.0

0.0

39.0

20.0

12.0

29.0

10.0

18.0

10.0

17.0

46.0

41.0

365.0

113.0

40.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

with the provisions of the patriot act which allow the national security administration to collect data on americans' phone calls newly expired, a new cnn/orc poll finds 61% of americans think the law ought to be renewed, including majorities across party lines, while 36% say it should not be reinstated. republican leaders in the senate are working to pass a bill to reinstate the law, after delays led by sen. rand paul (r-kentucky), whose presidential campaign has been noted for its appeal to independent voters and younger republicans, and other surveillance opponents led to the law's expiration at 12:01 a.m. monday. but paul's stance on the issue is unlikely to bring him many fans within his own party. support for renewal peaks among republicans, 73% of whom back the law. democrats largely agree, with 63% saying the law should be renewed. independents are least apt to back it, with 55% saying renew it and 42% let it expire. liberals, regardless of partisan affiliation, are most likely to say the law should not be renewed, 50% say so while 48% want to see it renewed. about half of americans, 52%, say that if the law is not renewed, the risk of terrorism here in the u.s. would remain about the same. still, a sizable 44% minority feel that without the law, the risk of terrorism will rise. just 3% feel it would decrease. related: rand paul vs. the gop field on nsa the sense that the risk will rise is greatest among republicans, 61% of whom say the risk of terrorism will climb if the nsa is unable to collect this data. among democrats and independents, less than half feel the risk of terrorism would increase if the program ended. the poll reveals a steep generational divide on the data collection program. among those under age 35, just 25% say the risk of terrorism would increase without nsa data collection. that more than doubles to 60% among those age 65 or older. those under age 35 are also split on whether the law should be renewed at all, 50% say it should be renewed while 49% say it should not. among those age 35 or older, 65% back renewal of the law. president barack obama's reviews for handling government surveillance of u.s. citizens have worsened since june 2013 when the nsa data collection program was first revealed. overall, 67% say they disapprove of the president's handling of government surveillance of u.s. citizens, up from 61% in june 2013. much of that decline comes among his fellow partisans. in june 2013, 61% of democrats approved of the president's handling of surveillance issues, that has fallen to 49% in the new poll. obama fares better on his handling of terrorism generally, 45% approve and 51% disapprove. the cnn/orc poll was conducted by telephone may 29-31 among a random national sample of 1,025 adults. the margin of sampling error for results based on the full sample is plus or minus 3 percentage points. related: patriot act provisions have expired: what happens now?

poll: 6 in 10 back renewal of nsa data collection

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

11.0

49.0

8.0

2947.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

161.0

0.0

47.0

0.0

22.0

3.0

7.0

1.0

7.0

0.0

9.0

16.0

15.0

163.0

47.0

22.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump swept to a convincing victory in the nevada presidential caucuses here tuesday evening, building a broad coalition that left his top two rivals trailing far behind and accelerating his march to the republican nomination. an angry electorate hungry for a political outsider in the white house catapulted trump to his third straight win in the gop primary race as the billionaire mogul used visceral rhetoric to tap into anxieties about the economy, terrorism and illegal immigration. the breadth of trump<u+2019>s support was staggering, with sens. marco rubio (fla.) and ted cruz (tex.) running more than 20 percentage points behind him in second and third place respectively, despite their aggressive campaigning across nevada in the closing days. retired neurosurgeon ben carson and ohio gov. john kasich, who did not mount a serious campaign here, were far behind in single digits. <u+201c>if you listen to the pundits, we weren<u+2019>t expected to win too much <u+2014> and now we<u+2019>re winning, winning, winning the country,<u+201d> a triumphant trump declared to supporters at his las vegas victory party. vowing to continue his streak and quickly secure the nomination, trump added: <u+201c>it<u+2019>s going to be an amazing two months. we might not even need the two months, folks.<u+201d> the nevada results underscored the challenge for trump<u+2019>s opponents to slow his momentum heading into next week<u+2019>s super tuesday, when 11 states will hold primaries and caucuses in a single day. cruz and rubio, who have been fighting bitterly to become the chief alternative to trump, were dealt a serious blow by nevada<u+2019>s voters. after watching with disappointment as returns rolled in, cruz all but ignored rubio as he addressed supporters at his las vegas caucus night party. he argued that the real race for the nomination had come down to him and trump. <u+201c>the undeniable reality that the first four states have shown is that the only campaign that has beaten donald trump and the only campaign that can beat donald trump is this campaign,<u+201d> cruz said, referencing his win in the kick-off iowa caucuses. rubio, who jetted out of nevada tuesday morning for campaign events in minnesota and michigan, made no public comments on the results. his advisers had been hopeful that he might finish strongly here, perhaps even win, considering that he spent part of his childhood in las vegas and enjoyed the support of much of the state<u+2019>s political establishment. high voter turnout apparently overwhelmed organizers at some caucus locations. there were isolated reports of double voting, dwindling supplies of paper ballots and what a republican party official described as <u+201c>chaos<u+201d> at a couple of caucus sites here in clark county, the state<u+2019>s biggest population center. some volunteer caucus officials collecting ballots wore trump campaign t-shirts and hats, sparking an outcry and allegations of voter intimidation on social media. the nevada republican party<u+2019>s caucus rules allow precinct workers to wear campaign paraphernalia. <u+201c>volunteers went through extensive training & are doing a great job,<u+201d> read a statement from the party. early entrance polling reported by cnn showed that trump<u+2019>s victory here was commanding, across most demographic groups and among voters of every ideology. nearly six in 10 caucus-goers said they were angry at the federal government, and a similar percentage wanted the next president to be a political outsider. trump reveled in the breadth of his winning coalition. <u+201c>we won the evangelicals, we won with young, we won with old, we won with highly educated, we won with poorly educated <u+2014> i love the poorly educated,<u+201d> trump said, referencing the network entrance polls. <u+201c>and you know what i really am happy about, because i<u+2019>ve been saying it for a long time? forty-six percent with hispanics. number one with hispanics! i<u+2019>m really happy about that.<u+201d> trump, who visited caucus sites tuesday night to motivate his supporters, had led every recent public poll by double digits. enormous crowds packed his rallies, including one monday night in las vegas that drew an estimated 8,000 people. trump<u+2019>s nationalist call to deport illegal immigrants and wall them off resonated with nevada<u+2019>s working-class whites resentful of the booming latino population. but a trump win was not seen as a done deal. the state<u+2019>s caucuses are peculiar and unpredictable <u+2014> and cruz and rubio labored to spring a surprise. cruz worked nevada harder than any other candidate, flying immediately to the state after south carolina<u+2019>s primary saturday and making nine crowded campaign stops. yet a message seemingly tailored to nevada<u+2019>s libertarian-leaning republicans <u+2014> with a particular focus on the federal control of land in the state <u+2014> did not appear to resonate as cruz might have hoped. and the day before the caucuses was squandered when cruz fired his communications director, rick tyler, who had published a false smear of rubio on facebook. the cruz roadshow had a slapdash feel, recycling video endorsements from iowa, one of which ended with: <u+201c>people of iowa, it is time to believe again.<u+201d> in carson city, when state attorney general adam laxalt needed to stall for cruz<u+2019>s arrival, he announced a <u+201c>short video<u+201d> <u+2014> and the audience groaned. in a television ad and in speeches, he promised to hand over to the state the 85<u+00a0>percent of nevada land controlled by the federal government. the idea drew applause <u+2014> and some protesters <u+2014> but did not move votes. like the cruz campaign, rubio<u+2019>s thought it could exploit trump<u+2019>s weak state-level organization with a carefully tailored strategy. rubio targeted nevada<u+2019>s well-organized mormon community, which propelled mitt romney to victory here in 2012, as well as seniors who populate the many retirement communities around las vegas. he also played up his local roots. he lived briefly as a child in las vegas, where his father tended bar at a casino and his mother cleaned rooms at a hotel. during that time, his family temporarily converted to mormonism. dozens of extended family members still live here. <u+201c>he has more family members in nevada than in florida,<u+201d> lt. gov. mark hutchison, rubio<u+2019>s state campaign chairman, said sunday night at a rally in north las vegas. [donald trump is on course to win the delegates he needs for the gop nomination] all along, however, nevada was trump<u+2019>s to lose. he focused on big rallies in las vegas and the reno area <u+2014> the state<u+2019>s two main population centers <u+2014> but he had a ground organization, as well. trump<u+2019>s campaign bought limited television advertising time in las vegas. in its main spot, which also ran in south carolina, a man whose son was murdered by an undocumented immigrant said that trump is <u+201c>the only one<u+201d> he trusts to secure the border. rubio campaigned across nevada with a broader message, trying to appeal to a more diverse cross-section of the electorate, and entrance polls suggested he won among voters who decided in the final days. many of the state<u+2019>s top elected officials backed rubio, including sen. dean heller. gov. brian sandoval, who has angered conservatives over a state tax increase, decided to stay on the sidelines, though he caucused for rubio on tuesday night. rubio attracted some star power, too. donnie wahlberg, a founding member of new kids on the block, a boy band popular in the late 1980s and early 1990s, endorsed him at his sunday night rally. <u+201c>i have never, ever voted for a republican presidential candidate <u+2014> that is, until this year, thanks to marco rubio,<u+201d> wahlberg said. rubio also had the support of rick harrison, a celebrated las vegas pawn shop owner and host of the <u+201c>pawn stars<u+201d> reality-television show. <u+201c>i really think he<u+2019>s got a shot at winning on tuesday,<u+201d> harrison told the sunday night crowd. scott clement in washington contributed to this report.

in nevada caucuses, trump gets a third straight win

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

51.0

8.0

7793.0

0.0

1.0

5.0

0.0

514.0

0.0

133.0

0.0

44.0

18.0

29.0

10.0

21.0

19.0

18.0

13.0

38.0

39.0

57.0

519.0

133.0

44.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

it was on a hot july day in 2013, six months after he joined the senate, that ted cruz began what would become his winning campaign in iowa. at a faith gathering at the des moines marriott, the texan bowed his head as pastors laid their hands on his shoulders to pray. meanwhile, the senator<u+2019>s aides collected their names and email addresses, starting a database of evangelical leaders that would swell over the following months and years. cruz<u+2019>s father, rafael, himself a preacher, looked on, beaming. donald trump began his iowa campaign with a business trip. he landed here in january 2015 to address a land investment expo, but, unbeknownst to the political world, he also started to build his campaign. iowa was a foreign place to the manhattan mogul, and trump knew he needed two things: credibility and a fast tutorial. he sought to gain both through chuck laudner, a veteran iowa operative. trump invited laudner and his wife, stephanie, into his suv. he poured on the charm. he leaned in to listen as laudner explained iowa<u+2019>s political topography <u+2014> the 99 counties, the caucus math, the glut of disengaged iowans who might be persuaded to come out for the right candidate. trump later brought the couple aboard his boeing 757, where they sat in plush leather chairs with gold-plated seat-belt buckles and sipped soft drinks. trump tried to make a deal <u+2014> and laudner was sold. the trump candidacy would soon be born, and the businessman would try to win over iowa just as he had won over laudner: by the power of his own seduction. there was yet a third playbook: that of marco rubio. the senator from florida banked on rising late. his supporters grumbled that he showed disdain for the campaign grind; during a five-day iowa swing in november, he took the third day off to watch football. but rubio believed that iowa could be won with an air war and a late burst of activity. in the final three weeks, his ads were ubiquitous on televisions here. as he crossed the state last weekend sounding an optimistic call for republican unity, his campaign paid to beam a 30-minute video of him on the stump into homes in each of iowa<u+2019>s media markets. rubio<u+2019>s strategy proved highly effective as he surged to a surprisingly strong third place, just one percentage point behind trump. but in a state that has long rewarded conservatives who put religion at the fore, and in a political era dictated by data analytics, cruz won on the strength of both. his message was perfectly tuned to iowa conservatives, he used his web of relationships to try to unite evangelical leaders, and he invested deeply in data and turnout organization. by caucus day, cruz had 11,986 volunteers in iowa and trained captains at nearly all of the 1,681 precincts. <u+201c>we formed the philosophy that our campaign would be waged by neighbors telling their neighbors who to vote for, and we needed to set up every piece and shred of data to allow that to happen,<u+201d> said jeff roe, cruz<u+2019>s campaign manager. that approach was paying off by the beginning of the year. cruz had a clear lead in the polls. his list of endorsements was growing by the day. crowds were swelling, even when he stopped by gas stations near midnight. on a six-day, 28-stop bus tour in early january through far-flung pockets of iowa, cruz sounded triumphant. <u+201c>father god, please, keep this awakening going,<u+201d> he said in mason city. still, two threats started to emerge. rubio<u+2019>s <u+201c>peak late<u+201d> strategy was ramping up, and he started to directly engage cruz with a new fervor. he also began talking about his faith everywhere he went. rubio had a model in sen. joni ernst (r-iowa), who has found support from both the right and the center of iowa<u+2019>s gop going back to 2014, when she navigated a crowded primary in spite of her ties to the party establishment. rubio was guided by ernst<u+2019>s strategist, todd harris, who recognized that suburban republicans could compete with the state<u+2019>s conservative wing. <u+201c>we went fishing where the fishes are,<u+201d> harris said. <u+201c>we knew exactly who the voters we wanted to talk to were. a lot of them were suburban. it<u+2019>s no surprise [rubio] was dubbed the <u+2018>mayor of ankeny.<u+2019> people made a lot of fun at that, but we knew what we were doing.<u+201d> then there was trump. around the beginning of the year, his gut was telling him he could be the winner. he started to attack hard, hitting cruz on his canadian birth, on previously undisclosed loans, on his <u+201c>nasty<u+201d> reputation in washington. <u+201c>i am putting myself a little bit out there,<u+201d> trump said in an interview in the boys<u+2019> locker room at muscatine high school, where he held a rally late last month. <u+201c>if i come in second, i come in second. i think we<u+2019>re going to come in first, frankly. i could say, <u+2018>oh, well, i just want to do well<u+2009>.<u+2009>.<u+2009>.<u+2019><u+2009><u+201d> trump rolled his eyes. <u+201c>i want to win,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>i want to win.<u+201d> hours after trump<u+2019>s june 16 announcement that he was running, he flew to des moines for his first rally. attendees at the hoyt sherman auditorium were revved up. the reigning miss iowa was there. cub scouts recited the pledge of allegiance. with neil young<u+2019>s <u+201c>keep on rocking in the free world<u+201d> blaring, trump was surrounded as he slowly made his way down the aisle. as he left the rally, trump asked campaign manager corey lewandowski, <u+201c>why aren<u+2019>t we going to win this state?<u+201d> trump<u+2019>s on-again, off-again romance with iowa had begun. he would spar with the state<u+2019>s biggest newspaper, the des moines register, and bar its reporters from his events. when ben carson briefly surpassed him in the polls in the fall, he took to the stage in fort dodge and wondered resentfully, <u+201c>how stupid are the people of iowa?<u+201d> but trump always believed he could will himself to victory here. early on, laudner, director of trump<u+2019>s iowa campaign, described the strategy in the state as a <u+201c>parallel campaign.<u+201d> rather than focusing on the roughly 120,000 republicans who regularly caucus, he targeted nontraditional voters <u+2014> <u+201c>people who wouldn<u+2019>t be caught dead at a republican event.<u+201d> that included trump<u+2019>s lieutenants. tana goertz, a political neophyte best known for being a runner-up on trump<u+2019>s nbc show <u+201c>the apprentice,<u+201d> was tapped as iowa co-chair. she used her own celebrity as a former spokeswoman for the bedazzler, a rhinestone-setting machine popular with home-crafts enthusiasts, to draw in volunteers. one brisk night last week, goertz was at trump<u+2019>s iowa headquarters carrying a carton of beads and shiny plastic gems as she headed out to a call center. she rewarded the most dedicated volunteers by bedazzling their <u+201c>make america great again<u+201d> t-shirts and hats. goertz also recorded a cheery youtube video with instructions on how to caucus. it was viewed more than 200,000 times. during the summer, as trump whipped up throngs of fans from alabama to arizona, aides drove a hulking royal-blue bus around iowa, wowing locals and signing up potential supporters. by late august, trump had surged to the lead for the first time in the register<u+2019>s iowa poll. but he had difficulty sustaining his momentum. enthusiasm for carson was growing. trump<u+2019>s flippant comment at an august gathering of evangelicals that he occasionally had a <u+201c>little cracker<u+201d> when he attended church and rarely, if ever, asked god for forgiveness sowed doubts about his character. his operation now had a dozen staffers in iowa, but his organizing was shrouded in mystery. republican operatives became dubious and saw little evidence of a trump ground game. while other campaigns happily showcased packed phone banks and detailed complex data applications, trump<u+2019>s did neither. after years of being a favorite source of quotations for iowa reporters, laudner went, in his words, <u+201c>radio silent.<u+201d> from his first trip to iowa three summers ago, cruz was plotting his path to the caucuses. cruz<u+2019>s father, rafael, journeyed to every corner of the state, again and again, huddling with pastors and preaching in churches. he told the story of his emigration from cuba and testified to ted<u+2019>s character, conviction and conservatism. to run his iowa campaign, cruz interviewed several seasoned consultants but settled on a former baptist pastor named bryan english who had deep ties to the evangelical networks led by rep. steve king and bob vander plaats, head of the conservative group the family leader. english was an unusual hire, but the move underscored cruz<u+2019>s strategy. <u+201c>do you set up your operation with a bunch of khaki-slacks, blue-blazer clowns?<u+201d> roe, cruz<u+2019>s campaign manager, asked. <u+201c>or do you set it up with an activist?<u+201d> back at national headquarters in houston, roe and his team invested several million dollars in a data analytics operation. there were about 175,000 republicans in iowa who had participated in a presidential caucus, and cruz<u+2019>s statisticians and behavioral psychologists set out to learn everything they could about them. the campaign conducted <u+201c>psychological targeting<u+201d> of likely caucus-goers, building its own version of a myers-briggs personality test to categorize republicans so it could send them personally tailored phone calls, mail and other messages. sitting in his office last week, with war-strategy tomes by sun tzu and carl von clausewitz stacked on his desk, english looked out at the bustling phone bank, which on this afternoon included rafael cruz. <u+201c>if anybody goes to caucus and says, <u+2018>i haven<u+2019>t seen ted cruz,<u+2019> i want it to be their fault, not ours,<u+201d> english said. for the first six months of the campaign, he was the lone cruz staffer in iowa, and he worked out of the basement of his home. by august, though, there was a headquarters in urbandale, then more staffers. the team grew to 20, and cruz rented out a dormitory building in des moines <u+2014> <u+201c>camp cruz<u+201d> <u+2014> to house volunteers from texas and other places who came in the final month to help canvass. cruz peeled supporters from former senator rick santorum of pennsylvania and former arkansas governor mike huckabee, who together won the past two caucuses with heavy support from evangelicals and home-school parents. cruz also targeted the libertarian followers of former congressman ron paul, whose son, sen. rand paul (r-ky.), was proving to be less popular than his father in his presidential bid. by january, the cruz campaign had so much information about iowa republicans that it believed it could pinpoint exactly which ones were certain to caucus for cruz, which were undecided and which were leaning toward competitors. ten days before the caucuses, the internal data (based on a turnout of 150,000 people, which would set a new record) showed that 19,186 were certain to be with cruz. about 1,400 had supported him at one point but had turned to another candidate; they got personal phone calls from ted; his wife, heidi; or rafael cruz in a push to win them back. only 15,626 people were certain to caucus for trump, according to the figures. the cruz campaign believed it was winning. the decision facing trump was straightforward: shower attention on iowa in the final days, only to risk a humbling defeat, or turn to new hampshire and south carolina, the next two states to vote, where he enjoyed substantial leads. the real estate magnate chose to roll the dice, propelled, in part, by his irritation at watching television pundits say that cruz was likely to win. so trump reminded iowans, again and again, about cruz<u+2019>s opposition to federal renewable-fuel standards, an issue critical to the state<u+2019>s powerful ethanol industry. in that, trump had an ally in gov. terry branstad (r), who broke his neutrality to call for cruz<u+2019>s defeat. trump also raised questions about cruz<u+2019>s canadian birth, first in an interview with the washington post and then at almost every rally and on tv. the issue dogged cruz: a man dressed in a royal canadian mounted police uniform trailed him, and a super pac supporting rubio ran an ad depicting cruz<u+2019>s face inside canada<u+2019>s iconic maple leaf. huckabee<u+2019>s super pac aired a provocative ad suggesting that cruz was <u+201c>a millionaire that brags about his faith<u+201d> but does not tithe. there were signs that the right was not united behind cruz. former vice-presidential nominee sarah palin, a tea party and evangelical heroine, endorsed trump at a splashy rally in ames. the nightly surveys conducted by the cruz campaign showed that palin was a boon for trump <u+2014> 67 percent of iowa republicans had heard of her endorsement, and of them, 19 percent were more likely to support trump. only 13 percent were less likely to. a few days later, trump won the backing of jerry falwell jr., son of the late televangelist and president of liberty university. the two men campaigned together across iowa the weekend before the caucuses. rubio also was making an overt play for evangelical support, airing ads about his faith and opposition to abortion, and talking on the stump about god as if he were a sunday school teacher. not everyone was sure that rubio<u+2019>s embrace of the religious right would work; some thought he was going too far in his attempt to win iowa. <u+201c>rubio<u+2019>s mistake is that he<u+2019>s moved too far toward the christian right when he should be focused on the mainstream,<u+201d> doug gross, an unaffiliated iowa republican power broker, said in december. attendees at rubio<u+2019>s events often would say that they were drawn to him not out of passion but out of a desire to back someone more moderate who had a chance to win in the general election. at a rubio stop in the late fall in west des moines, carol and pete click said they drove through an icy mush and argued politely along the way about the senator from florida. pete, 65, a retired business owner, said he wasn<u+2019>t enthusiastic, but carol urged her husband to give rubio a second look. <u+201c>all right, i<u+2019>m open to it,<u+201d> pete told his wife. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m tired of the establishment, but trump is a problem and maybe he needs to be stopped here.<u+201d> carol replied with a chuckle. <u+201c>we<u+2019>ve never caucused<u+201d> for someone with a chance of winning the general election. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s about time.<u+201d> in the past two weeks, rubio shifted as he saw an opening with cruz and trump bloodying each other. he kept up his citation of bible passages and channeled voter anger, but began to speak more of his ability to bring the party together as others clashed. he was a bridge-builder with conservative credentials. it worked. entrance polls of caucus-goers showed that he won over voters in iowa who waited until the final week to choose a candidate. on the eve of the caucuses, cruz returned to des moines for a sunday evening rally at the state fairgrounds. the crowd was deeply religious, with children wearing church youth-group t-shirts and two elderly couples up front holding hands in prayer. the videos that played on oversize screens before cruz went on featured soaring guitar chords mixed with testimonials from conservative leaders. rep. steve king rallied the crowd with an introduction that assured people cruz was spoon-fed the constitution and the bible as a child. cruz cast himself as the one true conservative in the race. <u+201c>stand with us. caucus for us. if we stand together, we will win.<u+201d> the crowd roared. a day later, they stood with him.

how ted cruz outfoxed donald trump in iowa

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

6.0

42.0

8.0

15153.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

943.0

0.0

320.0

0.0

103.0

16.0

51.0

10.0

23.0

41.0

15.0

22.0

71.0

35.0

94.0

945.0

320.0

103.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

hillary clinton and the democrats say america is stronger together. but they're not yet living up to the unifying spirit of their slogan. because i needed props for a theatrical performance, i bought campaign paraphernalia from several of the final candidates. so, snuggled together on the shelf behind my desk, i have a trump hat, a hillary t-shirt, a bernie coffee mug, and a couple of cruz buttons. as you can imagine, people are often confused by the collection. they have never seen all four of those items in the same place at the same time. but isn<u+2019>t that actually an accurate portrait of what hillary clinton<u+2019>s slogan, <u+201c>stronger together,<u+201d> means? because of my work, which is building bridges across the partisan divide, i sent my recent book to the clinton and trump campaigns. i received responses from both. from the vice-chair of her campaign, huma abedin, i received a very courteous note thanking me for supporting her candidate and wishing me much success with the book. and from <u+201c>team trump<u+201d> i received a thank you letter and two bumper stickers that say (guess what?): <u+201c>make america great again!<u+201d> but let me set the record straight. when <u+201c>team trump<u+201d> told me they were <u+201c>honored to call me a valuable member of our team and to work with us on rescuing the future of our country,<u+201d> i realized that they had not taken my letter seriously. i was not volunteering to join their campaign. i was asking them to change the way they were campaigning. i asked them to read my book because i wanted their standard-bearer to unite america, not divide it. obviously, they are not listening. and although i strongly prefer secretary clinton to mr. trump for president, i was not volunteering to work on her campaign, either. i sent my book because i wanted the clinton campaign to change its tone as well. i watched clinton speak recently to a crowd of 3,000 ardent fans in a packed high school gymnasium in colorado.<u+00a0> carefully positioned behind hillary so that the cameras would see her, a lone dissenter held up a cloth banner that read <u+201c>stop dnc corruption<u+201d> and shouted out the same message denouncing the democratic national committee. but clinton supporters around her held up their blue placards with the words <u+201c>stronger together<u+201d> so that she and her protest sign soon became invisible. it is just one detail on the campaign trail, of course. but it was a telling moment because it reminds us that <u+201c>stronger together<u+201d> is not just a slogan for getting elected. just as the words <u+201c>make america great again<u+201d> cannot be reduced to blindly endorsing an egomaniac, <u+201c>stronger together<u+201d> cannot be reduced to rallying around one remarkable woman. unless it means something more than that, it feels more like george orwell<u+2019>s <u+201c>newspeak<u+201d> than an uplifting call for unity. the protester being silenced and surrounded was a bernie sanders supporter. she was an older, solitary woman who still harbored a grudge about how her hero from vermont had been treated by dnc chairwoman debbie wasserman schultz and her staff. if the next president of the united states cannot include her in the <u+201c>stronger together<u+201d> tent, then what exactly does <u+201c>together<u+201d> mean? while the sanders dissenter was being escorted from the gym, clinton was repeating one of her favorite lines from her convention speech.<u+00a0> <u+201c>i want to be the president for all americans,<u+201d> she shouted over the raucous applause. <u+201c>democrats, republicans, and independents!<u+201d> despite that admirable rhetoric, neither campaign currently embodies the deepest meaning of <u+201c>stronger together.<u+201d> before clinton spoke, for example, no independents or republicans were invited to speak. to make matters worse, when us rep. ed perlmutter (d) of colorado opened the event, he welcomed the audience by shouting out a welcome to all the <u+201c>colorado democrats<u+201d> present in the room. like 4 in 10 americans, i am an independent. i know for a fact that there were many of us, as well as republicans, in the gym. yet the congressman<u+2019>s welcome was only to members of his party. his words contradicted what clinton was claiming she wanted to be <u+2013><u+00a0>a president for <u+201c>all americans.<u+201d> and it undermined the slogan being waved madly in the air by the crowd. so if <u+201c>stronger together<u+201d> is going to be the mantra for the clinton campaign, let<u+2019>s take it seriously. <u+2022> we need to learn from those who disagree with us, not demonize them. <u+2022> we commit ourselves to developing a healthy relationship with our adversaries, not treating them like <u+201c>enemies.<u+201d> <u+2022> we focus on meeting the challenges facing our country (problem-solving) rather than being <u+201c>right<u+201d> (position-taking). <u+2022> we remember that after campaigning comes governing, and whoever wins needs to be able to lead our country effectively in a troubled world. in other words, let<u+2019>s not just carry the banner. let<u+2019>s behave that way toward others. if we actually want to be <u+201c>stronger together,<u+201d> let<u+2019>s not just shout it; let<u+2019>s be it. <u+2013> mark gerzon, president of mediators foundation, is the author of "the reunited states of america; how we can cross the partisan divide." he writes his beyond red & blue blog exclusively for politics voices.

stronger together? yes, mrs. clinton, but what does 'together' really mean?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

75.0

8.0

5116.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

335.0

2.0

0.0

109.0

0.0

49.0

8.0

7.0

1.0

7.0

10.0

8.0

7.0

20.0

16.0

36.0

337.0

111.0

49.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the republican chairman of a high-profile house committee on sunday shook up the race to succeed outgoing speaker john a. boehner, launching a challenge to the heavy favorite, majority leader kevin mccarthy. the bid by rep. jason chaffetz (utah), chairman of the oversight and government reform committee, comes amid unrest from conservatives driven by doubts that mccarthy (calif.) will be any more inclined than boehner to embrace the right flank of the house republican conference. chaffetz said on "fox news sunday" that he was <u+201c>recruited<u+201d> by members displeased with mccarthy<u+2019>s ascent and that he would <u+201c>bridge the divide<u+201d> in the house gop. [chaffetz to run against mccarthy for house speaker] <u+201c>you don<u+2019>t just give an automatic promotion to the existing leadership team,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>that doesn<u+2019>t signal change. i think [house republicans] want a fresh face and fresh new person who is actually there at the leadership table in the speaker<u+2019>s role.<u+201d> chaffetz<u+2019>s remarks not only reflect tensions between conservatives and establishment republicans, but also concerns about mccarthy<u+2019>s ability to communicate with the gop base and the public at large. those concerns grew after mccarthy made comments last week suggesting that a house investigation into the 2012 attacks on a u.s. diplomatic compound and a cia annex in benghazi, libya, stemmed from political motivations. [mccarthy<u+2019>s comments on benghazi probe may be a political gift to clinton] <u+201c>we need somebody who<u+2019>s out there who is actually going out there and making the case to the american people, talking to the senate about what we need to do, and going on the national television shows and winning that argument,<u+201d> chaffetz said. <u+201c>we don<u+2019>t seem to win the argument, and that<u+2019>s a problem.<u+201d> chaffetz has spent his four house terms working his way to the top of the oversight committee, a post that makes him the gop<u+2019>s prime attack dog against president obama<u+2019>s administration. he is well versed in the hand-to-hand political combat of cable news and talk radio and has become the party<u+2019>s face on a variety of issues, including secret service failures and government funding for planned parenthood. he made headlines this week after an inspector general<u+2019>s report found that a top secret service executive suggested leaking information that chaffetz had been passed over for an agent<u+2019>s job years ago in retaliation for his committee<u+2019>s aggressive investigations. but mccarthy retains considerable advantages ahead of the closed-door gop leadership elections set for thursday. he enjoys a week<u+2019>s head start in building support, a ready-made political infrastructure, and close relationships across the republican conference built during his stint as the gop<u+2019>s chief house candidate recruiter ahead of the 2010 midterm elections. in thursday<u+2019>s party elections, a speaker candidate need only win the backing of a simple majority of those voting to become the republican nominee. but unlike other leadership posts, the speaker is chosen in a subsequent floor vote of all house members, and the house<u+2019>s 246 republicans will be under no obligation to select the party nominee. no democrats are expected to back mccarthy or any other republican, so the nominee cannot afford to lose the support of more than 28 gop members. chaffetz suggested that mccarthy does not have that level of support: <u+201c>there are nearly 50 people and a growing number that will not and cannot vote for kevin mccarthy as the speaker on the floor. he<u+2019>s going to fall short of the 218 votes on the floor of house.<u+201d> but chaffetz has weaknesses of his own. he has received mixed reviews of his tenure as the oversight committee chairman, with conservative commentators recently accusing him of squandering a hearing last week featuring the president of planned parenthood, cecile richards. and chaffetz, who criticized mccarthy<u+2019>s comments on the benghazi investigation, has his own history of bombastic and controversial remarks. he also played a role in a key episode that fanned conservative outrage against establishment republicans, stripping an oversight subcommittee chairman of his gavel in retaliation for breaking with leaders on a june procedural vote. that member, rep. mark meadows (r-n.c.), went on to file a rare motion to vacate the speaker<u+2019>s chair, accelerating boehner<u+2019>s departure. chaffetz said sunday that he <u+201c>learned from that lesson, that you<u+2019>re not going to do things by cutting people off at the knees.<u+201d> <u+201c>i think i<u+2019>m better for it, and i think mark is better for it, and we<u+2019>re certainly good friends on this day,<u+201d> he said. meadows agreed sunday that bygones are bygones: <u+201c>any emphasis placed on past disagreements would be misguided and is certainly not a factor in this race for me.<u+201d> chaffetz will audition alongside mccarthy and a third speaker candidate, rep. daniel webster (r-fla.), in closed-door meetings this week scheduled ahead of the thursday elections. a tuesday evening session sponsored by hard-line conservative groups, including the increasingly influential house freedom caucus, could be especially crucial. webster, a back-bencher who has emphasized the need for procedural improvements, has won some support from conservatives, but his appeal across the conference is limited. a previous speaker bid, challenging boehner in january, garnered 12 votes. the stakes of the speaker<u+2019>s race were heightened in recent days after the treasury department announced that congress must act to raise the federal debt ceiling on or about nov. 5 <u+2014> less than a week after boehner leaves office. an effort by boehner to pass a debt-limit increase in his final days with mainly democratic votes <u+2014> as happened last week on a 10-week government funding extension <u+2014> could further weaken mccarthy, who as majority leader is considered to be in control of the floor agenda. chaffetz said sunday that <u+201c>we<u+2019>re just not going to unilaterally raise the debt limit<u+201d> and suggested that he would take cues from members who overwhelmingly support using the deadline as leverage in spending negotiations with obama. <u+201c>as the speaker, you<u+2019>ve got to take the will of our body, appreciate and respect the process, and then go fight for that,<u+201d> he said.

rep. jason chaffetz launches bid for house speaker, shaking up gop leadership race

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

7.0

82.0

8.0

6199.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

375.0

1.0

0.0

108.0

0.0

30.0

15.0

16.0

8.0

18.0

11.0

13.0

8.0

30.0

28.0

47.0

379.0

109.0

30.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

i did not watch the benghazi hearings, unlike many others, in hopes of catching secretary clinton out, with my ears perked up for some admission that could sink her presidential ambitions. secretary clinton did not disappoint in her performance on thursday. she admitted to no wrongdoing, nor to breaking any laws. mistakes were made by others, the fault lies elsewhere. she put up with hours and hours of questions, and no one laid a glove on her.<u+00a0> secretary clinton was far more adept at bobbing and weaving than the members of congress who questioned her were at pinning her down. she brushed off blame by saying security decisions were handled at lower levels of the state department professional staff, not by the secretary. she didn't receive ambassador stevens' requests for more security -- implying that if only she had things might have turned out differently. it was a masterful performance. she showed enormous discipline and nearly super-human stamina. she let nothing slip. but in the end she let everything slip. she got a perfect score, but failed the test. she didn't mean to, but she showed us a glimpse into her soul. it was chilling. we now know that when secretary clinton met the plane carrying the bodies of the four americans who died at benghazi that the obama administration had intially lied about what happened. she stood over the flag-draped coffins of four dead americans knowing that the first narrative blamed their deaths on an internet video, which caused a demonstration outside the consulate to turn into a deadly attack, when she already knew the truth. she looked into the eyes of the families of the fallen heroes knowing all about that. she always knew they died from a planned terrorist attack from an al qaeda-like group. that's what she told her family and foreign leaders according to newly released emails. so why support the false narrative at the start? because the obama administration had an election to win eight weeks later, and a terrorist attack that killed four americans didn't fit into that plan. president obama asked voters to reelect him because he had killed usama bin laden. al qaeda was on the ropes. qaddafi was dead and the libyan war a success. the wave of war was a receding. president george w. bush's war on terror was over because obama and clinton had won it. a terrorist attack that killed americans at benghazi did not fit into that campaign narrative, so it had to be retold and spun into a different story. it wasn't radical islamist terrorists, but a spontaneous demonstration that got out of control in reaction to an obscure<u+00a0> internet video. in the end, the benghazi hearings probably didn't change many minds. secretary clinton's supporters will say it was a waste of time, a politically motivated witchhunt. secretary clinton's detractors will say she never answered the questions. but for me it wasn't the questions or the answers that mattered. it wasn't about negligence or criminality or incompetence. instead it was -- and still is -- about character. and secretary clinton has been found wanting. the even greater tragedy is secretary clinton doesn<u+2019>t think she did anything wrong. <u+00a0>in today<u+2019>s washington integrity and truth telling -- even to mourning families -- take a backseat to the relentless pursuit of power. no wonder the rest of the country wants to throw all the bums out. kathleen troia "k.t." mcfarland is a fox news national security analyst and host of foxnews.com's "defcon 3." she served in national security posts in the nixon, ford and reagan administrations

hillary clinton showed us a glimpse of her soul at benghazi hearings. it was chilling

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

85.0

8.0

3612.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

232.0

2.0

0.0

74.0

1.0

0.0

26.0

7.0

8.0

10.0

4.0

9.0

4.0

10.0

22.0

15.0

241.0

76.0

27.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

editor's note: the following column originally appeared on the resurgent website. it is reprinted with permission. in the first 48 hours since the horrific mass shooting in orlando, the worst terror attack on american soil since 9/11, the public has seen wall-to-wall media coverage of the events. the false narrative emerging from the media seeks to make a few points, all of which are red herrings and straw men designed to take attention from the truth. <u+2022> the shooter, omar mateen, was homophobic because he hated gays. <u+2022> mateen was unstable because he was mean and beat his wife <u+2022> mateen had too much unfettered access to guns story after story references these points, and they quote each other liberally (take the pun as you wish). fox news and other media outlets reported comments by a coworker at security firm g4s who called him "toxic" and "unhinged." the times of london quoted cnn, about his first wife, "he was mentally unstable and mentally ill." anti-gun new york daily news quoted nbc news, who spoke to mateen's father seddique matteen, who insisted the rampage had nothing to do with religion. the washington post also did a story on seddique mateen defending his son. <u+201c>he had a child and a wife, and was very dignified, meaning he had respect for his parents,<u+201d> seddique mateen wrote, standing in front of the flag of his apparent birthplace, afghanistan. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t know what caused him to shoot last night.<u+201d> the shooter's father has close connections with his native afghanistan, and has traveled back there as recently as 2014, even interviewing afghan president ashraf ghani in kabul, according to the washington post. he made a series of youtube videos praising the taliban and railing against the u.s. the boston globe appears to be at a complete loss as to mateen's motive for the killings, because there's no actual proof (besides the killer's own words pledging allegiance is isis) he was tied to any jihadist causes. while mateen claimed allegiance to islamic state leader abu bakr al-baghdadi, no evidence had emerged by late sunday pointing to actual ties to terrorist groups or a significant association with jihadist causes. yes, they actually wrote that. apparently a confession isn't evidence to them. we can either accept the media narrative, that some unknown complex mix of motives drove this mentally ill man to buy readily available assault weapons and kill people he simply hated for no reason, or we can apply occam's razor--the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. <u+2022>the quran teaches that homosexuality is wrong and punishable by death (not just "god himself will punish those involved in homosexuality. this, is not for the servants" of god, which seddique mateen said). in some sharia-law muslim countries, it actually is punished by death. certainly isis punishes homosexuality by death. <u+2022> many muslim men are brought up and taught to beat their wives--that this is the correct way to administer discipline in the home. this kind of behavior is common in the islamic world, where women are not valued as anything more than property. <u+2022> mateen had a clean record, worked as a security guard, kept himself in excellent physical condition, and trained for his jihad. this was not a crime of opportunity, or of passion. it was a planned operation. the "mentally ill" narrative offers no hard evidence at this point. he bought weapons because, despite the fbi having investigated him, nothing of concern was noted that would prevent him from doing so. this is a failure of the intelligence and law enforcement system, not our second amendment rights. <u+2022> the attack was absolutely religiously motivated. you didn't see mateen attacking the orlando islamic center, the mosque he attended, because he didn't like the people there. you didn't see the people with whom he worshipped calling the fbi or the local authorities to report mateen acting weird or talking about killing people. the simplest explanation is that mateen was a radicalized muslim, who moved easily with other radicalized muslims, some of whom are probably living their lives in orlando. only now would the fbi be interviewing those people and find connections. the press is weaving a false narrative to fashion a complex explanation for a simple problem. we have a cancer of radical islam growing in america. political correctness, the inability of our president to accept the problem because of his beliefs about islam being a religion of peace, and impossible restrictions placed on federal, state and local law enforcement have made this crime possible. our government is ignoring the cancer and it will continue to grow, as long as the country keeps buying the media's spin. steve berman is a georgia-based software entrepreneur and blogger who writes at the resurgent, erick erickson<u+2019>s home on the web. follow him on twitter @lifeofgrace224.

orlando: the mainstream media serves up a false narrative about terror attack

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

7.0

77.0

8.0

4883.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

371.0

1.0

0.0

106.0

0.0

31.0

20.0

16.0

11.0

34.0

10.0

16.0

6.0

27.0

41.0

31.0

375.0

107.0

31.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

former florida gov. jeb bush smoked marijuana while in high school, a personal use of the drug that stands in contrast to his later political stance on the plant. <u+201c>i drank alcohol and i smoked marijuana when i was at andover,<u+201d> bush, the current republican frontrunner seeking his party's 2016 presidential nomination, told the boston globe as part of a detailed new profile that describes his time at phillips academy in andover, massachusetts. both george h.w. bush, jeb's father, and george w. bush, his brother, also attended the prestigious private school. <u+201c>it was pretty common," bush said of his substance use during that time. a former classmate of bush's, peter tibbetts, recalled to the newspaper that the first time he ever smoked marijuana was with bush, in some woods near their dorm. <u+201c>the first time i really got stoned was in jeb<u+2019>s room,<u+201d> tibbetts told the globe. <u+201c>he had a portable stereo with removable speakers. he put on steppenwolf for me.<u+201d> tibbetts was eventually forced to leave the boarding school after being accused of using drugs. as a politician, bush has not embraced marijuana. he spent much of his time as florida governor championing jail instead of treatment for nonviolent drug offenders, and pushed for mandatory prison sentences for drug offenders -- with the exception of his daughter, noelle, who has struggled with crack cocaine use. more recently, while acknowledging that states should "have a right" to decide on the legalization of marijuana, bush publicly opposed an amendment to legalize medical marijuana in florida. "florida leaders and citizens have worked for years to make the sunshine state a world-class location to start or run a business, a family-friendly destination for tourism and a desirable place to raise a family or retire,<u+201d> bush said before the november midterm election. "allowing large-scale marijuana operations to take root across florida, under the guise of using it for medicinal purposes, runs counter to all of these efforts." <u+201c>you would think he<u+2019>d have a little more understanding then,<u+201d> paul, who may be a rival to bush in the republican primary, told the hill friday. <u+201c>he was even opposed to medical marijuana. this is a guy who now admits he smoked marijuana but he wants to put people in jail who do." the globe also spoke to some of bush's former classmates, who recalled a "physically imposing" young man who was seen as intimidating by some and a bully by others. tibbetts recalled a story to the newspaper of an occasion during their boarding school days when he and bush taunted a smaller student who lived in their dorm by sewing his pajama bottoms so that the student couldn't put them on. bush told the globe he didn't remember the incident or any other bullying, and was surprised that some of his former classmates viewed him that way. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t believe that is true,<u+201d> bush said, adding that it was more than 40 years ago and not possible for him to remember. it isn't the first time that allegations of bullying have surfaced about bush's high school years. another classmate of bush's told vanity fair in 2001 that he remembered bush as a bully as well, and that there was "a kind of arrogance" about him during his time at andover.

jeb bush smoked marijuana, bullied other students in high school

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

64.0

8.0

3227.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

232.0

1.0

0.0

63.0

0.0

18.0

4.0

7.0

0.0

8.0

5.0

13.0

15.0

19.0

237.0

64.0

18.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

palm beach, fla. -- ted cruz may not be running for anything<u+00a0>yet, but the senator from texas nevertheless presented his theory here friday night for why a presidential candidate like him would be best positioned to win back the white house for republicans. the conventional wisdom in political circles has been<u+00a0>that to win a presidential election again, republicans must broaden their appeal to more moderate swing voters, especially women, minorities and young people. it's a message former florida governor jeb bush, a favorite of the<u+00a0>party establishment, has repeatedly delivered as he prepares for an all-but-certain presidential run. but cruz, also a likely 2016 candidate, has a different take. he argued in<u+00a0>some detail to a gathering of elite conservative donors that a republican candidate could<u+00a0>win only if<u+00a0>he or she motivates more conservative activists, especially evangelical christians, to vote. he posited that former massachusetts governor mitt romney and sen. john mccain (ariz.) lost to president obama in 2008 and 2012 because "millions of conservatives" who cast ballots for president george w. bush's reelection stayed home the following two cycles. "how do we bring back to the polls the millions of conservatives who stayed home? if they<u+00a0>stay home, we lose," cruz said at a dinner friday night for the club for growth, attended by roughly 200 of the fiscally<u+00a0>conservative group's wealthy members. cruz took a swipe at bush's father, former president george h.w. bush. cruz said bush ran for his first term as a conservative promising a third reagan term, but in office raised taxes and became "kindler and gentler" -- a line that drew laughter from the crowd. cruz argued that bush lost his reelection because he was not sufficiently conservative. cruz drew a sharp contrast with jeb bush over education policy, describing common core, which bush backs,<u+00a0>as "national standards being dictated from washington<u+00a0>controlling the education of our kids." in his remarks, which including a question-and-answer session stretched for 70 minutes, cruz lambasted what he sees as crony political leaders in both parties. he said conservative voters don't trust politicians anymore because "they've been lied to too many times." and he lashed out at what he dubbed "this small cabal of consultants in washington" who keep<u+00a0>running republican campaigns, losing, and "coming back to donors saying, 'cut us a check to go make the exact same mistake all over again.'" cruz said<u+00a0>too many republicans run "an almost soviet-style campaign," whereas he signaled he would run a grass-roots-oriented<u+00a0>campaign empowering<u+00a0>what he called "political entrepreneurs." in his 2012 senate race, he said, he tried to "nakedly, shamelessly copy" obama's 2008 campaign strategy and ordered his aides to read obama campaign manager david plouffe's memoir. cruz, who was accompanied at the breakers, an iconic palm beach resort,<u+00a0>by his wife and two daughters, basked in a warm reception from<u+00a0>members of the club for growth, which provided substantial resources to help his underdog primary campaign for senate in 2012. "i do know for a fact that i would not be in the united states senate if it were not for the club for growth," cruz said. cruz received hearty applause when he said, "we should abolish the irs." he also called for abolishing the export-import bank, a contentious issue within the republican party as house speaker john a. boehner (ohio) and many business leaders support the bank. and he called for loosening or ending of federal regulations across the board. "we have seen regulations descend from washington like locusts on small businesses across this country," cruz said.

ted cruz says motivating conservatives is key to winning white house

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

68.0

8.0

3688.0

0.0

8.0

0.0

251.0

0.0

65.0

1.0

0.0

19.0

5.0

11.0

4.0

3.0

11.0

6.0

19.0

11.0

23.0

259.0

65.0

20.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

he made the comments before meeting in jerusalem with the speaker of the u.s. house of representatives, john boehner, a leading republican and strong critic of the white house's policy on iran. "now is the time for the international community to insist on a better deal," netanyahu said in a televised statement delivered in english. "a better deal would significantly roll back iran's nuclear infrastructure. a better deal would link the eventual lifting of the restrictions on iran's nuclear programme to a change in iran's behaviour," he said, citing threats to annihilate israel and accusing tehran of fomenting regional conflict. netanyahu said on tuesday that a framework agreement sought by international negotiators to rein in iran's nuclear programme would leave it with the capability to develop atomic weapons within a year. six world powers and iran went beyond a midnight deadline and were continuing to negotiate in the swiss city of lausanne on wednesday, having failed to agree on crucial details such as the lifting of u.n. sanctions. israel, which is believed to have the middle east's only nuclear arsenal, is not a party to the negotiations. iran was expected to be high on the agenda of netanyahu's talks with boehner, who is visiting the region with a republican delegation. avoiding stepping deeper into controversy with the white house over the issue, neither boehner nor netanyahu mentioned the nuclear talks in comments to reporters at the israeli leader's office. boehner's invitation to netanyahu to address the u.s. congress last month on the iranian issue drew accusations that both men were pursuing partisan politics at the expense of traditionally wide support for israel on capitol hill. "the bonds between the united states and israel are as strong as ever," boehner said. "our two countries cooperate on many different levels and while we may have political disagreements from time to time, the bonds between our two nations are strong and they're going to continue to be strong." congress has cautioned it would consider imposing new sanctions on iran if there was no agreement in lausanne this week. president barack obama has threatened to veto any such sanctions moves. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell has said that if a framework deal is reached, lawmakers would consider a bill that would require obama to submit a final accord for congress' approval.

netanyahu <u+2014> flanked by boehner <u+2014> calls for 'better deal' with iran

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

66.0

8.0

2411.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

193.0

0.0

32.0

1.0

0.0

27.0

5.0

10.0

2.0

5.0

3.0

2.0

19.0

12.0

18.0

195.0

32.0

28.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the election in 232 photos, 43 numbers and 131 quotes, from the two candidates at the center of it all.

inside the swing-state playbooks

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

32.0

8.0

103.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

4.0

1.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

7.0

4.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the usa today network is spending time in eight counties in eight states, exploring the key electoral themes that could decide this fall<u+2019>s election. each week from now until the election, we<u+00a0>will feature a different one. the series debuted last week with a look at<u+00a0>waukesha county in wisconsin. today: chester county in pennsylvania. west chester, pa.<u+00a0><u+2014> at age 48, patty mapa can't remember ever voting for a democrat for president. the substitute kindergarten teacher, who was shopping for fresh produce<u+00a0>with her husband and daughter at<u+00a0>the west chester growers<u+00a0>market in this philadelphia suburb on a recent day, worries the billionaire businessman<u+00a0>is<u+00a0>"negative, just very divisive, and erratic." she's less than thrilled about casting her ballot for democrat hillary clinton<u+00a0><u+2014> "there's that dark little cloud" when it comes to trustworthiness, she says <u+2014> but on this mapa is certain: "i am voting against trump." the biggest swing in the american electorate this year<u+00a0>is happening among white, college-educated voters like mapa. they are a big and growing group<u+00a0><u+2014> an estimated 23% of the electorate<u+00a0>four years ago<u+00a0>and expected to be a bit more this year<u+00a0><u+2014> and they have voted republican in every presidential election since at least 1952.<u+00a0>four years ago, mitt romney won their support by a solid 14 percentage points, according to surveys of voters as they left polling places. but in the latest pew research center poll, taken last month, clinton led among whites who have a college degree<u+00a0>by 14 points. that may be the most dramatic partisan shift by a major demographic group from one presidential election to the next<u+00a0>in<u+00a0>modern american history. in places like chester county in pennsylvania,<u+00a0>douglas county in colorado,<u+00a0>delaware county in ohio,<u+00a0>wake county in north carolina<u+00a0>and fairfax county in virginia, those changing allegiances create<u+00a0>formidable problems<u+00a0>for trump in states he needs to win<u+00a0>the white house. while national polls give the businessman and reality tv star a 2-1 lead among white voters who don't have a college education, democrats' traditional appeal among minority voters and their new<u+00a0>strength among better-educated whites, especially women,<u+00a0>risk making an electoral majority all but out of reach for him. pennsylvania is a crucial state. trump, clinton and running mates mike pence and tim kaine all have campaigned here since the democratic convention, and the clinton campaign also has sent in<u+00a0>vice president biden and former president bill clinton. on a sunny saturday near summer's end, the weekly farmers<u+00a0>market tucked on an open lot in downtown west chester is bustling with shoppers eyeing stacks of tomatoes and corn,<u+00a0>six kinds of apples, early pumpkins and gourds, and homemade<u+00a0>pies and cobblers. margot mckee, who works in real estate sales (and describes her age only as "old enough to know better")<u+00a0>bought a maple oat muffin to eat later.<u+00a0>in april, she<u+00a0>voted for trump in pennsylvania's gop primary. he trounced his rivals, winning 57% of the vote over texas sen. ted cruz (22%) and ohio gov. john kasich (19%).<u+00a0>but now she anguishes over<u+00a0>what to do in november. "i think he's done a great job in getting people's attention to some issues that have been neglected, and congress is dysfunctional and politicians are dysfunctional, and they don't seem willing to do their jobs," she<u+00a0>begins. but she says trump needs to "grow up and learn to keep his mouth shut," first describing<u+00a0>him as "impossible" and then calling him an unprintable epithet. what about clinton? mckee sighs. "i'm<u+00a0>drawn to her because of her experience and her even manner, but i'm not sure that she's honest," adding unhappily that<u+00a0>"the clintons seem to know how to duck and bob." "i'm so disgusted i'm thinking that maybe i'm not going to vote," she muses, something she's never done before.<u+00a0>"but<u+00a0>then, that's a cop-out." the four "collar counties" around philadelphia<u+00a0><u+2014> bucks, chester, delaware and<u+00a0>montgomery <u+2014> in the past have<u+00a0>provided republican margins to help neutralize the democratic advantage in the city itself. in the past 12 presidential elections, chester has voted for the democratic candidate only once, in 2008. but democrats have become increasingly competitive in the suburban counties, which include about a third of the state's voters.<u+00a0>in 2012, romney lost the other three<u+00a0>and carried chester by just two-tenths of a percentage point, the closest margin in the state. the county has a population of about 516,000, and half have college degrees <u+2014><u+00a0>the highest proportion in the state. average household incomes are well above the state average; unemployment is well below, and voter turnout is high. four years ago, seven in 10<u+00a0>of the voting-age citizens in chester cast ballots.<u+00a0>the county's residents are overwhelmingly white. just 6% are african american, 7% latino. even so, it is trump's provocative rhetoric about mexicans, muslims and immigrants that seems to have<u+00a0>created the biggest backlash among chester county voters. "typically here, it's having a fiscal conservative that's most important to chester county voters, but this race is transcending traditional issues," chester county republican chairman val digiorgio, a lawyer, says. "what's important here and determinative here is whether donald trump can show himself to be someone who reaches out to a broader segment of the population, as opposed to what he did during the primaries. we're still waiting to see whether that's the case." digiorgio, who endorsed florida sen. marco rubio in the republican primary, now supports trump and is "putting all our efforts to make sure he's elected president." he says the new york billionaire has drawn more volunteers than usual to the local gop organization. but the republican county committee's home page<u+00a0><u+2014><u+00a0>which among other things offers gop-branded<u+00a0>wine made from grapes grown in chester county <u+2014><u+00a0>on monday didn't<u+00a0>mention trump's name or the presidential race. the website's<u+00a0>tab listing "2016 candidates" included<u+00a0>statewide and local contenders, but not the top of the ticket. to be fair, the home page of the chester county democratic committee didn't mention clinton, either, though she was listed on the "2016 candidates" tab.<u+00a0>but a banner across the top of the page declared:<u+00a0>"if you don't vote the whole ballot, you are not doing your full part against trumpism." just how much impact trump could have down the ballot is a worry for republicans and a hope for democrats. in a statewide franklin & marshall college poll taken last month, clinton led trump by 7 points, 47%-40%, and democratic senate challenger katie mcginty led incumbent republican pat toomey by 5 points, 43%-38%. the hard-fought keystone state<u+00a0>race is one of a handful expected to determine control of the senate. "the fact is she<u+2019>s the beneficiary of clinton emerging into the lead," g. terry madonna, director of the poll and a professor of public affairs, says of mcginty. "i think if it's five points or less, toomey has a good chance of winning." but if clinton wins the state by more than 5 points, trump may leave toomey with too much ground to make up among voters willing to split their ticket. comitta, who is challenging three-term republican incumbent dan truitt for<u+00a0>the state house of representatives, enthusiastically backs clinton. but she generally tries to talk about local and state issues, not the national race, as she campaigns.<u+00a0>she stops<u+00a0>by the farmers market after a morning of walking door-to-door on this recent day, distributing fliers that don't mention party affiliation, instead describing her as<u+00a0>"mom. educator. mayor." "i hear from some people who love her,<u+00a0>some people who would never vote for her, and some who will vote for her because they can't imagine trump being president," she says of clinton. "because the two candidates are so polarizing, and i have to win my race, i'm not going there. ...<u+00a0>that's a whole other conversation." trump does have enthusiastic supporters in chester county, and linda ives is one of them. "you look at a human being as a body of work, and i think that the gentleman has without a doubt provided opportunities, job opportunities, for hundreds of thousands of people, and after watching his children at the convention, i was most impressed," says ives, 54, a retired u.s. army captain who now works as a consultant. she also is motivated by fierce opposition to clinton. she calls the former secretary of state<u+00a0>"a criminal" for her role in the 2012 deaths of four americans in benghazi, libya, and her carelessness with sending classified information on her private email server. "if i had sent one unclassified email like that, i would be at fort leavenworth right now; i would be in jail," ives says. she is concerned about trump's "delivery," but she also says unfair news coverage is contributing to his problems. "i think people are embarrassed to say they're supporting trump," she says. "i think what's happening is<u+00a0><u+2014> sorry, guys<u+00a0><u+2014> the liberal media is just pushing the whole, 'the man is a ridiculous clown.' i mean, he's getting portrayed as a ridiculous clown, and the only people who are<u+00a0>going to vote for him is the young, uneducated male. so people are then, 'i<u+2019>m an educated person,<u+00a0>why would i be stupid enough to vote for trump?' " indeed, the electoral shift among college-educated whites in just four years has been of historic proportions, particularly for such a large group of voters. "in donald trump, you have a perfect storm of a candidate in terms of pressing buttons to sending white, college-educated voters, particularly women, in the other direction," says ruy teixeira, co-director of "states of change," a<u+00a0>nonpartisan project that studies the impact of demographic trends on elections. "these are not voters who are protectionist or anti-immigrant. he represents a type of republicanism or strand of the republican party that they probably like the least." what's not clear yet is whether republican-leaning voters like those in chester county who plan to vote for clinton this time will stick with democrats down the road. "some of this is peculiar to trump, but i do think that trump's success reflects the way the bases of the two parties have changed,"<u+00a0>says political scientist alan abramowitz of emory university. the 2016 race may accelerate long-term trends<u+00a0>that are reshaping<u+00a0>the historic perception<u+00a0>of democrats as the party of blue-collar workers and republicans as the party of white-collar workers.<u+00a0>"especially at the presidential level, now republicans are the party of the white working class,"<u+00a0>abramowitz says. meanwhile, lisa cromley, 53, a middle-school english and history teacher, shops at the farmers market and<u+00a0>then drops by a democratic campaign storefront around the corner. "i am so concerned about trump that i don't know where to begin," she says, then ticks off a list. "i'm concerned that he doesn't know any issues; he's not a politician. he doesn't have a legal background; he really has a business background, and the business background he has isn't even something that i think translates.<u+00a0>i'm concerned about his attitude toward most of the people who make up our pluralistic nation, our multicultural nation. i'm concerned that he doesn't think before he speaks." she picks<u+00a0>up a yard sign and a bumper sticker for clinton, hoping the public displays of support will<u+00a0>encourage voters who may be reluctant to support her. "but<u+00a0>i try not to talk to people about this campaign," cromley adds. "it's so divisive." to report this series, the usa today network identified eight counties around the country that represent key voting groups in the november election, from blue-collar and college-educated voters to rural voters and latinos. journalists spent time with voters, political observers and experts in these eight counties <u+2014> blue, red and purple <u+2014> talking about the presidential<u+00a0>candidates, the issues and the importance of this year<u+2019>s election. our first story looks at gop <u+201c>base<u+201d> voters in waukesha county, wis. in our second story, we talk<u+00a0>to<u+00a0>white, college-educated voters in chester county, pa.<u+00a0>in the coming weeks, look for our coverage of the following counties: wayne county, mich.;<u+00a0>maricopa county, ariz.;<u+00a0>union county, iowa;<u+00a0>larimer county, colo.;<u+00a0>clark county, ohio; and<u+00a0>hillsborough county, fla.

a suburban tide against trump could sink his election bid

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

11.0

57.0

8.0

12298.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

797.0

1.0

0.0

248.0

0.0

70.0

12.0

33.0

11.0

17.0

21.0

19.0

16.0

50.0

35.0

72.0

803.0

249.0

70.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

with about 900,000 concealed handgun permit holders in texas, there is a good chance that someone next you in a lone star state grocery store or restaurant is carrying a concealed handgun.<u+00a0> starting friday, texas will join 44 other states that already allow people to openly carry handguns throughout the state. amidst today<u+2019>s threats of terrorism and mass public shootings, it is a good thing when we enable people to legally carry guns and protect themselves. under the new law, a person will need a concealed handgun permit to be able to openly carry a gun. if the experiences of other states are any guide, few people will actually openly carry their handguns.<u+00a0> moreover, businesses can still prohibit guns or request that they be concealed.<u+00a0> however, the chief financial officer of kroger (america<u+2019>s largest supermarket chain), has just said that the company will allow open carry. he says that the company hasn<u+2019>t encountered any problems with open carry.<u+00a0> other supermarket companies such as whole foods, randall<u+2019>s, and h-e-b, will be posting signs banning open carry. they will still be allowing concealed carry. these bans may be short lived.<u+00a0> when texas originally passed concealed carry in 1996, many stores initially posted signs banning concealed carry. with a few years, those signs all but disappeared. an odd nuance in texas law has led to much national attention in the last couple of years.<u+00a0> before friday, people were allowed to openly carry rifles, just not handguns.<u+00a0> <u+00a0>no problems ever occurred, but simply the additional handling required for carrying rifle as opposed to keeping a holstered handgun, certainly created concern that something might go wrong. some, such as michael bloomberg<u+2019>s everytown advocacy group, put pressure on companies to ban openly carried rifles. hillary clinton also chimed in: <u+201c>the idea that you could have an open carry permit with an ak-47 over your shoulder walking down the isles of a supermarket is just despicable.<u+201d> starbucks, jack in the box, chipotle, wendy's, applebee's, chili<u+2019>s and sonic<u+2019>s all <u+201c>respectfully request<u+201d> that customers not openly carry guns.<u+00a0> more importantly, however, they still allow people to carry a concealed gun. openly carrying handguns are less threatening than rifles and will likely face no greater p.r. issues than they have in other states. but open carry has an important drawback.<u+00a0> it isn<u+2019>t as effective as concealed carry in protecting people against terrorist attacks and mass public shootings. criminals and terrorists can strike anywhere and at any time.<u+00a0> they can attack someone who is openly carrying a gun.<u+00a0> alternatively, they can select another target or wait for a more opportune moment. concealed carry is the most effective way of counteracting this strategic advantage.<u+00a0> a killer can<u+2019>t attack a big grocery store in texas without facing likely resistance.<u+00a0> and, of course, an attacker has no idea who might be packing heat. since at least 1950, all but two of the mass public shootings in the u.s. (and every single one in europe) has occurred in a gun-free zone. policeone, the largest private organization of police officers in the us,<u+00a0> recently asked its 450,000 members: <u+201c>considering the particulars of recent [mass shooting] tragedies like newtown and aurora, what level of impact do you think a legally-armed citizen could have made?<u+201d><u+00a0> eighty percent said: <u+201c>casualties would likely have been reduced.<u+201d> in the u.s., over 13 million american civilians are licensed to carry concealed handguns.<u+00a0>every day, permit holders stop crimes. but they have also stopped a large and growing number of mass public shootings. concealed carry in texas isn<u+2019>t as common as you may think <u+2013> just over 4 percent of the state<u+2019>s adult population has permits.<u+00a0> but the rate is more than twice as high in pennsylvania and florida, both also large states. there<u+2019>s a simple reason for this. texas charges a permit fee of $140 <u+2013> one of the highest in the country.<u+00a0> lower fees would increase the number of concealed carry permits and the number of people who can protect others.<u+00a0> it would especially help the most likely victims of violent crime -- poor black men and women living in high-crime urban areas. a year from now, i predict that people will wonder why such a fuss was made about open carry. while michael bloomberg may have scored some temporary p.r. victories against open carry his fear tactics will be discredited in the long-run. john r. lott, jr. is a columnist for<u+00a0>foxnews.com. he is an economist and was formerly chief economist at the united states sentencing commission. lott is also a leading expert on guns and op-eds on that issue are done in conjunction with the crime prevention research center. he is the author of nine books including "more guns, less crime." his latest book is "the war on guns: arming yourself against gun control lies (august 1, 2016). follow him on twitter@johnrlottjr.

open carry comes to texas: why the lone star state will be safer in 2016

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

72.0

8.0

4916.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

287.0

1.0

0.0

63.0

0.0

34.0

18.0

14.0

6.0

16.0

7.0

22.0

28.0

36.0

290.0

64.0

34.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

in contrast to obamacare, the bush health plan envisions a much smaller role for government and a much bigger role for individual choice and competition in the marketplace. bush health care differs from obama health care in five significant ways: without the employer mandate, all of the anti-job provisions in obamacare would be gone. right now employers have perverse incentives to keep the number of employees small, to reduce their hours of work and to use independent contractors and temp labor instead of full time employees. under the bush plan, no employer would be punished for creating jobs. without the individual mandate, families would be free to buy insurance that meets individual and family needs rather than the needs of politicians. what woman would willingly choose to buy health insurance that offers free mammograms while she is healthy but makes her pay full price if there is a symptom of something wrong? that<u+2019>s only one of the many needlessly wasteful and expensive consequences of letting health insurance benefits be determined by the political system. also, without the individual mandate there is no reason for anybody to remain uninsured. the bush tax credit is equal to the average tax subsidy received by employees who get their heath insurance at work. let<u+2019>s say a family, for whatever reason, had no additional disposable income. it would still be able to buy a health plan with its tax credit. lower income families could qualify for additional help. i suspect they would always be able to buy medicaid-like insurance with no additional cash outlay. but don<u+2019>t we need mandates in order to keep people from gaming the system? we have found better ways in medicare part b, medicare part d and with medigap insurance. in those markets, if you don<u+2019>t buy when you are eligible, you can face penalties. in most places, if you don<u+2019>t sign up for medigap insurance when you are first eligible, you can be individually underwritten. the uniform tax credit is also a huge improvement. because obamacare conditions its subsidies on income, it raises the marginal tax rate for middle income families by six percentage points and in some cases far more. at 400 percent of poverty, a family can lose more than $10,000 in subsidies if it earns one additional dollar. at other <u+201c>cliff<u+201d> points, families can be subjected to thousands of dollars of additional exposure (higher deductibles and copayments) as a result of earning one more dollar. all these perversions vanish if everyone gets the same subsidy regardless of income. also, if the subsidy doesn<u+2019>t vary by income, all kinds of technical problems with healthcare.gov would vanish in a heartbeat. virtually all the technical problems in the exchanges stem from the need to verify income. that means that the computers run by the exchanges have to interface with the computers of the irs and other government agencies. yet, in the main government, computer systems don<u+2019>t know how to talk to each other and that<u+2019>s a problem that may never be solved. if every one of the same age gets the same subsidy, the exchange doesn<u+2019>t have to check with the irs to verify income. next april 15, there won<u+2019>t be a plethora of additional taxes and refunds because almost everyone wrongly predicted his income for the previous year. according to h&r block, as many as 3.4 million people got reduced refunds this year because they underestimated their income when they enrolled in obamacare insurance plans. the portability provision is another huge improvement over the current system. right now if employers give employees pre-tax dollars to buy their own insurance in the individual market, the obama administration is threatening to fine them $100 per employee per day. if you think that<u+2019>s overkill, it tells you just how much the current administration dislikes employees buying and owning their own insurance. with the bush plan, all the anti-portability provisions in current law will be gone.

the jeb bush health plan: five ways it differs from what obama's done

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

69.0

8.0

3963.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

291.0

2.0

0.0

77.0

1.0

0.0

42.0

9.0

10.0

7.0

11.0

6.0

10.0

3.0

11.0

19.0

20.0

295.0

79.0

43.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

top dems want white house to call off part b demo <u+2014> the next cancer drug shortage

boehner takes revenge

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

21.0

8.0

81.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

3.0

1.0

3.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

hanging in the balance is obama<u+2019>s vision of america<u+2019>s place in the world and the kind of leadership it can best wield in the 21st century, some foreign-policy analysts say. president obama is not battling to save his asian-pacific trade agenda simply because he suddenly believes in free trade. for mr. obama, the fight in congress over granting him trade promotion authority (tpa) is about something much bigger. hanging in the balance is nothing less than obama<u+2019>s vision of america<u+2019>s place in the world and the kind of leadership it can best wield in the 21st century, some foreign-policy analysts say. winning or losing tpa will make or break obama<u+2019>s foreign policy vision of the united states <u+2013> no longer the go-it-alone superpower <u+2013> leading a multipolar world where associations of like-minded nations build regional security and economic prosperity, these analysts say. with the obama administration pursuing not only the asian-pacific trade deal but also a <u+201c>transformational<u+201d> trade pact with the european union, the moment, they add, could not be more critical. <u+201c>without the trade deals, america does not get to set the global economic rules for the new era, using trade to bind its allies around the globe to the us and to one another,<u+201d> says john hulsman, a us foreign policy analyst based in germany. <u+201c>it is not too much to say,<u+201d> he adds, <u+201c>that without tpa, there simply is no grand strategy for the new era<u+201d> in america<u+2019>s relations with the world. the trans-pacific partnership, or tpp, that obama had hoped to conclude by the end of the year with 11 other pacific basin countries <u+2013> most critically japan <u+2013> is currently at the top of obama<u+2019>s agenda because of what it means for his asia strategy. without tpa <u+2013> the ability to negotiate trade deals with the assurance that congress will only be allowed a simple yes or no, non-amendable vote on a concluded trade accord <u+2013> obama has virtually no chance of securing a tpp deal. and without tpp, the <u+201c>asia pivot<u+201d> in us strategic interests that obama has been pushing since taking office in 2009 will be halted in its still tentative tracks <u+2013> reduced largely to the aspirational rhetoric that critics claim it has been all along. for obama administration officials, the asia pivot <u+2013> or what they prefer to call a <u+201c>rebalancing<u+201d> of us interests towards a dynamic and fast-growing asia <u+2013> is not just about the number of us forces stationed in the region (two pieces of the rebalancing so far have been accords to rotate troops into australia and the philippines). perhaps even more important is the economic dimension of the turn to asia. not only does obama underscore at every turn possible the importance of securing america<u+2019>s stake in the booming asian economy, he also notes that some power is going to determine the rules of the road for the world<u+2019>s most dynamic trading region. (the insinuation being that it<u+2019>s much better that it be the us and not china, the region<u+2019>s other dominant power.) the challenge to obama<u+2019>s asia policy <u+2013> and the death blow that failure to move ahead on tpp would deliver to it <u+2013> is not lost on the region<u+2019>s leaders. <u+201c>if you don<u+2019>t do this deal, what are your levers of power?<u+201d> singapore<u+2019>s foreign minister, k. shanmugam, said in a warning issued in a washington speech monday. <u+201c>the choice is a very stark one,<u+201d> he said in remarks delivered at the center for strategic and international studies in washington. <u+201c>do you want to be part of the region, or do you want to be out of the region?<u+201d> singapore<u+2019>s top diplomat <u+2013> his tiny but booming island country is one of the 12 tpp countries <u+2013> noted that without the economic dimension to its asia policy, the us is reduced to primarily a military power in the region. but in a part of the globe where trade and economic prosperity are the focus, he added, <u+201c>that<u+2019>s not the lever you want to use.<u+201d> noting that the 40-percent share of global gdp that the region represents is only expected to grow, mr. shanmugam said, <u+201c>in all of this, where is the united states?<u+201d> the asian diplomat sounded almost like he could have been speaking from white house talking points, suggesting that if the us chooses not to lead that asian countries will have no choice but to look elsewhere. that argument may not sway congress, however, which some see as too inwardly focused to grasp the changes going on in the world. <u+201c>we are shifting into a more multipolar world, but it<u+2019>s not clear washington realizes that,<u+201d> says mr. hulsman, who is president of john c. hulsman enterprises, a global political risk firm. on tuesday, it looked like the next test in congress for tpa <u+2013> and thus for obama<u+2019>s asia pivot and his grand global strategy <u+2013> might not come until late july. but if the president hasn<u+2019>t been able to sell his vision over years of promoting it, it seems at least uncertain he<u+2019>ll be able to save it now.

how asia trade deal could make or break obama's foreign policy vision (+video)

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

19.0

78.0

8.0

4834.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

351.0

0.0

96.0

0.0

42.0

8.0

15.0

7.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

11.0

32.0

17.0

39.0

357.0

96.0

42.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

suspects in paris magazine attack killed; market gunman and 4 hostages also dead a nationwide manhunt for the suspects of france's deadliest terrorist attack in more than 50 years ended in a hail of gunfire on friday. after hours of tension in two separate standoffs that shut down parts of the paris metro area, the two main suspects in the attack on a satirical magazine and a man who took hostages at a kosher grocery are dead, president fran<u+00e7>ois hollande said in a speech to the nation. hollande also said four hostages had been killed today; he called the week's events "a tragedy for the nation, an obligation for us to confront terrorists." "we are a free nation that does not give in," the french president said. "we carry an ideal that is greater than us." the standoffs started this morning, when police cornered said and ch<u+00e9>rif kouachi, who were suspected of killing 12 people in the charlie hebdo attack, at a print shop in the small town of dammartin-en-goele. while initial reports said an employee of the shop was being held hostage there, it later emerged that the worker, reportedly a graphic designer, was hiding in the building, undetected by the gunmen. "he was able to give [by text messages] tactical elements" such as the positions inside the building, french tv news itele reports. separately, in eastern paris, a gunman identified as amedy coulibaly entered a kosher grocery and took several people hostage. he also called a tv news station, seeking to talk to police (more on that in our updates below). and it seems that amidst his phone calls, coulibaly didn't hang up properly <u+2014> allowing police to hear his movements. "the audio information wasn't distinct," bfm tv reports, "but was precious to law enforcement." the station adds that police began their assault on the store at the same time they heard coulibaly start praying. police have made several connections between coulibaly and the kouachi brothers, french media report, through cellphone and legal records. police are still looking for one suspect: hayat boumeddiene, 26, whom they say was involved in the killing of a policewoman in paris thursday. "u.s. officials say both coulibaly and boumeddiene were known to american intelligence authorities," npr's dina temple-raston reports. a little after 11 a.m. et, and as the sun began to set in france, explosions were heard at both the store and the print shop, as police began an assault. images on french television showed hostages streaming out of the kosher grocery store after an explosion and gunfire; a large explosion was seen at the print shop in dammartin-en-goele. that was followed by smoke billowing from the building. the afp reported that when police stormed the print shop, the kouachi brothers came out firing and were killed during the confrontation. the authorities say coulibaly was killed during the siege of the kosher market. npr's eleanor beardsley reports that police were first tipped off to the kouachi brothers when a resident reported a stolen car in the small village of dammartin-en-goele, 25 miles northeast of paris. the caller recognized the brothers and told police that they were heavily armed. police moved in and surrounded the print shop, located in an industrial center not far from the charles de gaulle airport outside paris. for hours, special tactical units kept watch, while helicopters swooped overhead. as that was unfolding, another gunman walked into the kosher shop in eastern paris, reportedly taking a handful of hostages. eleanor reported that the series of events left the city <u+2014> already reeling from its worst terrorist attack in more than 50 years <u+2014> in a state of shock. police cordoned off parts of paris, and officers in tactical gear and with big guns walked through the streets as sirens sounded everywhere. police also released a poster naming coulibaly and a 26-year-old woman named hayat boumeddiene as suspects in a shooting that left a policewoman dead on thursday. there is still no word on the whereabouts of boumeddiene. by around 11:30 a.m. et, the siege was over. in total, since the mass shooting at charlie hebdo on wednesday, 17 people have been killed in france. hours after the standoffs ended, al-qaeda in the arabian peninsula released a statement threatening france with more violence; the ap says that the group has claimed responsibility for wednesday's attack. hollande said the country knows that the threat is not "yet over." he called for vigilance and extra security; he said the country should reject any racist attacks like the "anti-semitic act" committed today. he also said that the suspects killed today "have nothing to do with islam." "we must show our determination against anything that may divide us," hollande said. this is a breaking news story. as often happens in situations like these, some information reported early may turn out to be inaccurate. we'll move quickly to correct the record and we'll only point to the best information we have at the time. refresh this page for the latest. update at 6:50 p.m. et: explosives in kosher grocery paris prosecutor francois molins has confirmed more details about the case. molins spoke late friday; here's a quick recap of what he said: update at 5:50 p.m. et: al-qaeda in the arabian peninsula reportedly claims responsibility a senior official of al-qaeda in the arabian peninsula praised this week's attack in paris and threatened france with more violence, according to the site organization, which monitors extremist groups. a speech by was posted online friday, after the chief suspects in the attack were killed. in it, sheikh harith al-nadhari says (according to site's translation): "some of the sons of france were disrespectful to the prophets of allah, so a group from among the believing soldiers of allah marched unto them, then they taught them respect and the limit of the freedom of expression." the aqap separately claimed responsibility for guiding the attack, the ap says. update at 5 p.m. et: suspects said to have spoken to french media before deadly showdown a french media outlet says it spoke to both ch<u+00e9>rif kouachi and amedy coulibaly as the men were engaged in two separate standoffs with police, and that both of them avowed ties to terrorist groups. the phone interviews with kouachi and coulibaly reportedly took place well before france's bfm tv or its sister radio station rmc broadcast them. bfm tv says the conversation with kouachi took place after a journalist called the print shop where the kouachi brothers were holed up. kouachi said he and his brother had not killed any civilians and that they had acted to avenge prophet muhammad. he also said that western forces had killed women and children in iraq, afghanistan, and syria. according to a synopsis by sarah-lou cohen, the head of bfmtv's police and justice unit, kouachi said he had been supported by al-qaeda in yemen <u+2014> a group now more commonly known as al-qaeda in the arabian peninsula. when asked about the possibility that he might be killed, kouachi answered, "that's not a problem." bfm tv says it spoke to coulibaly after he called the network asking for a number for the police. at the time of the conversation, the man said that four people had already died in the kosher grocery where he had barricaded himself from the authorities. coulibaly claimed allegiance to the extremist group that calls itself the islamic state (or isis); he also said that his actions were tied to those of the kouachi brothers. when asked if the attacks had been synchronized, he answered, "no. just when they started the attack at hebdo, i was to attack police." update at 2:16 p.m. et. 'we stand for freedom': speaking in front of students at pellisippi state community college in tennessee, president obama offered the french his support. "the united states stands with you today, stands with you tomorrow," obama said. the president added that the u.s. stood by the values that the u.s. and france share. "in the streets of paris, the world's seen once again what terrorists stand for: they have nothing to offer but hatred and human suffering," obama said. "and we stand for freedom and hope and the dignity of all human beings. and that's what the city of paris represents to the world." closing his speech to a round of applause, obama said, "and that spirit will endure forever <u+2013> long after the scourge of terrorism is banished from this world. update at 1:21 p.m. et. 'how great the threat is': in statements to the press, france's interior minister bernard cazeneuve thanked the police officers and the special teams that worked to end the crisis today. he said the events of the past few days "show how great the threat" is to france. "it is incumbent on us to be on constantly alert," cazeneuve said. the minister refused to give any details of the operation, because he said he did not want to put out any misinformation. update at 12:11 p.m. et. hollande to address nation: president fran<u+00e7>ois hollande will address his country at 2 p.m. et, according to palais de l'<u+00c9>lys<u+00e9>e. update at 12:01 p.m. et. siege is over: according to multiple media outlets, both hostage standoffs in france are over. according to reports, said and ch<u+00e9>rif kouachi were killed in the siege in dammartin-en-goele, and amedy coulibaly was killed in the siege in eastern paris. there is still no word on any other casualties. update 11:19 a.m. et. explosions, gunfire at both locations: minutes apart, reporters at both standoff locations reported gunshots and explosions. npr's lauren frayer reported that french television showed what appeared to be civilians streaming out of the kosher grocery store in eastern paris. television images showed a large explosion at a print shop in dammartin-en-goele. that was followed by smoke billowing from the building. update at 11:14 a.m. et. explosions, sirens: npr's eleanor beardsley says she has just heard loud explosions and gunfire in paris. she says people started running when they heard it. the booms, she told morning edition, were followed by sirens. it's still unclear what is going on. update 11:06 a.m. et. the scene in paris: npr's eleanor beardsley reports that police have cordoned off a big area of eastern paris. she reports that "everyone is in a state of shock." "people are angry and nervous," she told our newscast unit. "it's a crazy scene." you can hear sirens and police dressed in tactical gear with big guns walking the city. update at 11 a.m. et. smoke, explosions: television images are showing light smoke coming from the printing company where the kouachi brothers are thought to be holed up. police forces in tactical gear were also on the roof of the building. reuters reports one of its reporters heard gunshots and "several explosions." update at 10:08 a.m. et. the links: there's a lot going on in this story. here, we'll try to lay out all of the known connections plainly: <u+2014> there are four events to keep in mind. 1. the shooting at charlie hebdo on wednesday morning. 2. the shooting death of a female police officer on thursday in montrouge. 3. an ongoing standoff in dammartin-en-goele, where police believe the two main suspects in the charlie hebdo shooting, said and ch<u+00e9>rif kouachi, are holed up in the building of a printing company. 4. an ongoing standoff at a kosher shop in eastern paris, where, according to multiple media reports, police believe amedy coulibaly has taken a handful of hostages. <u+2014> earlier today, police named coulibaly as a suspect in the shooting death of the female police officer on thursday. <u+2014> npr's dina temple-raston reported on morning edition that u.s. officials have been telling her privately that thursday's shooting incident was terrorism related. <u+2014> dina says that authorities now believe that coulibaly is a friend of the kouachi brothers. <u+2014> le parisen reports that in 2010, coulibaly was implicated in trying to help in the escape of one of the masterminds of terrorist attacks that happened in 1995. the news outlet also reports that coulibaly was convicted on terrorism charges. <u+2014> as we reported, ch<u+00e9>rif kouachi was implicated in that same incident in 2010. update at 8:22 a.m. et. a link between shootings: numerous news organizations have reported that police sources tell them that a shooting that left one police officer dead on thursday is linked to the shootings at the offices of charlie hebdo. france 24 reports that the people suspected of committing that crime belong to the same organizations as the kouachi brothers. police have officially released a photograph of two suspects in that shooting in montrouge. in that flier, police say the two <u+2014> hayat boumeddiene, 26, and amedy coulibaly, 32 <u+2014> are wanted in a murder committed in connection with a "terrorist organization." update at 8:09 a.m. et. interior minister at scene of kosher shop: france's interior minister bernard cazeneuve is at the scene of an apparent hostage situation in eastern paris. television images have shown dozens of police officers in tactical gear in front of the kosher shop. it's worth noting that it's not clear whether all of these events are related. update at 7:52 a.m. et. background: in case you have not been paying attention, here's a quick summary of what's been happening in france: wednesday morning, at least two gunmen entered the paris offices of charlie hebdo, a satirical magazine that has in the past been threatened by islamic extremists, and opened fire, killing 12 people, including four of the magazine's founding cartoonists. police launched a massive manhunt for two suspects: said and ch<u+00e9>rif kouachi, french citizens whom authorities had been watching for some time. ch<u+00e9>rif was convicted on terrorism charges in 2008. he served 18 months for helping to funnel fighters from france to iraq. today, that manhunt seems to have come to a climax, because police believe the two men are cornered at a printing company's building in a city northeast of paris. update at 7:49 a.m. et. another incident in paris: multiple news outlets, including afp, france 24 and le monde, are reporting that an armed man has entered a kosher shop in eastern paris and may have taken a hostage. there is no word on whether this incident, which police have not confirmed, might be related to the attack on charlie hebdo. update at 7:16 a.m. et. not certain if there are hostages: on twitter, an interior ministry spokesman said the men now in a standoff with police are "certain to be the kouachi brothers." the spokesman said it was still not clear whether the two suspects had taken any hostages. "the priority is to establish a dialogue with the suspects," the spokesman added. he added that there had been no deaths or injuries at the time and that police had not launched an assault on the building. update at 6:51 a.m. et. police make contact: citing an unnamed french official, the ap says police have "made contact with terror suspects."

suspects in paris magazine attack killed; market gunman and 4 hostages also dead

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

48.0

80.0

8.0

15026.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

961.0

0.0

312.0

0.0

86.0

28.0

27.0

11.0

38.0

15.0

19.0

12.0

45.0

60.0

966.0

312.0

86.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

as flames, property destruction and violent confrontations<u+00a0>spread across west baltimore<u+00a0>on monday night, state and federal authorities were quick to draw a distinction between rioting and so-called <u+201c>legitimate<u+201d> forms of protest. <u+201c>i condemn the senseless acts of violence by some individuals in baltimore that have resulted in harm to law enforcement officers, destruction of property and a shattering of the peace in the city of baltimore,<u+201d><u+00a0>u.s. attorney general loretta lynch<u+00a0>said in a statement.<u+00a0><u+201c>those who commit violent actions, ostensibly in protest of the death of freddie gray, do a disservice to his family, to his loved ones, and to legitimate peaceful protesters who are working to improve their community for all its residents.<u+201d> similarly, maryland gov. larry hogan on monday argued that there is <u+201c>a significant difference between protesting<u+00a0>and violence.<u+201d> that declaration has become a common refrain in the aftermath of racially charged civil unrest. when ferguson, missouri erupted last year over the shooting death of an unarmed black teenager<u+00a0>and a grand jury<u+2019>s decision not to indict the police officer who pulled the trigger, president barack obama<u+00a0>drew a sharp rhetorical line<u+00a0>between<u+00a0>those who <u+201c>just want their voices heard around legitimate issues<u+201d> and <u+201c>the handful of people who may use the grand jury<u+2019>s decision as an excuse for violence." but scholars of american social movements say the distinction might not be so clear. instead, they argue rioting is often what happens when marginalized groups feel they have no other outlet for expressing their grievances. <u+201c>what you have in places where rioting tends to occur is the long-running abandonment by institutions,<u+201d> said justin paulson,<u+00a0>a political sociologist at carleton<u+00a0>university in ottawa, canada. <u+201c>not that they<u+2019>re fully abandoned, it<u+2019>s just the institutions you and i expect to make things run smoothly, to make people<u+2019>s lives better, are actually turned against the members of these communities." the kerner commission<u+00a0><u+2014><u+00a0>a panel established in 1967 by then-president lyndon b. johnson to investigate the root causes for the race riots of the time <u+2014> suggested as much in<u+00a0>its<u+00a0>final report.<u+00a0><u+201c>ineffectiveness of the political structure and grievance mechanisms<u+201d> was one of the<u+00a0>motives fueling riots, said the report. martin luther king jr. alluded to a similar point in a 1968 speech during which he said it would be <u+201c>morally irresponsible<u+201d> to condemn rioting <u+201c>without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society." <u+201c>these conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative to engage in violent rebellions to get attention,<u+201d> said king. <u+201c>and i must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard." william darity jr., a professor of public policy at duke university, said police behavior <u+201c>seems to be the primary source<u+201d> of riots such as the ones which<u+00a0>occurred in baltimore and ferguson, as well as the unrest examined by the kerner commission. <u+201c>the fact that police lynchings of unarmed blacks have gone on for upwards of 50 years without any significant steps to curb police behavior makes it clear that trying to protest through established channels doesn<u+2019>t make a difference,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>i am no great enthusiast for anarchy and chaos, but i can also understand why at a certain point people say there<u+2019>s no point in behaving, and i<u+2019>d like to put this in quotes, <u+2018>legitimately.<u+2019>" rick perlstein, a historian who has written extensively about social unrest in the 1960s, said <u+201c>a radical sense of dispossession<u+201d> fueled rioting both then and now. in particular, distrust of the police <u+2014> and specific incidences of police violence <u+2014> have often been a major precipitating factor, he said.<u+00a0>citing<u+00a0>an in these times<u+00a0>article he wrote during the protests in ferguson,<u+00a0>perlstein noted that violent encounters with the police<u+00a0>led to the 2015 baltimore riot, 2014 ferguson riots, 1964 harlem riot, 1965 watts riot, 1967 newark riot, and others. the most recent riots in ferguson and baltimore have been <u+201c>much, much less intense<u+201d> compared to their predecessors, he said. police have become more effective at containing them, and cities are not subject to the same demographic pressure they experienced during the great migration of the 20th century, as african-americans moved en<u+00a0>masse from the south to northern cities. <u+201c>there just aren<u+2019>t that many places undergoing these kinds of ethnic and racial transitions,<u+201d> said perlstein.

why riots happen in places like baltimore

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

41.0

8.0

4512.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

348.0

0.0

82.0

0.0

42.0

22.0

12.0

10.0

19.0

6.0

13.0

8.0

21.0

29.0

33.0

352.0

82.0

42.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the civil war era<u+2019>s 14th amendment, granting automatic citizenship to any baby born on american soil, is a proud achievement of the party of lincoln. but now house republicans are talking about abolishing birthright citizenship. a house judiciary subcommittee took up the question wednesday afternoon, prompted by legislation sponsored by rep. steve king (r-iowa) and 22 other lawmakers that, after nearly 150 years, would end automatic citizenship. the 14th amendment, king told the panel, <u+201c>did not contemplate that anyone who would sneak into the united states and have a baby would have automatic citizenship conferred on them.<u+201d> added king, <u+201c>i<u+2019>d suggest it<u+2019>s our job here in this congress to decide who will be citizens, not someone in a foreign country that can sneak into the united states and have a baby and then go home with the birth certificate.<u+201d> it<u+2019>s no small task to undo a principle, enshrined in the constitution and upheld by the supreme court, that defines the united states as a nation of immigrants. it<u+2019>s particularly audacious that house republicans would undo a century and a half of precedent without amending the constitution but merely by passing a law to reinterpret the 14th amendment<u+2019>s wording in a way that will stop the scourge of <u+201c>anchor babies<u+201d> and <u+201c>birth tourism.<u+201d> judiciary committee republicans brought in three experts to testify in support of this extraordinary maneuver (a lone democratic witness was opposed), and they evidently had to search far and wide for people who would take this view, because they ended up with a bizarre witness: an octogenarian professor from the university of texas named lino graglia. this would be the lino graglia who caused a furor in 1997 when he said that latinos and african americans are <u+201c>not academically competitive with whites<u+201d> and come from a <u+201c>culture that seems not to encourage achievement.<u+201d> he also said at the time that <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t know that it<u+2019>s good for whites to be with the lower classes.<u+201d> this is also the same lino graglia who said in a 2012 interview that black and hispanic children are less <u+201c>academically competent<u+201d> than white children, and he attributed the academic gap to the <u+201c>deleterious experience<u+201d> of being reared by single mothers. when the interviewer, a black man, said he had a single mother, graglia said that <u+201c>my guess would be that you<u+2019>re above usual smartness for whites, to say nothing of blacks.<u+201d> and this is the very same lino graglia whose nomination for a federal judgeship in the 1980s fell apart amid allegations that he had urged austin residents to defy a court-ordered busing plan and had used the racist word <u+201c>pickaninny<u+201d> in the classroom. abolishing automatic citizenship for babies born on american soil, and having graglia make the case, probably won<u+2019>t help republicans overcome their problems with minorities, who are gradually becoming the majority. democrats, by happenstance, presented a sharp contrast to the gop effort wednesday: sens. elizabeth warren (mass.) and sherrod brown (ohio) and others met at washington<u+2019>s carnegie library with a coalition including immigration and civil rights advocates to launch a new jobs campaign, <u+201c>putting families first.<u+201d> at the birthright hearing, king got things going by informing his colleagues that <u+201c>birth tourism has grown substantially<u+201d> and that it costs $48,000 for a chinese national to fly to the united states, have her baby, get a birth certificate and take the child back to china. though conservatives generally take a dim view of international law, king said the united states in this case should follow <u+201c>almost every other industrialized country<u+201d> in abolishing birthright citizenship. graglia dutifully informed the committee that <u+201c>a law ending birthright citizenship should and likely would survive constitutional challenge.<u+201d> but consider the source: a man who by his own account takes <u+201c>a very limited view of the power of the supreme court<u+201d> and breezily dismisses contrary precedents. rep. zoe lofgren (d-calif) mentioned graglia<u+2019>s <u+201c>pickaninny<u+201d> comment and his position on busing. after lofgren<u+2019>s time expired, graglia blurted out: <u+201c>your bringing up .<u+2009>.<u+2009>. this alleged statement of <u+2018>pickaninny<u+2019> is in the nature of slur. i don<u+2019>t know why you<u+2019>re bringing up these insulting things that have nothing to do with<u+201d> his testimony. minutes later, rep. luis gutierrez (d-ill.) read aloud some of graglia<u+2019>s other comments about minorities. <u+201c>it seems some underhanded move is being made here,<u+201d> the professor protested, saying he <u+201c>never made a comment that in any way implied the inferiority of any group.<u+201d> the congressman asked that graglia<u+2019>s past statements be entered into the record. but rep. lamar smith (r-tex.) complained that the line of inquiry was <u+201c>a non-germane subject for this hearing.<u+201d> on the contrary, it gets right at the heart of the matter. read more from dana milbank<u+2019>s archive, follow him on twitter or subscribe to his updates on facebook.

house republicans try to gut a key american principle

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

53.0

8.0

4939.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

400.0

0.0

91.0

0.0

55.0

12.0

15.0

7.0

14.0

10.0

12.0

5.0

29.0

28.0

37.0

406.0

91.0

55.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

cnbc aired two gop presidential debates wednesday: a prime-time event starring 10 candidates and an earlier debate featuring four second-tier contenders, based on an average of recent polls. not every candidate uttered facts that are easily fact checked, but following is a list of 14<u+00a0>suspicious or interesting claims. as is our practice, we do not award pinocchios when we do a roundup of facts in debates. fiorina, who served as a surrogate for mitt romney<u+2019>s during his 2012 presidential run, recycles a misleading talking point from that unsuccessful campaign <u+2014><u+00a0>but oddly, she never double-checked the math. the romney campaign calculated these figures by comparing<u+00a0>the decline in the number of all nonfarm employees<u+00a0>from january 2009 to march 2012 with<u+00a0>the decline in jobs held by women<u+00a0>in that period. while the statistic was technically correct for one month in 2012 <u+2014> about three years into obama<u+2019>s first term <u+2014> it quickly was dropped by romney<u+2019>s campaign because newer economic data made<u+00a0>it obsolete. in the debate, fiorina claimed that this statistic was true for obama<u+2019>s first term. but by the time he took the oath of office a second time, his jobs record was a net winner, both for men and women. so this claim is utterly wrong. this is false, though it has increasingly emerged as a gop talking point. sanders, an independent from vermont who is seeking the democratic presidential nomination, has not yet released a tax plan, but has repeatedly denied that he would increase taxes from the current marginal rate of 39.6 percent to 90 percent. (the margin rate is what you pay on each additional dollar earned.) the united states had a marginal tax rate of 90 percent in the dwight eisenhower administration, and then john f. kennedy proposed to reduce<u+00a0>it to 70 percent. (the tax cut was passed after his assassination.) but even such rates would not take 90 percent of a person<u+2019>s income. bush repeatedly claims $19 billion in taxes over his eight years as governor, but that is quite misleading. this refers to cumulative state revenue changes as a result of state and federal decisions, and it includes revenue changes from tax and non-tax legislative actions during his tenure as governor. moreover, this $19 billion figure includes revenues the state would have received if the federal estate tax credit had not been phased out. there were some states that levied new state taxes to balance out the phase-out of the federal estate tax. bush didn<u+2019>t fight the estate tax repeal. but that<u+2019>s certainly not the same as actively <u+201c>cutting<u+201d> those tax revenues from the state budget. bush<u+2019>s 1.3 million jobs number is accurate, as far as it goes, and he avoided claiming that he <u+201c>led the nation<u+201d> in job creation. but, as we repeatedly warn, readers should be wary when state executives take credit for the number of jobs in their state. there<u+2019>s not one policy decision that affects jobs figures. cruz<u+2019>s comment is based on research by emmanuel saez, a university of california at berkeley economics professor who is often cited for claims on income inequality. saez analyzed internal revenue service income data dating to 1913, and found that the top 1 percent in 2012 had the highest share of income since 1928, the peak of the stock market bubble of the roaring 1920s. saez compiled market income data, including capital gains and excluding government transfers. the top 1 percent<u+2019>s income share fell slightly in 2013 compared to 2012, to 20.1 percent from 22.8 percent. but the trend remained the same. incomes in the top 1 percent fluctuated more sharply since 1928 compared to the bottom 99 percent. and the bottom 90 percent<u+2019>s income share did not increase as much as the top decile in recent decades, saez wrote. <u+201c>those at the very top of the income distribution therefore play a central role in the evolution of u.s. inequality over the course of the 20th century,<u+201d> saez wrote. moderator becky quick: <u+201c>you had talked a little bit about marco rubio. i think you called him mark zuckerberg<u+2019>s personal senator because he was in favor of the h-1b [visa].<u+201d> donald trump:<u+00a0><u+201c>i never said that. i never said that.<u+201d> perhaps trump should have read his own campaign web site before the debate. among the immigration policy proposals listed on donaldjtrump.com<u+00a0>is a proposal to increase the prevailing wage for those in the h-1b program. h-1b visas are granted to highly skilled immigrant workers who are coveted by technology companies, particularly ones in silicon valley. trump has proposed restricting the h-1b program. he criticized the program for giving away coveted entry-level it jobs to workers getting flown in cheaper from overseas. more stem (science, technology, engineering and math) graduates receive degrees than find stem jobs each year, according to trump<u+2019>s proposal. he proposed raising the prevailing wage paid to h-1b visa holders so that entry-level it jobs can go to <u+201c>the existing domestic pool of unemployed native and immigrant workers in the u.s., instead of flying in cheaper workers form overseas.<u+201d> <u+201c>mark zuckerberg<u+2019>s personal senator, marco rubio, has a bill to triple h-1bs that would decimate women and minorities,<u+201d> the white paper read. (we could not find any evidence that trump himself has made this assertion.) during the debate, trump denied that he was critical of zuckerberg, of facebook: <u+201c>i am all in favor of keeping these talented people here so they can go to work in silicon valley.<u+201d> christie loves to say this but that doesn<u+2019>t make it true. and he significantly misstates the date for when social security<u+2019>s trust funds will be depleted; that will not happen for another 20 years (and even then social security can pay partial benefits). an<u+00a0>iou is just a pejorative way of saying <u+201c>bond.<u+201d> these bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the u.s. government. until the 2011 debt-ceiling impasse, one could not imagine that any president or congress would risk defaulting on them because it would damage the nation<u+2019>s financial standing. still, treasury bonds are considered a good bet<u+00a0><u+2014> deemed to be one of the safest places to keep money. the bonds are a real asset to social security, but they also represent an obligation of the rest of the government. like any entity that issues debt, such as a corporation, the government will have to make good on its obligations, generally by taking the money out of revenue, reducing expenses or issuing new debt. the action taken really depends on the resources available at the time. there is nothing particularly unusual about this, except that the u.s. government is better placed to make good on these obligations than virtually any other debt-issuer. some analysts, however, question whether the social security system holding those bonds lowers the cost of paying benefits relative to if the system did not hold them. since the bonds have to be redeemed by general taxpayers, as a group taxpayers have to provide the same level of revenues to finance benefit payments as if social security were not holding any bonds. so then the question becomes whether the fact that social security ran these surpluses in the past improved the government<u+2019>s overall fiscal position and thereby made it easier for the government to finance the total level of upcoming benefit payments.<u+00a0>some<u+00a0>analysts<u+00a0>contend<u+00a0>that the existence of the earlier social security surpluses spurred lawmakers to spend more, resulting in higher public debt. rubio is referring to a report published in 2014 by the brookings institution, which studied census bureau data called business dynamic statistics. brookings analysts<u+00a0>tracked data back to 1978 and found that starting in 2008, business deaths exceeded business births through 2011. but note that this started happening seven years ago, while rubio makes it sound like it is a new development. (update: politifact noted that more recent data shows the trend shifted in 2012 and in the past two years, business starts began to exceed business deaths.) these are kasich<u+2019>s go-to claims about his record as ohio governor and chairman of the house budget committee. but some of his figures lack context. the $8 billion figure reflects the breadth of the budget imbalance that kasich<u+2019>s administration faced when he took office (the actual figure is $7.7 billion). but the projection did not end up being as high, and the actual shortfall was decreased by hundreds of millions of dollars. kasich<u+2019>s $2 billion figure and jobs numbers largely check out. the $2 billion surplus is the state government<u+2019>s tally of the rainy day fund. while bureau of labor statistics support his job creation numbers, we<u+2019>ve frequently urged readers to be wary about such claims. so much of what happens in an economy and the impact on jobs is beyond a single politician<u+2019>s control. kudos to kasich for clarifying that the $5 trillion surplus was a projection, not an actual surplus, when he left congress in 2000. we<u+2019>ve urged him to clarify this point in the past. the figure he uses was a projected, 10-year surplus <u+2014><u+00a0>but it didn<u+2019>t end up materializing because of a slower economy, tax cuts and increased government spending after 9/11 in the years after kasich left washington. trump, referring to the shooting at the naval reserve center in chattanooga, tenn., in july, is wrong on this point. the service members at the naval reserve center in chattanooga, tenn., were armed. in fact, the military is investigating why they were armed, as the pentagon has restrictions on who can carry weapons at such facilities. the fbi said a 24-year-old gunman armed with a semiautomatic assault rifle and a handgun methodically hunted for marines and sailors to kill. edward reinhold, special agent in charge of the fbi<u+2019>s field office in knoxville, tenn., provided the first definitive account of the terrorist attack that left four marines and a navy petty officer dead. reinhold told reporters at a news conference in chattanooga that mohammad youssef abdul<u+00ad>azeez smashed through the gate of the reserve center last thursday and was almost immediately confronted by a service member who had his own gun. the service member fired several rounds, but it has not yet been determined whether he managed to hit abdulazeez, who quickly entered the reserve center looking for targets, mortally wounding the sailor inside the building. this is false. manufacturing took a huge hit during the great recession, so 2 million jobs were lost between december 2007 and june 2009, the official length of the recession, according to government statistics. <u+00a0>but the recession began a year before obama took office. meanwhile, from those depths,<u+00a0>manufacturing has slowly crawled its way back. from the start of obama<u+2019>s presidency, there are about 250,000 fewer manufacturing jobs. that is still about 1.4 million fewer than the start of the recession, however. this is jindal<u+2019>s go-to line about his record as governor. but he takes too much credit. the state budget in fiscal 2009, jindal<u+2019>s first budget after taking office in 2008, was $34.3 billion. in fiscal<u+00a0>2016, the proposed budget was $25.1 billion. that is a $9.2 billion decrease, or a 26.8 percent decrease. but this budget decrease was not due to his executive decisions alone. federal funding also decreased by $10 billion during those eight years,<u+00a0>from $19.7 billion to $9.7 billion. part of this decrease was waning federal funding for hurricane recovery,<u+00a0>the times-picayune has reported. the labor participation rate fell to 62.4 percent in september, according to the u.s. bureau of labor statistics. that<u+2019>s actually lowest since 1977, when it touched 62.3 percent <u+2014> but that<u+2019>s 38 years, not 50. so santorum<u+2019>s a bit off with his figure. when obama took office in january, 2009, the workforce participation rate was 65.7 percent. so there has certainly been a decline. but the rate had already been on a steady downward track since it hit a high of 67.3 percent in the last year of bill clinton<u+2019>s presidency. a key reason? the composition of the labor force has been affected by the retirement of the leading edge of the baby-boom generation. the federal reserve bank of chicago<u+00a0>in 2012 concluded<u+00a0>that just over half of the post-1999 decline in the participation rate comes from the retirement of the baby boomers. critically, the research showed that the problem is only going to get worse in the rest of the decade, with retirements accounting for two-thirds of the decline of participation rate by 2020. in other words, the rate will keep declining, no matter how well the economy does. will this zombie claim about the shrinking navy ever go away? apparently not; we already awarded graham three pinocchios earlier this year for the same claim. fact checkers repeatedly debunked this in the 2012 presidential elections, and it<u+2019>s being repeated again this time around. but, surprise: a lot has changed in 100 years, including the need and capacity of ships. after all, it<u+2019>s a now a matter of<u+00a0>modern nuclear-powered fleet carriers, versus gunboats and small warships of 100 years ago. the push for ships under the reagan era (to build the navy up to 600-ship levels) no longer exists, and ships from that era are now retiring. navy secretary ray mabus recently spoke about this problematic ship-counting exercise. there are other ways to measure seapower than just the sheer number of ships, he said: <u+201c>that<u+2019>s pretty irrelevant. we also have fewer telegraph machines than we did in world war i and we seem to be doing fine without that. <u+2026> look at the capability. look at the missions that we do.<u+201d> plus, the navy is on track to grow to just over 300 ships, approximately the size that a bipartisan congressional panel has recommended for the current navy. as for his statement about the army, graham is<u+00a0>on a bit more solid ground because he<u+2019>s talking about the number of troops. (under sequestration, the number of troops was due to be reduced to 420,000 in fiscal year 2016, the lowest since 1940, but the new budget deal will likely change that.) but even then, it<u+2019>s apples and oranges to compare the capabilities of a world war ii army with today<u+2019>s army. that the export-import bank levels the playing field for the u.s. economy is a common argument for reauthorizing the federal agency. but there are data limitations to how the ex-im bank<u+2019>s loans has affected american jobs. the government accountability office in 2013 found that there are limitations to the method the bank uses to keep track of employment figures. this method plays an essential role in the bank<u+2019>s jobs calculation process, the gao found. but because of limitations out of the agency<u+2019>s direct control, the gao found that the data <u+201c>cannot be used to distinguish between jobs that were newly created and those that were maintained.<u+201d>

fact-checking the third round of gop debates

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

13.0

44.0

8.0

14786.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

940.0

2.0

0.0

291.0

0.0

89.0

21.0

31.0

7.0

30.0

23.0

24.0

13.0

59.0

58.0

89.0

942.0

293.0

89.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the man accused of shooting a young woman dead on a popular pier had served 181 months in federal prisons and been deported five times. but san francisco<u+2019>s sheriff saw fit to free him. across the top of the letter, the man neatly lettered the words <u+201c>motion to correct sentence<u+201d> and <u+201c>united states v. juan francisco lopez-sanchez.<u+201d> he is listed in this and most of his other court cases by that name and in others as juan jose dominguez-de la parra. his real name is said by federal authorities to most likely be jose inez garcia zarate. the authorities are not sure which of the various dates of birth he has provided is accurate. as lopez-sanchez, dob 12/12/1980, he reminded the court in this letter from a federal correctional facility in missouri that he was serving 51 months in federal prison for illegal reentry to the united states. he had also been sentenced to an added 21 months for violating the terms of his supervised release after a 1998 conviction for a previous illegal reentry. he wrote to the court that it was his understanding the 51 months and the 21 months were to be served concurrently. but prison officials were now trying to tell him the sentences were supposed to be consecutive. just three months later, this man who had written of his desire to return to his own country was arrested in eagle pass, texas, for once again leaving it to slip into the united states. he was sentenced to another 46 months, to be followed by 21 months of supervised release, as before. his total time in federal pens stood at 181 months<u+2014>or a little more than 15 years<u+2014>as he neared the end of his latest sentence. this march 23 letter was written by the san francisco sheriff<u+2019>s department. the letter<u+2014>first reported by the san francisco chronicle<u+2014>said lopez-sanchez was wanted on an outstanding $5,000 bench warrant arising from a 1995 bust for selling $20 of marijuana to an undercover cop in that city. the federal prison authorities were asked to notify the sheriff<u+2019>s office <u+201c>when the subject is ready for pick-up.<u+201d> lopez-sanchez was at a federal detention facility in san bernardino county near los angeles. the san francisco sheriff<u+2019>s department took custody of him three days later, on march 26. the feds are said to have asked the sheriff<u+2019>s people to notify them prior to his release on the pot case. the real aim of the letter he had written to the court back in 2007 was to return to his country as soon as possible so he could then slip back into america even at the risk of yet another heavy prison term. he now found himself at liberty in sanctuary city, for once with no need to worry about being deported as long as he stayed in san francisco. he could have remained as snug as a citizen if he had not made everybody wish he had been deported by allegedly picking up a .40 caliber pistol that had been stolen from a car on june 27. the pistol belonged to a federal u.s. bureau of land management ranger who had duly reported the theft. another gun was brandished by the thug who pulled up in a bmw, hopped out, and pistol-whipped as well as robbed two tv news crews that had come to cover the shooting on pier 14. a memorial for kate steinle was held on thursday. family and friends told stories of an adventurous, exuberant, and uncommonly kind young woman. they had a phrase for the sunny, uplifting impact she seemed to have on everybody, wherever her wide travels took her:

the murder shaking san francisco<u+2019>s liberal soul

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

47.0

8.0

3411.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

187.0

1.0

0.0

94.0

0.0

21.0

12.0

16.0

5.0

16.0

8.0

5.0

20.0

22.0

23.0

190.0

95.0

21.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

democratic presidential hopeful bernie sanders opened a new phase of his campaign monday, pledging to more aggressively lay out his differences with hillary clinton, an opponent whose views on some issues, he said, are guided by <u+201c>hastily adopted campaign rhetoric.<u+201d> speaking at a news conference here, the senator from vermont drew distinctions with clinton on campaign finance and trade <u+2014> the start of what he said will be a series of differences detailed in coming weeks <u+2014> and pledged to contest the democratic nomination through the convention. <u+201c>i have to say that i am delighted that secretary clinton, month after month after month, seems to be adopting more and more of the positions that we have advocated,<u+201d> sanders said, adding that the former secretary of state <u+201c>is beginning to use a lot of the language and phraseology that we have used.<u+201d> [despite what his critics say, bernie sanders insists he is not championing a <u+2018>radical<u+2019> agenda] the feistier performance by sanders comes on the heels of his loss to clinton in the nevada caucuses saturday and in advance of an expected loss this saturday in the south carolina primary, in which polls have shown clinton with a comfortable lead. with 11 other states holding nominating contests march 1, sanders is fighting to show that he is not running out of momentum after strong performances in the first two contests, in iowa and new hampshire, where the voters were largely white. he chose to hold his news conference in massachusetts, one of the super tuesday states<u+00a0>where he appears strongest against clinton. sanders also unveiled an endorsement from a new multi-state, racially diverse coalition of progressive groups called people<u+2019>s politics. clinton held no public campaign events monday, spending a second day in california at a series of high-dollar fundraisers. earlier monday, sanders campaigned in south carolina, where, during a stop in sumter, he sought to push back against clinton and other critics who have said that his agenda is utopian and unachievable. in recent weeks, clinton has cast herself as the more pragmatic candidate who could implement a progressive agenda while arguing that sanders<u+2019>s plans for universal health care and other bold policies would never be implemented. sanders countered, saying, <u+201c>one of the things that is going on in this campaign is that bernie sanders is too ambitious, he<u+2019>s thinking too big. well, i don<u+2019>t think so. i mean virtually every idea that we are bringing forth not only is the right idea, it<u+2019>s what our country needs, it<u+2019>s what the american people want.<u+201d> sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, ticked off some of his proposals, including ushering in a <u+201c>state-of-the-art, cutting-edge child-care system,<u+201d> each time telling his audience that the idea wasn<u+2019>t as <u+201c>radical<u+201d> as it<u+2019>s been portrayed. as a presidential candidate, sanders has toggled back and forth a couple of times when it comes to drawing contrasts with clinton. [actor danny glover and activist ben jealous size up bernie sanders<u+2019>s outreach to black voters] for the first months of his bid, he barely mentioned his opponent. last fall, however, he considerably stepped up his efforts to draw policy distinctions, and during the first part of the year, he was openly critical of clinton<u+2019>s acceptance of large speaking fees from goldman sachs and other wall street interests. more recently on the campaign trail, sanders had returned to only infrequent mentions of the former secretary of state, even as she and her surrogates attacked him on a range of issues, including gun control, immigration and women<u+2019>s reproductive rights. the issues sanders chose to highlight during his news conference monday<u+00a0>were not new ones, but his critique of clinton was more pointed. <u+201c>the people of massachusetts and the people of the united states need to know that difference between hastily adopted campaign rhetoric and the real record and the long-held ideas of the candidates,<u+201d> he said. he asserted that the two candidates have <u+201c>a very profound difference<u+201d> on campaign finance, noting that a super pac supporting clinton raised $15 million from wall street interests during the most recent reporting period. clinton has sought to distance herself from the donations, saying they were to a super pac originally established to support president obama but has since chosen to back her. <u+201c>i know that every candidate who has ever received special- interest money always says that the millions and millions of dollars they receive will never influence them <u+2014> never, never, never,<u+201d> he said. sanders sought to contrast his method of fundraising, saying his campaign has received 4<u+00a0>million donations averaging $27 apiece, most of them online. sanders also highlighted his long record in congress opposing trade deals, including the pending trans-pacific partnership, a deal being pushed by obama. after declining to take a position on the pact for months, clinton announced her opposition far more recently. at his news conference, sanders shared comments made in january by tom donohue, president of the u.s. chamber of commerce, predicting clinton would eventually support the deal if she won the democratic nomination. sanders later opened the floor to reporter<u+2019>s questions, answering two before he said he had to leave to make it to a scheduled rally in amherst. the first dealt with whether he has a viable path to the democratic nomination. <u+201c>the short, three-letter answer is y-e-s,<u+201d> sanders said. he then chided reporters for placing too much emphasis on the importance of each nominating contest, noting that the primaries and caucuses<u+00a0>are not winner-take-all and saying he is in the race for the long haul. in nevada, sanders said, clinton won 19 delegates to the national convention, while he received 15. (an updated count released monday put the tally at 20 to 15). it takes about 2,400 delegates to secure the nomination, sanders<u+00a0>said. he predicted that the race with clinton will be <u+201c>a slog<u+201d> fought <u+201c>state by state by state.<u+201d>

sanders sharpening message, attacks on clinton after nevada loss

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

64.0

8.0

6034.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

400.0

0.0

128.0

0.0

30.0

11.0

21.0

5.0

7.0

13.0

8.0

9.0

21.0

15.0

42.0

403.0

128.0

30.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

bringing a new approach to a long-running capitol hill standoff, a turkish-american coalition is pushing a new bill in congress that will call for reconciliation and dialogue between turkey and armenia while sidestepping the question of whether the 1915 mass killings of armenians at the hands of the ottoman empire was genocide.

proposed bill calls for reconciliation between turkey and armenia

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

65.0

8.0

329.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

32.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

4.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

4.0

2.0

4.0

38.0

6.0

2.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the leading republican presidential candidates clashed sharply over immigration policy, military spending, and other intractable and emotional issues in a debate here tuesday night, bringing into sharp relief the party<u+2019>s fault line between rigid conservatism and mainstream practicality. the two-hour debate spotlighted the rift between the outsider candidates and establishment governors over how strictly to enforce immigration laws and whether to provide a pathway to legal status for the country<u+2019>s more than 11 million undocumented immigrants or deport them. it also revived a long-simmering dispute over the size and role of the u.s. military, with sen. rand paul (ky.) warning of the potential adverse fiscal effects of increased defense spending and sens. marco rubio (fla.) and ted cruz (tex.) advocating a more muscular american military presence in the world. overall, however, it was a relatively cerebral affair. in a marked departure from the three previous debates, tuesday<u+2019>s questions prodded the candidates to explain their positions on such substantive issues as tax policy, the minimum wage and trade treaties, rather than draw contrasts with one another. little attention was paid to the personal attacks that have shaped the race in recent weeks. on the campaign trail, billionaire donald trump has harshly assailed ben carson as the retired neurosurgeon rose in the polls, but trump refrained from hitting his fellow front-runner on the debate stage. similarly, former florida governor jeb bush, whose attack on rubio backfired at the oct. 28 debate, did not strike his onetime protege on tuesday night. instead, he focused his rhetoric on president obama and democratic front-runner hillary rodham clinton, delivering a few punchy answers in a performance that was not dominant but was more energetic than his earlier lackluster showings. a lengthy discussion of immigration stood out as a proxy for a debate over how republicans can win back the white house after eight years in the wilderness: under the banner of pure and principled conservatism, or with a moderated platform designed to broaden the gop<u+2019>s appeal to latinos and other minorities. trump forcefully defended the<u+00a0>controversial proposal that has <u+00ad>fueled his candidacy since summer, in which he would deport all undocumented immigrants and construct a wall along the border with mexico to keep them out. <u+201c>we are a country of laws, we need borders, we will have a wall, the wall will be built, the wall will be successful, and if you think walls don<u+2019>t work, all you have to do is ask israel,<u+201d> said the former reality-television star. <u+201c>the wall will work, properly done. believe me.<u+201d> that drew a quick retort from ohio gov. john kasich, who had been spoiling for a fight and repeatedly interrupted the questioning of other candidates to give his opinions. <u+201c>for the 11 million people, come on, folks, we all know we can<u+2019>t pick them up and ship them across the border,<u+201d> kasich said. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s a silly argument. it<u+2019>s not an adult argument.<u+201d> trump then interjected with a taunt at bush: <u+201c>you should let jeb speak.<u+201d> [in early debate, two governors clash over conservative records] and the former florida governor did just that, arguing that deporting illegal immigrants is in conflict with american values and would tear families and communities apart. bush warned of<u+00a0>the electoral consequences should the gop nominee campaign with trump<u+2019>s position. <u+201c>they<u+2019>re doing high-fives in the clinton campaign right now when they hear this,<u+201d> bush said. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s the problem with this. we have to win the presidency, and the way you win the presidency is to have practical plans.<u+201d> soon after, brian fallon, a clinton campaign spokesman, tweeted, <u+201c>we actually are doing high-fives right now.<u+201d> cruz, however, sided with trump. <u+201c>if republicans join democrats as the party of amnesty, we will lose,<u+201d> the senator from texas said. cruz said that for many voters, illegal immigration is <u+201c>a very personal economic issue,<u+201d> and he added: <u+201c>we<u+2019>re tired of being told it<u+2019>s <u+2018>anti-immigrant.<u+2019> it<u+2019>s offensive. i am the son of an immigrant who came legally from cuba to seek the american dream, and we can embrace legal immigration while believing in the rule of law.<u+201d> tuesday<u+2019>s debate, the fourth so far in the republican race, was hosted by fox business network and the wall street journal before a live audience at a historic theater in downtown milwaukee. there were eight candidates in the main debate <u+2014> the smallest group to share the big stage so far <u+2014> as national polling averages winnowed the top tier. new jersey gov. chris christie and former arkansas governor mike huckabee were relegated for the first time to an earlier undercard debate, where both faced sharp attacks from louisiana gov. bobby jindal over their records on fiscal policy and other issues. [the take: candidates set aside personal attacks to address economics] for the moderators, the event brought added scrutiny in the wake of the oct. 28 debate in boulder, colo., which was a chaotic affair. cnbc<u+2019>s moderators were sharply criticized for the tone and personal nature of their questioning, and the candidates felt they were being baited to attack one another rather than asked about substance. from the outset of tuesday night<u+2019>s debate, the moderators sought to set a different tone. co-moderator neil cavuto said the focus of the debate would be <u+201c>the economy and what each of you would do to improve it. no more, no less.<u+201d> the first questions were about democratic proposals to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. there are varying views within the republican party about the minimum wage, with 2012 presidential nominee mitt romney among those supporting an increase, which polls show is widely popular. but trump and carson said they would not raise it, arguing an increase would inhibit job growth. <u+201c>taxes too high; wages too high,<u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>we<u+2019>re not going to be able to compete against the world. i hate to say it, but we have to leave it the way it is. people have to go out, they have to work really hard and have to get into that upper stratum.<u+201d> carson said, <u+201c>every time we raise the minimum wage, the number of jobless people increases,<u+201d> especially among black people. he said the better question is: <u+201c>how do we allow people to ascend the ladder of opportunity rather than how do we give them everything and keep them dependent?<u+201d> kasich, who has raised the minimum wage in ohio, took a more moderate approach. <u+201c>economic theory is fine,<u+201d> he said, <u+201c>but you know what? people need help.<u+201d> later in the evening, an extended series of questions about the candidates<u+2019> tax plans sparked a fight between rubio and paul over the size of the military and defense budget. <u+201c>i know rand is a committed isolationist. i<u+2019>m not,<u+201d> rubio said, earning loud cheers from the crowd. <u+201c>.<u+2009>.<u+2009>.<u+00a0>i know that the world is a safer and better place when america is the strongest military power in the world.<u+201d> paul persisted, warning that the country could ill afford to spend more money on the military: <u+201c>i want a strong national defense. but i don<u+2019>t want us to be bankrupt.<u+201d> cruz interjected, siding with rubio: <u+201c>you think defending this nation is expensive? try not defending it. that<u+2019>s a lot more expensive.<u+201d> former business executive carly fiorina also delivered tough lines about the military and the united states<u+2019> role in syria, but she also accused trump of bluster when he talked about his past associations with russian president vladi<u+00ad>mir putin. at one point, trump snapped: <u+201c>why does she keep interrupting everybody?<u+201d> the crowd booed loudly, but unlike in previous debates, fiorina did not respond to trump. meanwhile, carson <u+2014> who has built a powerful following among grass-roots conservatives with his soft-spoken approach <u+2014> faced virtually no scrutiny from the moderators or fellow candidates over the veracity of his personal narrative, which has been the subject of recent media investigations. when cavuto asked carson whether the scrutiny was engulfing his campaign, carson seemed pleased to have the chance to clear the air. <u+201c>thank you for not asking me what i said in the 10th grade,<u+201d> carson said. <u+201c>we should vet all candidates. i have no problem with being vetted. what i do have a problem with is being lied about and then putting that out there as truth.<u+201d> he added: <u+201c>people who know me know that i<u+2019>m an honest person.<u+201d>

the fourth gop debate is more about the party<u+2019>s path than personal attacks

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

3.0

74.0

8.0

8401.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

561.0

2.0

0.0

165.0

0.0

66.0

24.0

23.0

10.0

26.0

14.0

20.0

8.0

41.0

42.0

56.0

563.0

167.0

66.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a president hellbent on destroying human decency would be toxic for my son and daughters. listen up, fellow republican moms, it's time to say enough is enough. it was time even before donald trump<u+2019>s<u+00a0>vulgar boasts<u+00a0>about what he could do to women because of his status, before a parade of women accused him of actions matching those words. no mother should<u+00a0>ever vote for this man. don't get me wrong. i do get your initial hesitancy. you disagree with much of the democratic platform.<u+00a0>and you probably aren<u+2019>t too fond of hillary clinton. fine. i don<u+2019>t love her politics much either, but, come on now. it<u+2019>s time to wise up. i have stood with the republican party since my first election back in 1984, when i pulled the lever for the original<u+00a0>"make america great again"<u+00a0>candidate, ronald reagan. i am the daughter of a longtime republican, a man who worked under george w. bush,<u+00a0>was fired by president obama, and was a passionate, respectful advocate for conservative views until his death in<u+00a0>june. but this is now the party of donald trump, and i can tell you for this card-carrying, die-hard republican, this time around it<u+2019>s got nothing to do with platforms and politics.<u+00a0>i am a mom of three children, a son who is 16<u+00a0>and two daughters ages<u+00a0>13 and 11. and i know there is no wall that will protect my kids from a man hellbent on destroying the common core of human decency. think about it. from the moment they are born, we teach our children how to act.<u+00a0>we demonstrate through our words and our actions how to speak with respect, embrace kindness, work for change with a humble and open heart. then along comes trump and the republicans who so sheepishly stand behind their candidate simply because he is a republican. almost overnight, they have legitimized a cesspool of hypocrisy and hatred. these are the facts: if we let trump become president,<u+00a0>we are saying to our children that respect for others doesn<u+2019>t matter.<u+00a0>we are saying to our daughters that it is ok when a man belittles a woman based on her gender or her body type, and that your value is solely based on your looks. we are saying to our children that money is power and power is a license to bully, to <u+201c>punch him in the face<u+201d> just because he may disagree. and we are saying to all our children, forget everything we have ever taught you <u+2014><u+00a0>forget that compassion and morals matter, forget that our differences are what make our country great, forget the need to stand up for what is right. if we elect trump, we are telling our kids that<u+00a0>it<u+2019>s ok to be a narcissistic, antagonistic, egotistical sob and that there are no rules if your tongue is sharp enough and your pocket is deep enough.<u+00a0>and by blindly supporting a nominee<u+00a0>just because he has the stamp of approval from your party, we are saying to our children, just stand in line, join the masses, do what<u+2019>s expected. because in the end, there is nothing you can do, so why bother caring? except i do care. and i will never accept a candidate who uses power and words to intimidate rather than to protect. instead, i will teach my children to always be willing to stand up<u+00a0>because idle threats are but a shield for insecurity and incompetence. i will never allow a man to condemn an entire community simply because of a skin color, gender or faith; instead, i will remind my children that we are all the same on the inside. i will never accept a man who shouts insults from his pedestal, and<u+00a0>i see no need to support his statements. instead, i will require my children to speak intelligently, to always back up their arguments with real evidence, and to listen and engage with respect. i will never support<u+00a0>a man who seemingly believes women are mere sex objects and says, "when you're a star they let you do it." and i will never vote for<u+00a0>a person who believes that <u+201c>i alone can fix it.<u+201d> instead, i will help my children look for what they can do together to make a difference, because it does take a village. i am a republican.<u+00a0>but i am also a mom.<u+00a0>and as i watch donald trump and the republican party this election year, i cannot allow the destructiveness of his words and lessons to take root within my children. i may be a party girl, but i sure as hell am not an idiot. so i say<u+00a0>to all my fellow republican moms: i am jumping ship, and for the sake of our kids, i hope you do too. jenny tananbaum is a new jersey-based mom, writer and community volunteer. you can read<u+00a0>diverse opinions from our<u+00a0>board of contributors<u+00a0>and other writers on<u+00a0>the<u+00a0>opinion front page,<u+00a0>on twitter<u+00a0>@usatopinion<u+00a0>and in our daily<u+00a0>opinion newsletter.<u+00a0>to submit a letter, comment or column, check our<u+00a0>submission guidelines.

diehard gop mom: no mother could ever vote for trump

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

3.0

52.0

8.0

4633.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

329.0

1.0

0.0

69.0

0.0

39.0

17.0

24.0

10.0

15.0

18.0

13.0

12.0

25.0

32.0

40.0

330.0

70.0

39.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

north charleston police officer michael t. slager, 33, can be seen shooting 50-year-old walter scott after a confrontation on saturday, according to the post and courier. slager chases scott and shoots at him eight times in the video recorded by a passerby and obtained by the new york times. the confrontation started when slager had reportedly pulled over scott because of a broken taillight. it escalated into a foot chase as scott allegedly fled because there were family court-issued warrants for his arrest. slager pursued scott into a grassy lot and claimed that he fired his taser to subdue him. earlier this week, an attorney for slager said the cop felt threatened after scott tried to overpower him and take his taser. today that attorney told the post and courier that he's "no longer involved" in the case. but first images in the video are of slager shooting at scott as he runs away from him. it also appears that slager drops the taser near scott after he was gunned down, according to the new york times. police reports also say that responding officers performed cpr and delivered medical aid to scott, but the video shows scott face down in handcuffs for several minutes after the shooting. another officer shows up and appears to give scott aid, but never performs cpr. police chief eddie driggers said tuesday that slager had been arrested. the u.s. department of justice said in a statement that fbi investigators would work with the state law enforcement division, which typically investigates officer-involved shootings in south carolina, and the state<u+2019>s attorney general to investigate any civil rights violations in scott<u+2019>s death. mayor keith summey added during a news conference that as a result of the video and slager<u+2019>s <u+201c>bad decision,<u+201d> the officer would be charged with murder. scott had been arrested about 10 times in the past, mostly for failing to pay child support or show up for hearings, according to the paper. "he has four children, he doesn<u+2019>t have some type of big violent past or arrest record. he had a job, he was engaged," a lawyer for scott's family told the times. "he had back child support and didn<u+2019>t want to go to jail for back child support." in a statement released tuesday night, south carolina governor nikki haley (r) said, "what happened in this case is not acceptable in south carolina." senator tim scott (r) said "the senseless shooting and taking of walter scott's life was absolutely unnecessary and avoidable," adding that he would be watching the case closely. the shooting in north charleston comes on the heels of several high-profile cases of police officers using deadly force against unarmed black men in ferguson, missouri, cleveland and new york. this is one of the few times the offending officer has been charged with murder. "what if there was no video? what if there was no witness? where would we be without that video," justin bamberg said at a presser with the family on tuesday night. bamburg is one of the scotts' family attorneys and also represents south carolina's house district 90. family attorney l. chris stewart called the witness who recorded the video a "hero," saying that video evidence disproved initial reports that scott reached for the slager's taser. stewart added that the witness is working with investigators and may eventually come forward. "if there was no video, i do not believe that officer would be in jail," bamberg said. "from what the video shows, i think that provides the necessary ammunition to hold this officer accountable." "i don't think anybody can see that and not see that what that officer did was murder mr. scott in cold blood," bamberg said. "what would have happened if this witness did not have the courage to stand up and do the right thing and decide that what he witnessed was wrong? i'm glad we don't have to ponder that."

graphic video shows white officer shooting unarmed black man in back

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

2.0

0.0

3.0

68.0

8.0

3862.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

245.0

0.0

70.0

1.0

0.0

16.0

14.0

11.0

7.0

20.0

6.0

11.0

5.0

19.0

23.0

24.0

252.0

70.0

17.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a day after the fox news-facebook republican presidential primary debates, contenders for the nomination tried to capitalize on momentum friday by firing up their base at a gathering of grassroots conservative. at the 2015 redstate gathering in atlanta, a host of republican 2016 hopefuls including sen. marco rubio, r-fla., former hewlett-packard ceo carly fiorina and new jersey gov. chris christie tried to build on strong performances the night before. the gathering, named after the conservative political website redstate.com, is the brainchild of wsb radio host erick erickson. the three-day convention of top gop elected officials brought a host of 2016 contenders hoping to establish themselves as favorites among the conservative base. all three sought to stir up the base with biting speeches that used humor while showcasing their conservative principles. <u+201c>2016 is going to be a fight, a real fight, between conservatism and the progressivism that has completely dominated the democrat party and that is now not only undermining the character of our nation but crushing the potential of this nation,<u+201d> fiorina, whom analysts seemed to agree dominated thursday's 5 p.m. fox news-facebook debate, told participants. <u+201c>in order to win [in 2016], we<u+2019>re going to have a nominee who throws every punch, who will not ever pull her punches,<u+201d> fiorina said. both fiorina and christie took aim at the u.s. chamber of commerce <u+2013> an unpopular organization among many grassroots conservatives <u+2013> with christie blaming it for republicans not properly dealing with the problem of illegal immigration. <u+201c>the reason we<u+2019>re not dealing with immigration as strongly as we need to be in my opinion is because of the chamber of commerce crowd,<u+201d> christie said. <u+201c>because they want to employ illegal folks and they don<u+2019>t want to use e-verify.<u+201d> fiorina asked: <u+201c>what does the chamber of commerce do, remind me?<u+201d> meanwhile, rubio received big cheers for emphasizing his plan to <u+201c>repeal and replace<u+201d> obamacare, and spent much of his speech talking about solutions to the issue of student loans and the cost of higher education, arguing for more competition and innovation to break the monopoly of higher education. <u+201c>i believe before you take a loan, schools should have to tell you <u+2018>this is how much people make when they graduate with a degree you are seeking from our school.<u+2019> and then you can decide if it<u+2019>s smart to borrow $50,000 to be a greek or roman philosopher, because the market for those philosophers has tightened in the last 2000 years,<u+201d> rubio quipped to laughter from the audience. the participants also had choice words for president obama<u+2019>s policies, with christie promising to repeal his <u+201c>illegal<u+201d> executive actions and slamming his economic record. <u+201c>it is just disgraceful that we are sitting with a president who takes a victory lap for the worst economic growth in post-world war ii history,<u+201d> christie said, while also calling for a radical simplification of the tax code. <u+201c>imagine how many people i could fire from the irs if you could do your taxes in 15 minutes.<u+201d> christie said. meanwhile rubio took aim at obama<u+2019>s foreign policy, specifically his approaches to iran and israel, saying, <u+201c>we have a president who is more respectful of the ayatollah of iran than the prime minister of israel.<u+201d> other candidates at the gathering included louisiana gov. bobby jindal and former texas gov. rick perry. the lineup was due to be followed up on saturday with appearances by former arkansas gov. mike huckabee, texas sen. ted cruz, former florida gov. jeb bush, business mogul donald trump and wisconsin gov. scott walker. the gathering adopted a similar tone to thursday's debate, which was filled with lots of jabbing one-liners that resonated with the audience, and vitriol aimed at the obama administration and hillary clinton. the republicans sparred with each other plenty on thursday, but nobody landed a ko, leaving the 17-candidate field intact heading out of the cleveland showdown.

gop 2016 candidates look to seize momentum out of debates

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

6.0

57.0

8.0

4001.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

297.0

0.0

73.0

0.0

28.0

6.0

9.0

4.0

8.0

3.0

5.0

16.0

14.0

35.0

300.0

73.0

28.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

two women with an interest in violent jihad were arrested in queens, new york, thursday morning as part of an fbi sting, after allegedly plotting to create explosive devices to use in a terrorist attack in the united states. noelle velentzas, 28, and asia siddiqui, 31, had allegedly taken several steps toward constructing an explosive device and discussed their activities with an undercover officer, according to court documents. they had not yet identified a target for their planned attack, federal authorities said. the defendants are u.s. citizens who live in queens and were roommates until recently. during regular meetings between the two women and the undercover agent, both women espoused jihadist beliefs and praised past terrorist attacks in the united states. velentzas allegedly showed the officer her cell phone, which had a background image of osama bin laden holding an ak-47. siddiqui once said that velentzas had been obsessed with pressure cookers since the boston marathon bombings, and velentzas joked about how she planned to cook "food" in a pressure cooker she had recently purchased. it appears velentzas eventually became suspicious of the undercover agent's identity, allegedly using her phone in november and december to access webpages with titles like "learning the identity of a confidential informant," "how to spot undercover police," "is s/he an informant?" she also researched how to detect bugs. yet she and siddiqui continued to meet with the agent in the months that followed. siddiqui purchased several propane tanks and stored them in her basement, and discussed them during the meetings. "i got everything up in this joint, i already told you. if you guys... once we learn... i got everything up in this joint," she allegedly said. "yo, she got everything. this is like the home depot," the undercover agent responded. velentzas then asked siddiqui why she hadn't told them that she had purchased the tanks, but siddiqui insisted she had. "she's the master of not telling you shit that's really important," velentzas said, later telling the undercover agent that they had to "keep it a hundred" so they could trust one another. "cause how could you have a... have a open conversation about some shit that is uhm... federal-time worthy shit and the person... you know... is... half-ass in communication?" velentzas said. "i"m gonna die for your ass and you don't communicate?" federal authorities apparently have been aware of the women for a number of years. velentzas "expressed violent jihadist ideology and an interest in terrorism" in meetings with the undercover agent back in 2013, and said that being a martyr guarantees entrance into heaven. siddiqui allegedly wrote a poem in 2009 for a magazine called jihad recollections, which was a predecessor to the al-qaeda publication inspire, and sent a letter to a man arrested for trying to detonate a bomb during a christmas tree lighting ceremony in portland, oregon, in 2010. she had repeated contact with members of al qaeda in the arabian peninsula, according to court documents.

feds arrest two women in new york city in alleged terror plot

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

61.0

8.0

3088.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

209.0

0.0

52.0

1.0

0.0

29.0

11.0

7.0

5.0

13.0

6.0

5.0

7.0

12.0

17.0

18.0

213.0

52.0

30.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

sen. ted cruz of texas scored a hard-fought upset win over businessman donald trump in the iowa republican caucuses monday night, while former secretary of state hillary clinton and sen. bernie sanders of vermont were locked in a virtual tie on the democratic side with most of the votes counted. cruz made good on his bet that a methodical campaign organization would eclipse trump<u+2019>s media dominance in the first test of republican voters. with 99 percent of the precincts reporting, cruz was beating his rival by more than 5,100 votes, with sen. marco rubio of florida a close third. cruz appeared to capitalize on deep support from religious and social conservatives and showed that old-fashioned retail politicking could overcome trump<u+2019>s massive political rallies in the hawkeye state. <u+201c>god bless the great state of iowa,<u+201d> cruz told supporters at his campaign<u+2019>s iowa headquarters after embracing his wife, heidi. <u+201c>tonight is a victory for the grass roots. tonight is a victory for courageous conservatives across iowa and all across this great nation. iowa has sent notice that the republican nominee and the next president of the united states will not be chosen by the media, will not be chosen by the washington establishment, will not be chosen by the lobbyists.<u+201d> clinton had been a clear front-runner in iowa last summer, as she hoped to make up for her loss to barack obama in the 2008 democratic caucuses. but sanders, hammering a message about economic inequities in the middle class, narrowed the margin in iowa into a dead heat in the final days, and the results could presage a long, grueling fight to the nomination. he maintains a polling advantage in new hampshire, which will hold its primaries next week. with 95 percent of the precincts reporting, clinton had 49.8 percent of the vote to sanders<u+2019>s 49.6 percent. clinton, joined by her husband, former president bill clinton, and daughter chelsea, addressed supporters before the final tally was in, saying she was <u+201c>breathing a sigh of relief.<u+201d> <u+201c>it is rare that we have the opportunity we have now to have a real contest of ideas, to really think hard about what the democratic party stands for,<u+201d> clinton said. <u+201c>i am excited about really getting into the debate with senator sanders about the best way forward to fight for us and america.<u+201d> sanders, accompanied by wife, jane, appeared in front of a jubilant crowd that chanted <u+201c>feel the bern!<u+201d> he said that his showing against clinton sent a message to the political and media establishments that <u+201c>given the enormous crises facing our country, it is just too late for establishment politics and establishment economics.<u+201d> the night also began to winnow the field on both sides. former maryland governor martin o<u+2019>malley, the only other major democratic candidate, had negligible support and suspended his campaign monday night, according to a person close to the campaign. former arkansas governor mike huckabee, a republican, also suspended his campaign. the crowded republican field and lively debates appeared to boost interest in the race. a record 185,000 people took part in the gop caucuses, increasing the 2012 turnout by 5.4 percent, according to estimates from edison media research. trump had led the republican polls since last summer, shortly after he declared his candidacy, and he seemed to rewrite the traditional rules and expectations of national political campaigns. yet his outsider appeal, which swelled crowds at rallies, failed to translate entirely to the caucus turnout, and some political analysts questioned his decision to drop out of the final gop debate last week. appearing before supporters at his iowa headquarters, trump congratulated cruz, but he reminded his audience of how far he had come. <u+201c>on june 16, when i started this journey, there were 17 candidates. i was told by everybody, <u+2018>do not go to iowa. you could never finish even in the top 10,<u+2019><u+2009><u+201d> trump said. <u+201c>we finished second. .<u+2009>.<u+2009>.we will go on to get the republican nomination, and we will go on to beat hillary or bernie or whoever they throw up there.<u+201d> cruz, who had surged to a polling lead in iowa by december but fell behind to trump in the past few days, outperformed his final polling results in iowa. aides touted a strong ground game in which the senator appeared at events in all 99 counties. cruz had 28 percent of the vote, with trump at 24 percent and rubio at 23. supporters at cruz headquarters cheered loudly when their candidate was shown on a giant video screen. a cover band played songs of patsy cline and johnny cash as the audience exchanged hi-fives and hoisted drinks. <u+201c>that<u+2019>s priceless. you<u+2019>re fired!<u+201d> cruz precinct captain ted sturgill said, using trump<u+2019>s catchphrase from <u+201c>the apprentice<u+201d> television show against him. whether cruz can translate the win into similar success in new hampshire is uncertain, as the past two iowa winners, pennsylvania<u+2019>s rick santorum in 2012 and huckabee in 2008, failed to win the nomination. rubio did far better than expected, with a late rally as he sought to consolidate support among establishment republicans who have doubted trump and cruz. former florida governor jeb bush, who started the campaign as a prohibitive front-runner with a massive campaign war chest, finished way back in the pack. bush wasn<u+2019>t even in the state on monday, campaigning instead in new hampshire. <u+201c>they told me i needed to wait my turn, that i needed to wait in line,<u+201d> rubio told an enthusiastic crowd at his iowa headquarters. <u+201c>tonight here in iowa, the people in this great state sent a very clear message that after seven years of barack obama, we are not waiting any longer to take our country back,<u+201d> rubio said. voters gathered at caucus sites in 99 counties around the state. the last-minute lobbying officially began at 7 p.m. central time, with votes following. political operatives predicted a high turnout <u+2014> and there were reports that some sites were so packed that officials had trouble closing the doors, despite a significant snowstorm that was bearing down on the state. forecasters said the storm would probably hit after the caucuses were closed. <u+201c>i pray we will win,<u+201d> cruz said during a stop at a baptist church in marion. trump and sanders made their final pushes monday to coax nontraditional voters to the caucuses, even as their chief rivals suggested that well-tested organizing tactics would give them the crucial margin of victory. television networks showed trump, in a solid red tie, visiting a caucus site in west des moines with his wife, melania, in a matching all-red ensemble, and taking a seat in the front row. one woman approached and posed with him for a selfie on her mobile phone. <u+201c>we are going to bring our country back,<u+201d> trump told the crowd, speaking into a microphone. reflecting on a campaign that was dismissed early on by the political establishment in washington, trump said: <u+201c>it<u+2019>s really been a journey, an amazing journey. i<u+2019>m a messenger. we<u+2019>re going to run it the way it<u+2019>s supposed to be run <u+2014> as a great, great country.<u+201d> [here<u+2019>s how the voting in iowa works] there was little question that the lack of an incumbent, coupled with the unconventional style of several candidates, has sparked iowans<u+2019> interest in the race this year. jeff kaufmann, who chairs the iowa republican party, said his office has received five to six times as many calls compared with past years. <u+201c>the phone calls at the republican party of iowa headquarters are absolutely unprecedented. i mean, we<u+2019>re looking at 100 an hour, literally,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>now, obviously, not all of that is tied to donald trump. there<u+2019>s also a lot of these calls that are going to a variety of candidates. but i think that<u+2019>s a sign of the enthusiasm.<u+201d> [6 iowans explain how they<u+2019>re deciding whom to vote for] iowa gov. terry branstad (r) echoed that assessment in an interview, saying that trump has <u+201c>turned out bigger crowds than we<u+2019>ve ever seen before.<u+201d> <u+201c>i know everybody is saying, <u+2018>are they just coming for curiosity?<u+2019> but i think they<u+2019>re for real; they<u+2019>re committed and will show up for caucuses,<u+201d> branstad said. <u+201c>i<u+2019>ve been pretty impressed with what they<u+2019>ve done. <u+201c>of course, we saw this phenomenon eight years ago with obama,<u+201d> he said, referring to obama<u+2019>s first white house bid. <u+201c>it was beyond what anyone could have imagined, and i think trump is a phenomenon, too.<u+201d> the democratic field was much smaller but no less competitive. clinton, whose comfortable lead in iowa evaporated earlier this year, has scrambled to try to fend off sanders, who has attracted massive crowds and an intense grass-roots following that put an iowa upset within reach. sanders was encircled by volunteers and a crush of reporters as he arrived late monday morning at his iowa headquarters in a strip shopping center outside downtown des moines. <u+201c>we have come a long, long way in the last nine months,<u+201d> the senator told his supporters. <u+201c>you<u+2019>ve got a tied ball game, that<u+2019>s where we are.<u+201d> sanders also pushed back against critics who have suggested his agenda is too radical. <u+201c>our platform, our agenda, is precisely what the american people want,<u+201d> he said. eilperin and nakamura reported from washington. sean sullivan, robert costa, katie zezima, philip rucker and john wagner in des moines, and abby phillip in council bluffs, iowa, contributed to this report.

trump, clinton cautiously optimistic ahead of iowa caucuses

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

59.0

8.0

9341.0

0.0

2.0

8.0

0.0

658.0

1.0

0.0

168.0

0.0

67.0

13.0

30.0

3.0

16.0

19.0

8.0

15.0

37.0

21.0

51.0

666.0

169.0

67.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

this post has been updated. president obama would veto a bill that would allow for the construction of the keystone xl pipeline, the white house said tuesday. "if<u+00a0>this bill passes this congress, the president wouldn<u+2019>t sign it," said white house press secretary josh earnest. the white house<u+2019>s announcement came as the republican-controlled congress was being sworn in. gop leaders have pledged to pass a bill authorizing the pipeline<u+2019>s construction. sen. joe manchin (d-w.va.) and john hoeven (r-n.d.) introduced legislation tuesday authorizing the pipeline's construction. <u+201c>the president is going to see the keystone xl pipeline on his desk,<u+201d> sen. john barrasso (r-wyo.) said sunday on <u+201c>meet the press.<u+201d> senate democrats narrowly blocked passage of the bill in november. the white house said at the time that the bill was something obama "doesn't support." "if this bill passes this congress, the president wouldn<u+2019>t sign it either," earnest said. earnest said there is a "well-established process in place" for approving projects such as keystone. the $7.6 billion project would stretch nearly 1,700 miles and deliver 830,000 barrels of oil a day from western canada to the united states. earnest said that because there is a process, congress should not meddle. that process is held up by a<u+00a0>lawsuit in nebraska over whether the state legislature could allow the governor to make decisions on the pipeline rather than the state's public utilities commission. <u+201c>i think the president has been pretty clear that he does not think that circumventing a well-established process for evaluating these projects is ... the right thing for congress to do,<u+201d> earnest said. obama rejected a canadian firm's application to build the pipeline in 2012. at a year-end news conference in december, obama sought to downplay the benefits of the pipeline. he said the benefits for u.s. citizens and workers from the pipeline would be "nominal." "i think that there<u+2019>s been this tendency to really hype this thing as some magic formula to what ails the u.s. economy," obama said. house speaker john boehner said obama has sided with "fringe extremists" in the democratic party who do not support keystone, not americans who do want the pipeline to be built. boehner said the veto threat shows that obama is "hopelessly out of touch" and has "no plans" to listen to his constituents. "after years of manufacturing every possible excuse, today president obama was finally straight with the them about where he truly stands.<u+00a0> his answer is no to more american infrastructure, no to more american energy, and no to more american jobs," boehner said in a statement. jack gerard, chief executive of the american petroleum institute, said the group is "very disappointed" by the veto threat. "and i think it doesn't bode well for relationships between the white house and capitol hill" gerard<u+00a0>said.<u+00a0>"i'm disappointed the president has made that decision. i'm hopeful he and his advisers will reconsider." the move angered not just republicans and oil industry officials but some democrats such as manchin. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s the most discouraging thing i<u+2019>ve ever heard,<u+201d> manchin said in a phone interview, minutes after earnest had made his comments. <u+201c>for the leader of the country to say basically, <u+2018>forget it, this is all for naught,<u+2019> is not what this country is about, it<u+2019>s not what we<u+2019>re all about, and it<u+2019>s not the process that i<u+2019>m used to working through.<u+201d> manchin said the move made a mockery of a legislative process under which democrats as well as republicans would have a chance to offer amendments to alter the bill. <u+201c>to say that he won<u+2019>t give it a chance is absolutely a disservice to our country,<u+201d> he added. at the same time that the white house issued its veto threat, sen. richard j. durbin (d-ill.) objected to the senate energy and natural resources committee holding a hearing wednesday on the keystone xl bill. durbin said another democrat, whom he did not identify, objected to the session. <u+201c>while this means we won<u+2019>t be having a hearing tomorrow, it does not slow down the keystone xl floor process,<u+201d> the panel<u+2019>s spokesman, robert dillon, wrote in an e-mail. <u+201c>sen. murkowski was committed to moving legislation through regular committee order and having a robust hearing process. working with the incoming ranking member, we had lined up witnesses from a labor union and the center for american progress (cap) to testify on the keystone xl. democrats will no longer have an opportunity to hear that testimony or make statements. we think that<u+2019>s unfortunate.<u+201d> <u+201c>the new republican majority in congress wants to play pipeline politics with our future, and the president is focused on a single question: is the tar sands pipeline in our national interest,<u+201d> said bob deans, a spokesman for the natural resources defense council. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s not.<u+201d> sen. bernie sanders (i-vt.) said he applauds obama "for standing up to republicans trying to ram through congress a bill to let a canadian oil company ship some of the dirtiest oil on the planet across the united states on its way to overseas markets." supporters of keystone<u+00a0>argue that the pipeline will create jobs tied to the pipeline's construction and boost a source of reliable energy, helping the economy. opponents counter that it will extract oil from dirty tar sands in canada and do little to help the u.s. economy.

white house: obama would veto keystone bill

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

7.0

43.0

8.0

5366.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

371.0

0.0

111.0

1.0

0.0

43.0

12.0

19.0

10.0

5.0

11.0

5.0

28.0

20.0

35.0

374.0

111.0

44.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

that in itself was a sign that the punch landed; normally o<u+2019>reilly doesn<u+2019>t descend from his perch in the <u+201c>no-spin zone<u+201d> to debate mere mortals on platforms besides fox. the mother jones story is embarrassing, but it<u+2019>s probably not fatal. most of the <u+201c>reporting<u+201d> on fox has roughly the same relationship with the truth as o<u+2019>reilly<u+2019>s claim to combat zone action. i can<u+2019>t see him facing censure for this, but i hope i<u+2019>m wrong. if you missed the action, corn and daniel schulman reported that despite o<u+2019>reilly<u+2019>s claims of having <u+201c>survived a combat operation<u+201d> during the falklands war, the fox host, then with cbs, only got as close as buenos aires, roughly 1,400 miles away from the fighting. <u+201c>nobody from cbs got to the falklands,<u+201d> cbs<u+2019>s bob schieffer told mother jones. <u+201c>i came close. we<u+2019>d been trying to get somebody down there. it was impossible.<u+201d> there was, of course, no combat in the argentinian capital, but there was a raucous protest, and that<u+2019>s apparently what o<u+2019>reilly refers to as a <u+201c>combat operation.<u+201d> he also claimed he was the only cbs reporter covering the demonstration, which schieffer likewise denies. <u+201c>we were all out with our camera crews that day to cover the protest,<u+201d> schieffer says. <u+201c>i<u+2019>d been out there with a crew too.<u+201d> likewise, his claim of having seen combat danger in el salvador is undermined by reporting <u+2013> the reporting of bill o<u+2019>reilly himself, on the ground, in real time. in his book <u+201c>the no-spin zone<u+201d> o<u+2019>reilly tells of visiting a dangerous, <u+201c>guerrilla controlled area<u+201d> with a camera crew, where <u+201c>i quickly did a stand-up amid the rubble and we got the hell out of there.<u+201d> his real-time dispatch for cbs was different. he described touring a scene by helicopters with the salvadoran military, and reported <u+201c>these days salvadoran soldiers appear to be doing more singing than fighting,<u+201d> having succeeded in <u+201c>scattering the rebel forces, leaving government troops in control of most of the country.<u+201d> there was no mention of having to <u+201c>get the hell out of there.<u+201d> the problem for people who care about the truth is that o<u+2019>reilly is not likely to be punished for shading it. he<u+2019>s a serial exaggerator <u+2013> remember his claim to be the product of middle-class levittown, when he grew up in tonier westbury? much of the <u+201c>reporting<u+201d> on fox is similarly distorted; the ratio of truth to fiction is often worse than in o<u+2019>reilly<u+2019>s combat zone mythology. the made-up fox bogeymen of the new black panther party were actually less dangerous to democracy than buenos aires was to o<u+2019>reilly. more recently, the network<u+2019>s claim of muslim-only <u+201c>no-go<u+201d> zones in london was based on even skimpier evidence. i personally got a big story wrong last year: i predicted fox<u+2019>s sean hannity would pay a price for hyping the cause of racist grifter cliven bundy, especially after stephen colbert flayed him<u+00a0>for it. but he didn<u+2019>t. so while i hope to be wrong this time <u+2014> by underestimating roger ailes<u+2019>s conscience, rather than exaggerating it <u+2013> i don<u+2019>t expect to be. the good news is, i<u+2019>ve covered a lot of unruly protests in my time. i<u+2019>m glad to know i can now claim to have <u+201c>survived a combat operation.<u+201d> thanks, bill!

bill o<u+2019>reilly<u+2019>s humiliating bust: does fox news have guts to suspend its own serial exaggerator?

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

96.0

8.0

3128.0

0.0

1.0

9.0

0.0

208.0

0.0

70.0

1.0

0.0

18.0

8.0

11.0

5.0

16.0

5.0

11.0

4.0

14.0

25.0

16.0

217.0

70.0

19.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

killing obama administration rules, dismantling obamacare and pushing through tax reform are on the early to-do list.

hillary<u+2019>s cash flow issue

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

25.0

8.0

117.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

10.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

12.0

1.0

0.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

iran<u+00a0>is<u+00a0>targeting about $30 billion<u+00a0>in investment by offering 70 oil and natural gas projects to international companies as<u+00a0>the persian gulf country anticipates the lifting of economic sanctions. iranian officials presented the projects at<u+00a0>a two-day conference in tehran<u+00a0>as part of an effort to attract more than $100 billion to revive the energy and petrochemicals industries and generate much-needed government income.<u+00a0>oil minister bijan namdar zanganeh introduced<u+00a0>them along with a new type of investor contract offering better incentives than the buy-back agreements iran offered in the past. the work covers 52 production and 18 exploration projects, both onshore and in the gulf and caspian sea. iran is offering a negotiable framework for new oil deals rather than a uniform contract for all investors, roknoddin javadi, managing director at national iranian oil co., said saturday in tehran. the government may modify the framework and plans to present more details in february at a conference in london, seyed mehdi hosseini, chairman of the ministry<u+2019>s oil contract restructuring committee, said sunday in an interview. here are five things to know about this turning point in iran<u+2019>s campaign to upgrade its energy industry: * the new investor contract will give companies a share of the oil they produce and let them sell it globally,<u+00a0>hosseini said in tehran. international companies will be paid in cash or in kind based on a fee per barrel, talin mansourian, a consultant with hosseini<u+2019>s committee, said saturday. iran would reduce the fee if oil prices fell by more than 50 percent and increase it if prices rose by a corresponding amount,<u+00a0>mansourian said. iran<u+2019>s old buy-back deals paid companies a fixed fee regardless of how much oil they produced and offered them no incentive to exceed output targets. buy-backs also paid no compensation to companies that spent more than budgeted amounts to develop a field. under the new contracts,<u+00a0>the nioc won<u+2019>t limit capital spending and will approve budgets on a yearly basis, though companies still won<u+2019>t receive a higher fee if they produce above their output targets, hosseini said. * the new contracts will be valid for 20 years, with possible extensions to 25 years. buy-back agreements were limited to seven years, which wasn<u+2019>t enough time for companies to make adequate returns on their investments, total sa chief executive officer patrick pouyanne said last month in<u+00a0>abu dhabi. investors should be able to recover their development costs five to seven years after starting production, according to iranian officials.<u+00a0>companies that come up empty-handed after exploring for oil or gas can search for fuel in nearby areas. under buy-backs, they had to stick to<u+00a0>development plans agreed upon before work began and were barred from exploring new areas. *<u+00a0>companies will be able to negotiate directly for some contracts, and iran could sign its first deal as early as march or april, hosseini said. iran won<u+2019>t allow foreign companies to escape their contractual obligations if the u.s. or another party re-imposes unilateral sanctions, said seyed mostafa zeynoddin, an adviser to the committee. if the un restores sanctions, a company could claim force majeure if unable to execute a contract, he said. * international investors must team up with local partners that the iranian government selects, and they can<u+2019>t own hydrocarbon deposits. iran will let international and local companies determine the stakes each will hold in joint-ventures formed to develop fields. * iran is preparing to start the bidding process for oil and gas rights<u+00a0>by the next iranian calendar year starting march 21. companies will be asked to make bids based on a per-barrel development fee, mansourian said. nioc will announce other terms when it starts the tendering process in four to five months, she said.

iran gives investors glimpse of $30 billion in oil deals to come

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

64.0

8.0

3859.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

284.0

0.0

47.0

0.0

28.0

4.0

12.0

0.0

4.0

9.0

4.0

3.0

19.0

12.0

23.0

293.0

47.0

28.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

police on thursday nabbed the 21-year-old man suspected of gunning down nine people gathered for bible study in a charleston, s.c., church, nearly 14 hours later and 240 miles away after an all-night manhunt. dylann roof, of columbia, was captured without incident just before noon in a traffic stop after a tip led police to shelby, n.c. he was in the black hyundai sedan seen fleeing the horrific scene at emanuel african methodist episcopal church, where the church's pastor, clementa pinckney, who was also a state senator, was among those killed. <u+201c>we had a number of tips that were coming in,<u+201d> charleston police chief greg mullen said. <u+201c>it was amazing the fact that we had teams ... standing by. whenever we got a lead ... we sent out teams. it was a tremendous effort.<u+201d> <u+201c>i am so pleased that we were able to resolve this case quickly ... so that nobody else is harmed by this individual.<u+201d> roof waived extradition and was put on a plane from north carolina on thursday afternoon, authorities said. he was being held at a detention center pending a bond hearing, charleston police tweeted thursday evening. with roof in custody, the focus turned to his motives and the victims in the horrific attack that shocked charleston's close-knit african-american community and prompted president obama, who knew pinckney, to say it <u+201c>raises questions about a dark part of history." <u+201c>i<u+2019>ve had to make statements like this too many times,<u+201d> obama said. <u+201c>communities like this have had to endure tragedies like this too many times. once again, innocent people were killed because someone who wanted to inflict harm had no trouble getting their hands on a gun." at least two people survived the attack. one was reportedly a five-year-old girl who obeyed her grandmother's instructions to play dead and the other was a woman whom the gunman freed to "tell the world" what happened, according to reports. pinckney, 41, had been a pastor since he was 18 and was the youngest african-american elected to the south carolina legislature when he won office in 1996 at age 23 and had been a state senator since 2000. also identified by the charleston county officials as among the dead were: police and local officials immediately branded the shooting spree a hate crime, and the department of justice announced thursday morning that it had opened an investigation into whether federal charges were warranted. roof's childhood friend, joey meek, alerted the fbi after recognizing him in a surveillance camera image that was widely circulated, said meek's mother, kimberly konzny. roof had worn the same sweatshirt while playing xbox videogames in their home recently. "i don't know what was going through his head," konzny said. "he was a really sweet kid. he was quiet. he only had a few friends." the post and courier reported that roof was arrested twice in south carolina and was jailed in march in lexington county on a drug charge. roof received a .45-caliber pistol from his father for his 21st birthday in april, his uncle told reuters. the uncle told the news agency that police were at the suspect's mother's home shortly after the shooting. dot scott, the president of the charleston naacp, told the post and courier newspaper that she had spoken with a female survivor who said the gunman told the woman he was letting her live so she could tell others what had happened. "there is no greater coward than a criminal who enters a house of god and slaughters innocent people engaged in the study of scripture," naacp president and ceo cornell brooks said in a statement thursday. "today i mourn as an ame minister, as a student and teacher of scripture, as well as a member of the naacp." the church is a well-known landmark in charleston, known as "the holy city" because of its many houses of worship and denominations. the church traces its roots to 1816 when african-american members of the city's methodist episcopal church, led by a freed slave, broke away to form their own congregation. the church was burned to the ground in the 1820s, and rebuilt a decade later. the campaign of gop presidential hopeful jeb bush sent out an email saying that due to the shooting, the candidate had canceled an event planned in the city thursday. south carolina gov. nikki haley issued a statement calling the shooting a "senseless tragedy." the associated press contributed to this report. click for more from the post and courier.

charleston church massacre suspect caught, but answers elude victims' loved ones

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

7.0

80.0

8.0

4435.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

275.0

0.0

93.0

0.0

20.0

11.0

14.0

6.0

21.0

13.0

18.0

5.0

29.0

26.0

36.0

278.0

93.0

20.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

william<u+2019>s wife, patricia, turned the maisonette into a quarry of precious metals and shiny trinkets that, for a certain kind of person, might necessitate sunglasses or anticonvulsants. eclectic, hectic, and loaded in every sense, the duplex was a motherlode of hand-painted floor screens and mother-of-pearl tables, its walls splashed with flashy modernist paintings and lit with leaded tiffany lamps. but despite the bonanza of gilded pier glasses and silver sconces and bronze flowerpots, it was a harpsichord that held the home together. the man-of-the-house<u+2019>s chief contribution to the glittering litter was a seventeenth-century keyboard, and he placed it in the marble foyer so that guests saw it first<u+2014>as if to clear any suspicion that his wife<u+2019>s knack for chintz reflected on his personal taste in art. buckley, who called the harpsichord <u+201c>the instrument i love beyond all others,<u+201d> had matching models in his connecticut mansion and swiss chalet; the conservative scion would entertain his visitors with a tune as often as an epigram. bach was his muse as much as edmund burke. this love of his provides a rare moment of peace in <u+201c>best of enemies,<u+201d> a turbulent, whiplash-inducing new film on the rivalry between buckley and gore vidal. (in fact the music of bach is a through-line in the documentary, serving as buckley<u+2019>s leitmotif.) after well over an hour of watching the men trade petty points and cheap insults<u+2014>in archival footage, not the grave, though a psychic medium may easily prove otherwise<u+2014>we see buckley pull up his bench and play a bach prelude in c, the simplest, most uncluttered of key signatures. the effort, contemplative and composed, is the film<u+2019>s only moment of civility. (early on, vidal gives us an idyllic tour of his estate in salerno, but he leads us immediately to the bathroom, where buckley<u+2019>s portrait hangs next to the toilet.) an amateur musician but not a dabbler, buckley performed in the <u+2019>80s and <u+2019>90s with a roster of symphonies around the country, honing his skill with almost spiritual devotion. (<u+201c>art of any sort,<u+201d> he once wrote, <u+201c>is very, very serious business: that which is sublime can<u+2019>t be anything less.<u+201d>) his worship of bach, a lifelong attachment, mirrored his intellectual manner. like bach<u+2019>s themes, his arguments in writing and speech were famously complex, surprising, winding, and sonorous. as with any player of polyphony, buckley showed considerable sleight of hand in teasing out parallels and resolving contradictions. baroque music, which is contrapuntal, makes no great fuss about harmony, surely an appealing trait to a contrarian at odds with society. like bach, buckley inevitably clung to the counterpoint. i harp on music because<u+00a0><u+201c>best of enemies<u+201d> harps on dissonance. directed by morgan neville and the oscar-winning robert gordon, this is a serious film by serious filmmakers, and it seeks to understand the decay of american commentary into white noise. why, the film wonders, do americans hope to divine the truth in 60-second shouting matches rather than 6,000-word features? why do the opinion programs scuttle the well-read in favor of those who can barely decipher a teleprompter? why does fox news boom with the authority of mount sinai? why, when parsing a point, do its hosts sound like a hernia is rending their groin? why do our congressmen echo the same guttural sound bites? why has the united states traded an intelligentsia for a punditocracy? for gordon and neville, these rhetorical questions do not have a rhetorical answer, and they point their plugged ears at the rhetoric of buckley and vidal, whom they take to be the media<u+2019>s original screaming heads. they circle the writers with yellow tape, saying they<u+2019>ve found the epicenter of the shift. they diagnose buckley and vidal as patients zero of our madness, of our newsmen<u+2019>s hysterics and our leaders<u+2019> strain of tourette<u+2019>s. at best, this is half true. the decline and fall of the chattering class began in 1968, the filmmakers say, and in a certain sense they are right. in that year, abc, one of three television channels, lagged far behind nbc and cbs in ratings, and when its competitors bought up the rights to report from the republican and democratic national conventions, the network hatched a plan. it would hire two writers to comment on the presidential nominees. they would perch on america<u+2019>s left and right shoulders and vie for its conscience. but both of them acted like devils and raised hell from the first debate to the tenth. despite the authors<u+2019> aristocratic airs and mid-atlantic inflections, buckley hissed through his drawl as vidal thumbed his aquiline nose at him. the clamor began well before the opening bell. as the film recalls, vidal courted buckley<u+2019>s rage years earlier, lampooning him on <u+201c>the tonight show.<u+201d> at the republican convention in 1964, vidal embarrassed him again in front of a national audience, airing remarks from a campaign official about buckley<u+2019>s relationship with barry goldwater, then running for president. before the 1968 debates, featured in the film, vidal hired a researcher to help him smear buckley and wrote his put-downs in advance, testing them on abc<u+2019>s cameramen and gophers. the liberal vidal called his opponent a prophet of greed, the <u+201c>marie antoinette of the right wing,<u+201d> and the inspiration for myra breckinridge (the transsexual rapist in vidal<u+2019>s novel by the same name). when vidal dismissed california<u+2019>s conservative governor as an <u+201c>aging juvenile actor,<u+201d> buckley defended ronald reagan by playfully dismissing vidal<u+2019>s film efforts. (<u+201c>if abc has the authority to invite the author of <u+2018>myra breckinridge<u+2019><u+00a0>to comment on republican politics, i think that the people of california have the right, when they speak overwhelmingly, to project somebody into national politics even if he did commit the sin of having acted in movies that were not written by mr. vidal<u+201d>). bickering became screaming in the melodrama<u+2019>s final act, when vidal labeled buckley a <u+201c>crypto-nazi,<u+201d> a weightier offense in postwar america than today, and buckley called him a <u+201c>queer<u+201d> and threatened to <u+201c>sock him in the goddamn face.<u+201d> buckley, a veteran of the second world war, took the insult especially hard, having spent much of his career trying to purge conservatism of its anti-semitic elements and having succeeded in marginalizing the john birch society. if we believe the film, then, the ten-episode kerfuffle, shocking to <u+2019>60s viewers, was a historic moment on tv that changed discourse forever. we are reminded that at one point abc<u+2019>s studio at the convention actually collapsed <u+2014> a metaphor for the shockwaves of the debaters<u+2019> sonic boom. while journalists panned the program as so much hot air, abc sucked in a massive new audience and a windfall of advertising dollars. the hubbub was a boon, and the network and its competitors would try to revive the debates<u+2019> flare in future political coverage. they would prioritize noise over reason, shouting over thinking, and anoint pundits as america<u+2019>s kingmakers. but including buckley in this category is more than a violation of good manners. as he might say about socialism <u+2014> however wrongly, i might add <u+2014> such a sentiment commits the sin of overreaching. buckley, for all of his objectionable politics, was nonetheless the quintessential anti-pundit, and his example could serve as a timely antidote to the poor state of contemporary opinion,<u+00a0>particularly in his own party. though vidal said after the debates that he was glad to have given the audience <u+201c>their money<u+2019>s worth,<u+201d> buckley considered the argument a <u+201c>disaster.<u+201d> vidal replayed the debates obsessively in his dotage, but they embarrassed buckley to the end of his days, and he wished abc had destroyed the tapes. (buckley had wanted <u+201c>to talk about the republican convention,<u+201d> he said, but he found it <u+201c>difficult to do so when you have somebody like this, who speaks in such burps and who likes to be naughty, which has proven to be a professional, highly merchandisable vice.<u+201d>) his outburst brought him lasting guilt, and gordon and neville show their sense of irony when buckley plays bach<u+2019>s <u+201c>well-tempered clavier<u+201d> midway through the film. if they give vidal a theme, it is purcell<u+2019>s <u+201c>funeral march for queen mary,<u+201d> a piece popularly associated with <u+201c>a clockwork orange<u+201d> <u+2014><u+00a0>an allusion to the social, political, and rhetorical upheavals that vidal helped kick off. (vidal claimed in the paris review that he was <u+201c>not musical,<u+201d> which might explain the shrill tone of his essays.) noise is to music as confusion is to reason, and buckley was as practiced a logician as a pianist. indeed, the historian sam tanenhaus, interviewed at length in the film, describes him as the <u+201c>great debater of his time.<u+201d> genuine debate needn<u+2019>t traffic in shame or tinnitus, and buckley eschewed the low-rung slur as much as he shied from the high-pitched shout. this is not to say that he wanted for wit, which he had aplenty, but that he used it only to ornament a fully developed theme. (if insults do not replace an argument, they can do healthy, illuminating work in revealing the hypocrisy or absurdity of a figure heaped in public praise. to object is to deny that character as well as ideology shapes history; it<u+2019>s to deny that politics are personal.) buckley would argue steadily and quietly, holding forth with a hushed assurance that would seldom rush or halt his opponent<u+2019>s assertions. like any trained musician, he had that quality of self-mastery which the world used to call virtue. his willingness and eagerness to listen, the mark of an able and disciplined ear, and his love for the long phrase and extended argument gave him doubts about tv. though vidal said he would <u+201c>never miss a chance to have sex or appear on television,<u+201d> buckley believed there was <u+201c>an implicit conflict of interest between that which is highly viewable and that which is illuminating.<u+201d> yet the show he hosted, <u+201c>firing line,<u+201d> had an enduring impact on the marketplace of ideas: it ran for 33 years, longer than any other public-affairs program, and won an emmy for its commitment to spirited inquiry. he questioned guests who agreed with him (ronald reagan, margaret thatcher, milton friedman, friedrich hayek) as eagerly as those who did not (jimmy carter, noam chomsky, saul alinsky, christopher hitchens). speaking to the show<u+2019>s long format, a largesse for probing conversation, the economist john kenneth galbraith said that <u+201c><u+2019>firing line<u+2019> is one of the rare occasions when you have a chance to correct the errors of the man who<u+2019>s interrogating you.<u+201d> hitchens echoed the sentiment: <u+201c>i did my first <u+2018>firing line<u+2019> in 1983 and swiftly learned that if i left the studio cursing at what i hadn<u+2019>t said, it was my own fault.<u+201d> buckley<u+2019>s desire to persuade rather than overpower, and his willingness to cope with the otherness of others<u+2019> views, earned him fast friends among the left-leaning intelligentsia. galbraith, murray kempton, and mario cuomo all found in him a receptive and challenging companion. in the pages of national review, the magazine he founded, he helped launch the career of joan didion, though her liberal awakening happened later. his lifelong friendship with norman mailer is the subject of a new book by kevin schultz, <u+201c>buckley and mailer,<u+201d> that gives the lie to the film<u+2019>s charge of divisiveness. it is a meticulous portrait of two radicals who meet at the margins. buckley even has my own respect, though i find many of his positions odious. i<u+2019>m at least as leftist as the late mr. vidal, but i stick my fingers in my ears only half as much. buckley<u+2019>s brand of anti-statism, his hatred of the new deal and the great society and federal intervention of any kind, owed to a neurotic cold war fear of collectivism. (his anti-interventionism even led him to oppose the civil rights act, a heinous lapse of judgment that he later recanted.)<u+00a0>in vietnam he thought we were staring down the four horsemen. all his life, he kissed the ring of the war criminal henry kissinger. his fear of big government excused the worst indignities of big money, enshrining inequality as patriotism. <u+201c>the socialized state is to justice, order, and freedom what the marquis de sade is to love,<u+201d> he once wrote, rather sadistically. as with many conservatives, his defense of liberty against the state was genuine but misguided. he despised totalitarianism as fiercely as i do, and he railed against the soviet union in an era of d<u+00e9>tente. but on a domestic level, i part from him on the matter of social welfare, in that i consider freedom null and void if swaths of the population are so disenfranchised they can<u+2019>t make full use of it<u+2014>economically, politically, biologically. unlike my opponents, i refuse to forget the third item in jefferson<u+2019>s list of inalienable rights: <u+201c>life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.<u+201d> some found buckley calculating and cold. his rhetoric, they said, was all head and no heart. it is a charge often brought against bach, this idea of enthroning reason and suppressing the passions. it is also a common criticism of plato. yet conservatism fills an important role in society. in the body politic, the right hand is as essential as the left. liberals ask what we can gain from change, while conservatives ask what we can lose. at every moment of crisis, this is a valuable conversation to have<u+2014>if it is in fact a conversation. otherwise it evokes a kind of madness, like talking to oneself in the subway. nowadays, blather rattles the land like thunder. in cabs, diners, and doctors<u+2019> waiting rooms, the din of stupid opinion yields only to the grinding of one<u+2019>s teeth. but for our lightbulbs, we would seem to be entering a dark age. the noise today is relentless, enough to inspire thoughts of taking a drill to one<u+2019>s eardrums. it is inescapable, this babbling rabble of 24-hour tv. bill o<u+2019>reilly seems to be always on the verge of an aneurysm. greta van susteren, a scientologist with a questionable grasp of reality, grunts and slurs like a bartender who<u+2019>s her own best customer. nested with parrots and mockingbirds, the capitol building has become an echo chamber for fox news. senator ted cruz, a champion princeton debater and a harvard doctor of law, now sounds like sarah palin with more testosterone. a bach fugue is as trying on the hands as on the head, and if buckley the writer and musician aspired to self-mastery, it was in the pursuit of excellence. excellence, of course, is the antithesis of our leaders<u+2019> and pundits<u+2019> lack of seriousness, discipline, and integrity. when asked to provide a mission statement for the<u+00a0>national review, buckley turned to the question of character: <u+201c>the largest cultural menace in america is the conformity of the intellectual cliques which, in education as well as the arts, are out to impose upon the nation their modish fads and fallacies, and have nearly succeeded in doing so. in this cultural issue, we are, without reservations, on the side of excellence <u+2026> and of honest intellectual combat (rather than conformity).<u+201d> though some suspect buckley of elitism, his demand for excellence simply set him against mediocrity. this is as it should be. his intellect, eloquence, and candor would be a tonic for the oafs now puffing themselves up as republican messiahs. in its most noxious strain, their populism equates to craven demagoguery and outright philistinism. such thinking prevents the consideration of radical, inventive, unique voices and ensures that politicians, on the right but also on the politically correct left, remain toadies to their respective orthodoxies. a master of counterpoint, buckley despised orthodoxy within his own movement. he spurned dogma and hewed to original principles as the need arose. the rigor of his views did not lend themselves to rigor mortis, and he often veered radically from orthodoxy in favor of the practically radical or radically practical. when entering the public sphere, he was reluctant to accept the conservative label, preferring to call himself an <u+201c>individualist.<u+201d> he once wrote that <u+201c>intelligent deference to tradition and stability can evolve into intellectual sloth and moral fanaticism, as when conservatives simply decline to look up from dogma because the effort to raise their heads and reconsider is too great.<u+201d> so he opposed the war on drugs, its bitter financial and human costs, and supported the legalization of illicit substances. though libertarians cite him as a kind of hero, he rejected their desire to demolish the state, to privatize all public works, as the most ridiculous kind of utopianism. in a debate with ron paul on <u+201c>firing line,<u+201d> he held that <u+201c>the libertarian position is discredited by a kind of reductionism that is simply incompatible with social life.<u+201d> he might say the same of his ideological heirs, on the airwaves and the national mall, who crank their bullhorns of drivel to one hundred decibels. they spout so much sound and fury signifying nothing.

william f. buckley would have loathed fox news: inside the right-wing media<u+2019>s intellectual downfall

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

11.0

99.0

8.0

16903.0

0.0

9.0

0.0

1303.0

2.0

0.0

398.0

0.0

165.0

62.0

44.0

41.0

55.0

44.0

41.0

25.0

77.0

118.0

132.0

1312.0

400.0

165.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the gop establishment has seen all of its candidates not merely beaten, but utterly humiliated, by an aggressively ignorant demagogue, whose rhetoric makes him sound like a cheap knockoff of benito mussolini and george wallace. why? a look at the facts of american economic life suggests that the rubes have decided they<u+2019>re tired of being played for marks, which explains why the gop establishment<u+2019>s siren song about the land of opportunity is no longer doing the trick. the basic myth the right wing of the money party has sold to republican voters over the past 40 years (the left wing of the party is called the democrats) goes like this: the economy boomed in the decades immediately after world war ii, and standards of living rose rapidly. <u+00a0>but since then, too much government regulation, too many taxes, and an overly generous welfare system that has made those people<u+00a0>even lazier than they were before have combined to kill the american dream. that is why ordinary americans (aka working and middle-class white people) have bank accounts that don<u+2019>t reflect the rewards they should have received for all their hard work. if not for government meddling we would have a thriving economy, just like the one we enjoyed back in the good old days. all this is a fantastic lie, as a glance at the actual economic history of america since 1945 illustrates. <u+00a0>(in what follows, all figures have been converted to constant, inflation-adjusted dollars). america is a vastly wealthier country today than it was forty years ago. <u+00a0>furthermore, on a per-person basis, the country<u+2019>s wealth has increased far more over the past four decades than it did in the thirty years immediately after world war ii. here are the numbers: between 1945 and 1974, per capita gdp in the u.s. grew from $17,490 to $27,837. <u+00a0>that is an impressive improvement, but it pales in comparison to what has happened since: in 2014, per capita gdp was $55,185, i.e., almost exactly double what it was in 1974. <u+00a0>in terms of economic output, the country is twice as rich per person now as it was then. where has all this money gone? <u+00a0>the answer ought to shock anyone who cares about either economic opportunity or increasing inequality. <u+00a0>the average household income of the bottom 50% of american households was $25,475 in 1974, and $26,520<u+00a0> in 2014. <u+00a0>in other words, half the population has gotten essentially none of the extra $10<u+00a0>trillion dollars of national wealth that the american economy has generated over the past forty years. keep in mind that this group includes fully half of the nation<u+2019>s middle class, by every standard definition of that category. meanwhile, over this same time, the average household income of the top five percent of american households (most of the members of this group would not, of course, consider themselves rich, let alone part of the actual plutocracy) has gone from $187,729 to $332,347. <u+00a0>as for the really rich, the numbers are truly staggering: in constant, inflation-adjusted dollars, the household income of the top 0.01% (roughly, the nation<u+2019>s 13,000 richest households) increased by about seven-fold, from less than $5 million to more than $30 million per year. of course, some of trump<u+2019>s appeal is based on his willingness to exploit racism and xenophobia while speaking to the economic anxieties of white middle and working class voters. <u+00a0>but establishment politicians are making a big mistake when they under-estimate the extent to which trump<u+2019>s message <u+2013> crude and bombastic as it is <u+2014> that americans were winners but are now losers, resonates with the actual life experience of so many people. these people are angry about what has happened to them and their communities, and especially angry about the empty promises of a republican party that is run for the almost exclusive benefit of the rich. <u+00a0>the half of america that gets along on $40,000, or $25,000, or $10,000 per year doesn<u+2019>t care about cutting capital gains taxes or getting rid of the estate tax (which already exempts the <u+201c>first<u+201d> $11 million of a married couple<u+2019>s wealth), and it isn<u+2019>t enthusiastic about slashing social security and medicare either. to the contrary, all these things are the pet projects of the republican donor class. <u+00a0>for forty years the gop has managed to manipulate culture war issues and racial and ethnic animosities to hide from its base two facts: the contemporary republican party exists to protect the economic interests of that class, and those interests don<u+2019>t actually align with the economic interests of middle- and working-class americans, even if they happen to be white and culturally conservative. that it took a shameless foul-mouthed egomaniacal reality tv star to speak this truth in such a way that republican voters would hear it is a sad comment on the state of our politics and culture.

listen to the donald trump voters: it has taken an ignorant demagogue to tell truth about gop, humiliate party establishment

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

8.0

124.0

8.0

4815.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

315.0

1.0

0.0

95.0

1.0

0.0

43.0

10.0

12.0

8.0

11.0

9.0

6.0

21.0

30.0

322.0

96.0

44.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the former secretary of state warned that<u+00a0>a trump presidency could spark nuclear conflicts overseas and ignite economic catastrophe at home. previewing a rancorous fall campaign, hillary clinton assailed donald trump on thursday as a potential president who would lead america toward war and economic crisis. she portrayed her own foreign policy as optimistic, inclusive, and diplomatic, born from long experience in public life. there was nothing diplomatic in her remarks, a clear indication of how she'll take mr. trump on. electing him, she said, would be "a historic mistake." during a speech in san diego that was billed as a foreign policy address, the democratic former secretary of state unloaded on her likely republican election opponent, counting down reasons he is not qualified - from his aggressive twitter attacks to his emotional outbursts. "he is not just unprepared; he is temperamentally unfit," she told supporters in a ballroom. "we cannot let him roll the dice with america." she said a trump presidency could spark nuclear conflicts overseas and ignite economic catastrophe at home. "there's no risk of people losing their lives if you blow up a golf course deal, but it doesn't work like that in world affairs," ms. clinton said of the celebrity businessman. "the stakes in global statecraft are infinitely higher and more complex than in the world of luxury hotels." she mocked trump's twitter blasts and predicted he was preparing more as she spoke. as if on cue, he tweeted after she finished: "bad performance by crooked hillary clinton! reading poorly from the telepromter! she doesn't even look presidential!" trump, meanwhile, got an endorsement he'd been seeking, from republican house speaker paul ryan, who had resisted even after the businessman clinched the gop nomination. clinton's robust assault on trump was widely carried on television, a change for the leading democratic candidate who's frequently struggled to break through coverage of trump. she is ramping up her criticism of the presumptive republican nominee and trying to quell concerns within her own party that she isn't ready to rumble with the famously combative trump. she offered a number of aggressive new attack lines, at times baiting trump to respond by calling him "thin skinned." she hit trump for his reality television past, for his snarky twitter feed, for his hotel experience. she ran down a list of people he has insulted, including the pope. and she assailed trump over many statements, criticizing him for seeking to ban muslims from entering the country, for talking about leaving nato, and for suggesting japan could one day acquire nuclear weapons. "he has the gall to say prisoners of war like john mccain aren't heroes," clinton said. "he says he has foreign policy experience because he ran the miss universe pageant." emphasizing her experience as first lady, senator, and secretary of state, clinton said she recognizes what it means to deploy american troops and would provide the steady diplomacy the country needs. clinton and trump offer starkly different visions of us foreign policy. her proposals reflect the traditional approach of both major parties. despite differences on some issues, such as the iraq war and iran, democratic and republican presidents have been generally consistent on policies affecting china, russia, north korea, nuclear proliferation, trade, alliances, and many other issues. trump's "america first" approach is short on details but appeals to angry voters who believe that successive leaders have weakened the country and have been duped into bad trade deals that cost american jobs. trump accused clinton of lying about his foreign policy plans at a rally in sacramento, calif., wednesday night. "she lies. she made a speech and she's making another one tomorrow. and they sent me a copy of the speech and it was such lies about my foreign policy," trump said. "they said i want japan ... to get nuclear weapons. give me a break," he objected. "i want japan and germany and saudi arabia and south korea and many of the nato nations <u+2013> they owe us tremendous. we're taking care of all these people. and what i want them to do is pay up." trump has suggested in the past that he might be ok with japan one day obtaining nuclear weapons. in recent days, clinton has criticized trump over his business practices, his resistance to disclose which charities received money he raised during a january fundraiser for veterans' causes, and the now-defunct trump university. on wednesday she called him a "fraud" and said the real estate mogul had taken advantage of vulnerable americans. trump has pushed back. on the education company, he has maintained that customers were overwhelmingly satisfied with the offerings. while clinton is stressing her concerns about trump, she is still dealing with her primary race. she needs just 70 more delegates to win the democratic primary, but is dealing with a tough fight with rival bernie sanders in california.

clinton says electing trump would be 'historic mistake'

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

55.0

8.0

5032.0

0.0

3.0

5.0

0.0

354.0

1.0

0.0

107.0

0.0

34.0

19.0

14.0

8.0

14.0

6.0

8.0

9.0

14.0

34.0

31.0

359.0

108.0

34.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

washington -- a new research paper suggests congress helped the economy to the tune of nearly 2 million jobs when lawmakers killed long-term unemployment benefits at the end of 2013. the working paper, by economists marcus hagedorn, iourii manovskii and kurt mitman, is a boon to congressional republicans who insisted the benefits not be renewed. the wall street journal editorial board trumpeted the findings and the house ways and means committee, chaired by rep. paul ryan (r-wis.), touted the paper on its blog. but while the study might help the gop take credit for an improving economy, the story isn't so simple, as several other recent studies have found the long-term benefits weren't holding back workers. the new paper says the benefit cut led to 1.8 million additional jobs last year. "almost 1 million of these jobs were filled by workers from out of the labor force who would not have participated in the labor market had benefit extensions been reauthorized," the authors write. they reached their conclusion by comparing the 2014 employment growth of adjacent counties in separate states, since the federal unemployment insurance program that expired in december 2013 offered different durations of benefits depending on a state's unemployment rate. using labor department data, the paper found that counties in states that lost out on more weeks of benefits saw higher job growth. in other words, they were better off without the benefits. the finding is contrary to predictions from the obama administration and the congressional budget office, which assumed keeping the extended unemployment compensation through 2014 would boost the economy. other studies have found that the long-term jobless aid in place since 2008 didn't reduce the likelihood that laid off workers would take available jobs. some commentators, both liberal and conservative, have taken issue with the paper's methodology. using a different set of labor department data, dean baker of the center for economic and policy research found a smaller increase in employment in states where the benefit cut was deeper. for some of the workers whose benefits ended that december, hardship ensued -- at least in the short term. things got desperate for charlie walker of phoenixville, pennsylvania, for instance, before he got a new job last fall. and brian krueger of mount horeb, wisconsin, only got back to work in may 2014 after going on food stamps and nearly losing his house. he doesn't see himself as part of a happy story about the economy improving.

conservatives cheer research saying cuts to unemployment benefits helped the economy

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

84.0

8.0

2548.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

152.0

3.0

0.0

52.0

1.0

0.0

22.0

3.0

5.0

1.0

5.0

4.0

2.0

13.0

10.0

18.0

157.0

55.0

23.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a verdict in 2017 could have sweeping consequences for tech startups.

the gop front-runner? it's not jeb bush

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

39.0

8.0

69.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

3.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

5.0

1.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

fargo, north dakota (cnn) ted cruz claimed a majority of delegates in north dakota on sunday -- though the delegates are not bound to him, so their loyalty remains uncertain. north dakota republicans selected 25 national delegates and, of those, 18 were on a list of preferred delegates that cruz circulated -- a clear win for the texas senator. the delegates met sunday evening, just as the convention ended, and selected state party chairman kelly armstrong to be chair their convention delegation and chose republican national committeeman curly haugland and rnc committeewoman sandy boehler to serve on the powerful convention rules committee. party leaders make up many of the slots, including gov. jack dalrymple, first lady betsy dalrymple, attorney general wayne stenehjem and top party donors. but party activists won a good number of slots, too. the delegates who said they were supporting cruz sunday were adamant in their support. rick becker, who ran a close race for the republican nomination for governor at the convention, said he didn't want to hold out making a decision in order to be wooed by candidates. "should i play that game? no, i don't care. if i was actually undecided, i'd say that, but i just kind of, i'm always standing by principle, as boring as that might be. i know i'm going to support cruz, i can't fathom what would occur." becker said. "holding out for a helicopter ride, or the goodie bags, or all that kind of crap. i'm just, i'm not interested in that." with the delegates formally unbound and free to make their own decisions at the national convention, it would be impossible to declare north dakota's results a clear win for any of the three campaigns. but the race was on sunday evening to do just that anyway. the cruz campaign sought to portray the results as an unequivocal win. "i'm thrilled to have the vote of confidence of republican voters in north dakota who delivered such a resounding victory today," cruz said in a statement. "as i met them over the weekend, north dakota republicans recognized that i am the only candidate who can move this country forward by protecting freedom and liberty. whether we defeat donald trump before the convention or at it, i'm energized to have the support of the vast majority of north dakota delegates." even though none of the 17 national delegates contacted by cnn said they were voting for kasich, the ohio governor's campaign claimed a victory of sorts sunday evening. "cruz strong arm tactics fail in nd, where he lost key floor vote & helped elect delegates who will vote @johnkasich in cleveland. #ndgop16" tweeted top kasich strategist john weaver. cruz himself addressed the north dakota republican gathering saturday. the other campaigns sent surrogates. former candidate ben carson rallied the more than 1,600 state delegates for trump sunday morning, with a speech focused heavily on faith and his efforts to teach trump religion and spirituality. but behind the scenes he lobbied north dakota republican brass one-on-one. ahead of sunday's speech, he pulled haugland into a private meeting, he also met privately with former gov. ed schafer the night before. "we had an opportunity to really explain things, to explain rationale for doing things," carson told cnn backstage at the scheels arena. "i said the proof will be in the pudding we'll see how it all comes out." as the delegates packed into this fargo hockey arena for the final day of their state convention, the trump, cruz and kasich campaigns worked furiously to identify supporters. republicans were scheduled to vote for 25 national delegates from a list of 74 nominated delegates. but the state's unique delegate selection process -- which lets delegates vote for whichever candidate they prefer at the national convention -- led to much battling between the campaigns. north dakota's lone congressman, rep. kevin cramer, endorsed trump sunday, shortly before north dakota republicans began selecting the delegates to the national convention. "it's something i'd been processing for a long time and it really culminated with my online straw poll where i really did want to give voice to the people who can't be here," cramer said. because the delegates will be unbound, they are not formally committed to any campaign. but that didn't stop the campaigns from working to set expectations so they could claim victory. trump adviser barry bennett told cnn that "a plurality" on the list of 25 preferred were leaning toward trump after a strong lobbying effort from cramer, who bennett called the trump operation's "sherpa" over the course of the hectic weekend. "we'll be drinking champagne here all day," bennett said, if the slate of 25 delegates picked by party leaders earlier this weekend passes in the convention. of the 25 people the party leaders put forward, 16 were chosen and nine new delegates were selected. still, as is the case on the ground in states around the country, cruz's campaign has had a strong presence in and around the convention. in addition to cruz's speech on saturday, carly fiorina, the former presidential candidate and top cruz surrogate, has been meeting publicly and privately with potential delegates since friday. as many as 10 of the delegates on the preferred list have indicated some or solid public support for cruz. kasich's delegate wranglers were equally optimistic saturday after reviewing the list of party picks, saying they saw at least 20 on their who could be swayed to their side. in the end, however, the decisions will not be known until the delegates place their vote on the first ballot at the national convention in cleveland.

cruz allies prevail in north dakota delegate race

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

6.0

49.0

8.0

5675.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

311.0

0.0

107.0

0.0

37.0

5.0

16.0

6.0

8.0

12.0

6.0

7.0

41.0

15.0

49.0

314.0

107.0

37.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump has dominated the<u+00a0>gop presidential race for seven months. nothing <u+0080><u+2014> not his many offensive comments, not his mediocre debate performances, and not the once-feared gop establishment <u+0080><u+2014> has been able to stop his rise. but on february 1, all that could change when trump faces by far his biggest challenge yet:<u+00a0>the iowa caucuses. the results in iowa <u+2014> the first time a state's actual voters weigh in in the presidential nomination contest <u+2014> can make the national contest turn on a dime. barack obama won iowa in 2008, and he suddenly shot up to become competitive with hillary clinton in national polls. john kerry came out of nowhere to win iowa in 2004, and the presumed leader, howard dean,<u+00a0>collapsed with astonishing speed. and trump could be vulnerable in iowa. he<u+00a0>has taken the lead in recent polls, but there have been anecdotal reports suggesting that trump's ground game <u+2014> crucial in the low-turnout caucuses <u+2014> is laughably inferior to<u+00a0>ted cruz's. so in the first contest that really counts, trump could end up a loser. yet if he manages to pull off a win <u+2014> watch out. but let's step back for a minute, and ask:<u+00a0>why do the quirky iowa caucuses have this tremendous impact on the race, anyway? "what is the difference between first place and third place in iowa going to be, 4,000 votes? it's like a student body election." the state is small. its population is overwhelmingly white. turnout for the caucuses is absurdly low. democrats don't even get a secret ballot. and vanishingly few of the delegates who will actually determine each party's nominee at the national conventions will be from iowa. so why do we care so much about who wins? as i'll explain, iowa became super important because we <u+2014> the media, party insiders, activists, the candidates themselves, and even voters to an extent <u+2014> gradually decided to make it so important. these key players think the caucus results reveal a great deal about which candidates can win elections elsewhere, and the contest for iowa isn't really a contest for delegates <u+2014> it's a contest to look good in their eyes. but does iowa's prominence make sense? or could the obsession with its results from the media and insiders alike be a tremendous overreaction, bordering on a bizarre mass delusion <u+2014> one that could end up distorting who gets nominated for president? "what is the difference between first place and third place in iowa going to be,<u+00a0>4,000 votes? it's like a student body election," says stuart stevens, who was mitt romney's chief strategist in 2012. "you have to respect the absurdity of it," he continues. "or it'll drive you crazy." the iowa caucuses are the first time actual voters all across any us state get up and go say who they want to be president. and these voters do literally have to "get up and go" <u+2014> to an in-person event, held at a specific time in the evening, at one of 1,681 precincts across the state. there's no absentee voting, so if you're bedridden or out of the state, you've historically been out of luck. the caucuses are administered separately by each major party, and republicans and democrats have quite different rules. this year, the gop contest is simple: after some opening rigmarole at their caucus sites, an ordinary secret ballot vote on presidential candidates will be conducted, and the totals will be tallied statewide. "it's kind of like a carnival, where the candidates' supporters say, 'come over to us!'" the democratic caucuses are far more complicated <u+2014> they're rowdy, hours-long public affairs, with back-and-forth debate among attendees who have to go physically stand with other supporters of their preferred candidate. "it's kind of like a carnival, where the candidates' supporters say, 'come over to us, to our group!'" says drake university political scientist dennis goldford. there's no secret ballot, and if a democratic candidate doesn't get enough supporters in a precinct (15 percent of attendees), he or she is eliminated, reality show style. here's a video showing how one precinct's caucus went down in 2008: like it or not, the iowa results appear to be hugely important in determining who the major parties<u+2019> presidential nominees will be <u+2014> particularly when considered alongside the impact of fellow early state new hampshire. "it<u+2019>s not remotely a national primary. these national polls mean nothing. the nation isn't voting," says stevens. instead, it's iowans who get the first say. and, importantly, even if the iowa victor doesn<u+2019>t end up winning the nomination in the end, the state<u+2019>s results can dramatically shake up the presidential contest <u+2014> knocking some candidates out of the race entirely, while elevating others to top-tier status in the eyes of political elites and future voters. "you think about the number of people who participate" <u+2014> usually a little over 100,000 people per party, meaning around 20 percent of eligible caucus-goers <u+2014> "and iowa has just an amazing, outsize impact on the country," says democratic pollster stan greenberg. like you and i, the political world is obsessed with the question of who can actually win in each presidential nomination race. and a large part of that world has come to believe that the caucus outcomes help shed some important light on that question. (remember, before iowa, assessments of who can win are mainly based on polls <u+2014> and polls, of course, can be wrong.) "iowa has just an amazing, outsize impact on the country" it's pretty weird: essentially, the iowa caucuses are important because the media, the candidates, and the political world more broadly all treat their results as greatly important in determining who can win. and this plays out in several interacting ways: all of these dynamics, it should be noted, also apply to new hampshire (and, to a decreasing degree, to other states as the process continues). the media, the candidates, political elites, and to a certain extent voters elsewhere all act on the signals they believe iowa and new hampshire are sending them. and that's how these early state contests dramatically reshape the nomination landscape long before the vast majority of the american people get to weigh in. the earliest case in which iowa changed everything was little-known former georgia gov. jimmy carter's victory in the 1976 democratic caucuses. this was only the second time iowa went first, and carter calculated that if he won there, he'd get so much media coverage that he'd be catapulted from obscurity to national fame. so he essentially camped out in iowa for a year, and his strategy worked like a charm when he won. carter's subsequent media-driven poll surge helped him narrowly carry new hampshire and then 11 of the next 12 contests, followed by the nomination and the white house. "jimmy carter would say he would never have become president without the iowa caucuses," says jerry crawford, a longtime iowa democratic organizer now working for the clinton campaign. iowa convinced people "that obama was more than just a media phenomenon" barack obama, too, relied on iowa for his first victory for his campaign against hillary clinton in 2008. on the day of the caucuses, he trailed hillary clinton by more than 20 points in national polls. but days after he won there, he shot up to within 5 points of her. "the results of iowa were validating for us," says larry grisolano, who consulted for obama's campaign that year. "people became convinced that obama was more than just a media phenomenon <u+2014> and that he was a candidate who could attract votes." obama's win there made him surge to within striking distance of clinton in national polls, and far above her in another important early contest, south carolina. "iowa's peculiarities played to his strengths," grisolano adds. "i don<u+2019>t know how it would<u+2019>ve turned out if we started in a place that was more advertising-centric." even when the iowa winner doesn't end up winning the nomination (as with mike huckabee and rick santorum, the two most recent gop winners), the caucus results can shake up the race by elevating them, rather than other candidates, to prominence in the contest. "the caucuses are about who exceeds expectations and who fails to. and who sets expectations? you and i do." but it's important to understand that not every candidate is affected equally by the caucuses. iowa matters primarily because of how it changes the perceptions of the political world. and candidates are, in large part, judged by whether their caucus performance meets the expectations of the media and political elites. for instance, in the 2008 gop caucuses, mitt romney came in second and john mccain came in fourth. yet romney was portrayed as a big loser, since he had been campaigning hard in iowa and had once seemed the favorite to win. mccain, meanwhile, hadn't really been trying to win iowa and was focusing instead on doing well in new hampshire, so his fourth-place finish wasn't interpreted as a stunning setback for him. "every candidate in iowa has the same opponent, and that opponent<u+2019>s name is 'expected,'" says goldford. "the caucuses are about who exceeds expectations and who fails to. and who sets expectations? you and i do." essentially, iowa moved its caucuses to the front of the line at the perfect moment. it happened back in 1972, just while the democratic party was overhauling its nomination process to give actual voters, not just party bosses, more of a say. that's how the presidential nomination system we know today <u+2014> the months-long sequence of staggered primaries and caucuses in every state and territory <u+2014> came about. (republicans adopted very similar reforms soon afterward.) but for 1972 <u+2014> the first nomination contest under the reformed system <u+2014> iowa democrats slated their usual caucuses for the unusually early date of january 24. people offer various different explanations for why they did so: a deliberate effort to help a favorite son who was considering running for president, an arcane party rules change that required that 30 days pass between various state and local events, or even that a lack of available hotel rooms in des moines that summer necessitated an earlier state convention date (which then necessitated an earlier caucus date). whatever the reason, the iowa democratic caucuses moved ahead of the new hampshire primary, which had traditionally been the nation's first. "people in the political community concluded, 'what happened out there told us something'" at first, few people outside iowa noticed or cared, and the 1972 caucus results got little attention nationally. but in retrospect, after george mcgovern shockingly won the democratic nomination, insiders second-guessing about why they failed to predict his rise concluded that they should have paid more attention when he finished a surprisingly strong second in iowa. "people in the political community concluded, 'what happened out there told us something. it told us about a weak frontrunner. it told us about the energy of the antiwar movement," says david yepsen, a former political reporter for the des moines register. savvy iowans of both parties worked hard to promote this idea that iowa was an early bellwether. democrats arranged the event so top-line "results" could be easily reported to the national press, and republicans moved their caucuses to the same day to create a unified event that would get lots of media buzz. as tom whitney, then state democratic chair, later told iowa public television: so carter's victories in iowa and the general election weren't just great for him <u+2014> they ended up being great for iowa, which could now claim to be a kingmaker. future candidates in both parties spent more time and money there, and the national press started regularly covering the results as a major event. party insiders and voters in other early states began taking iowa's results more and more seriously, too. ever since, the state parties have tenaciously and successfully fought to keep their caucuses first, helped by the new "precedent" they had set, as brookings fellow elaine kamarck chronicles in her book primary politics. not at all! many critics, including vox's dylan matthews, argue that iowa's population is unrepresentative of the country as a whole <u+2014> the state is much more white and more rural, and has fewer foreign-born people. others criticize the caucus setup itself: the events take a long time, they're scheduled at a specific time in the evening, and there's been no absentee voting in the past, all of which depresses turnout and could make it even more unrepresentative. (four out of five registered party members in iowa and the vast majority of independent voters there usually don't show up.) "i think [iowa] distorts the process in a good way," says an operative in the state furthermore, democrats don't even get a secret ballot, which means social pressure could skew their results. on the gop side, turnout has recently been dominated by evangelical activists, many of whom have opted for candidates that lack national appeal, like huckabee and santorum. and presidential candidates of both parties have long felt compelled to voice fealty to powerful interest groups in the state, like big corn (though peverill squire convincingly argues that pro-corn policies are mainly driven by congress, not the white house). finally, it seems just plain unfair to a lot of people in other states that iowa gets such power. caucus defenders respond by saying that iowa does skew the results <u+2014> positively. "i think it distorts the process in a good way," says crawford, the hillary clinton organizer. that's because iowa's a state where retail campaigning and one-on-one interactions with voters, rather than simply big money and ad buys, matter. its voters have shown that they don't just follow the prevailing national winds <u+2014> they're more willing to give little-known and poorly funded challengers a chance, which helps ensure a more democratic contest overall. "iowa's a level playing ground," says iowa gop operative eric woolson. "and iowa has an electorate that pays attention to what's going on." in any case, every attempt to supplant iowa has failed, because neither national party can agree on who else should be first in line, or on an alternative way to do things entirely. and states that have tried to "jump the line" <u+2014> like louisiana in 1996 <u+2014> have had their contests boycotted (at iowa pols' behest) and deemed meaningless by national elites and the press. eventually, the national parties accepted that iowa and new hampshire were hell-bent on going first and second <u+2014> and that the vast majority of other states didn't care all that much. so the parties began harshly penalizing other states that tried to move their own nomination contests too early. accordingly, nobody even bothered to try to leapfrog iowa this time around. once again, it's the lessons the political world takes away from the caucuses that are really important <u+2014> not how the delegates end up allotted. everyone is anxious to see how the actual iowa results measure up to their expectations, to help them better understand who can actually win. and they'll be looking for a few major things. in the gop contest, everyone is anxiously awaiting the answer to one key question: "can donald trump get people to actually vote for him?" because despite trump's months-long lead in national polls, there's still a great deal of skepticism from elites about him: perhaps polls overstate his support, perhaps his campaign doesn't have a good ground game, perhaps his supporters who aren't regular gop primary or caucus voters won't bother to show up, or perhaps the electorate will flock to a more seemingly electable candidate at the last minute. if trump wins iowa, prepare for a media frenzy like you've never seen before since caucus turnout is difficult for pollsters to model and since ted cruz is perceived as having a better organization than trump, much of the political world has long expected trump to finish second, behind cruz. yet trump has taken the lead in<u+00a0>all the most recent polls <u+2014> which has had the perverse effect of raising expectations for him. now, a second place finish would be viewed as a disappointment for him. and if he comes in third or worse, he'll be portrayed as a loser who went down to a pathetic defeat. but if he does manage to actually win the caucuses, he'll debunk much of that skepticism mentioned above, prove he won't be vanishing from the contest anytime soon <u+2014> and unleash a media frenzy like you've never seen before. the iowa results will have big implications for other gop candidates too. since ted cruz led polls there until recently, a loss there would be perceived as a serious blow to his candidacy. marco rubio, meanwhile, is currently polling in third place, so that's where people expect him to end up. if rubio manages to surprise people by placing second or even first, he'll get a huge amount of positive buzz going into new hampshire. but if he somehow falls further behind <u+2014> especially if another establishment-friendly candidate like jeb bush or chris christie passes him <u+2014> whispered doubts about his campaign's competence will be vindicated, and whoever beats him will have the "momentum" of media coverage and buzz among elites in the week before the granite state contest. and if some other candidate entirely manages to surge late in iowa (as rick santorum did in 2012), expect him or her to be a major player in the next contests, too. meanwhile, on the democratic side, bernie sanders has suddenly surged in iowa polls after a full year of trailing clinton. since he's long been ahead in new hampshire, he's now positioned to seriously compete in both early states. but with this comes raised expectations. if clinton wins both contests outright, sanders's movement could well fizzle out, and she could wrap up the nomination quickly. if sanders wins either, though, or even comes very close in iowa, expect a pitched battle between the two that will last quite some time. (and unless martin o'malley vastly exceeds his current low single-digit percent support in iowa, expect him to drop out soon afterward.) the nightmare scenario for clinton at this point <u+2014> which is not all that implausible <u+2014> is that sanders wins both iowa and new hampshire. if that happens, political elites and the press will mercilessly mock and second-guess the clinton campaign for weeks. yet insiders also understand that both states are heavily white and not representative of the more diverse democratic electorate overall. so the big question is whether the positive coverage sanders gets will improve his performance among nonwhite democrats who have seemed uninterested in his candidacy so far <u+2014> and that will be put to the test in the next contest, south carolina. "it's a goofy way to do it, i agree. but absent a clear alternative..." if you feel like you needed a decoder ring to make sense of all that, you're not alone. no one sat down and designed our bizarre presidential nomination system <u+2014> indeed, even iowans admit that no one would ever sit down and design this exact system from scratch. "it's a goofy way to do it, i agree," says yepsen. "but absent a clear alternative the process continues." candidates keep investing their time and money, the media keeps giving saturation coverage to the results, and political elites keep on believing that iowa matters <u+2014> so iowa just keeps on mattering. this article was originally published on january 25, 2016. it has been updated with the latest expectations for how the candidates will perform in the caucuses.

why the iowa caucuses have such a massive impact on the presidential race

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

11.0

73.0

8.0

19637.0

0.0

3.0

6.0

0.0

1310.0

2.0

0.0

366.0

0.0

148.0

19.0

39.0

15.0

21.0

25.0

21.0

50.0

53.0

88.0

1316.0

368.0

148.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a day after the candidates squared off in a fiery debate, they came to columbia, south carolina, and largely agreed that while king's impact can still be felt today, work still needs to be done to guarantee racial equality. "yes, the challenges we face are many, but so are the quiet heroes working in every corner of america today doing their part to make our country a better place," said the former secretary of state. "i for one receive much inspiration from that simple fact." there was symbolism in the event organized by the naacp: in front of a statehouse that flew the confederate battle flag until it was taken down last year. all three candidates noted the flag being removed. "the flag is down but we are still here because that flag was just one piece of something bigger," clinton said. "dr. king died with his work unfinished and it is up to us to see through." sanders argued that king is not just a historic figure, but someone whose moral compass should guide people today. repeating the phrase "i think if he were here today," sanders argued that if king were alive today, he would be supporting many of his presidential positions. "as we celebrate his life it is terribly important to me that we don't just look at him as a museum figure, somebody in the past," the vermont senator said. "it is important to me that we look at his vision, to see the america he wanted to see." sanders and o'malley walked in the naacp sponsored march before the event, strolling down the streets of charleston as activists chanted. o'malley, whose birthday is monday, laughed when asked what he wanted for his birthday, telling reporters that he is hoping for "beat expectations" in iowa for his birthday.

hillary clinton, bernie sanders: king's legacy is alive

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

55.0

8.0

1712.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

117.0

0.0

38.0

0.0

9.0

2.0

5.0

0.0

5.0

2.0

1.0

12.0

2.0

20.0

123.0

38.0

9.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

don<u+2019>t gloat, progressives. your candidate is going to win, but she<u+2019>ll have no mandate and millions of enraged people who dislike her, and your, agenda and values. to be sure, trump himself proved a mean-spirited and ultimately ineffective political vessel. but the forces that he aroused will outlive him and could get stronger in the future. in this respect trump may reprise the role played another intemperate figure, the late senator barry goldwater. like trump, goldwater openly spurned political consensus, opposing everything from civil rights and medicare to d<u+00e9>tente. his defeat led to huge losses at the congressional level, as could indeed occur this year as well. goldwater might have failed in 1964, but his defeat did not augur a second new deal, as some, including president lyndon johnson, may have hoped. instead, his campaign set the stage for something of a right-wing resurgence that defined american politics until the election of president obama. pushing the deep south into the gop, goldwater created the <u+201c>southern strategy<u+201d> that in 1968 helped elect richard nixon; this was followed in 1980 by the victory of goldwater acolyte ronald reagan. history could repeat itself after this fall<u+2019>s disaster. people who wrote off the gop in 1964 soon became victims of their own hubris, believing they could extend the welfare state and the federal government without limits and, as it turned out, without broad popular support. in this notion they were sustained by the even then liberally oriented media and a wide section of the <u+201c>respectable<u+201d> business community. three decades later a similar constellation of forces <u+2014>- hollywood, silicon valley, wall street<u+2014>have locked in behind hillary clinton. but it is the transformation of the media itself both more ideologically uniform and concentrated more than ever on the true-blue coasts, that threatens to exacerbate progressive triumphalism. in this election, notes carl cannon, no trump fan himself, coverage has become so utterly partisan that <u+201c>the 2016 election will be remembered as one in which much of the mainstream media all but admitted aligning itself with the democratic party.<u+201d> successful modern democratic candidates, including president obama and former president clinton, generally avoid openly embracing an ever bigger federal government. obama, of course, proved a centralizer par excellence, but he did it stealthily and, for the most part, without the approval of congress. this allowed him to take some bold actions, but limited the ability to <u+201c>transform<u+201d> the country into some variant of european welfare, crony capitalist state. hillary clinton lacks both obama<u+2019>s rhetorical skills and her erstwhile husband<u+2019>s political ones. her entire approach in the campaign has been based on creating an ever more intrusive and ever larger federal government. even during bill clinton<u+2019>s reign, she was known to be the most enthusiastic supporter of governmental regulation, and it<u+2019>s unlikely that, approaching 70, she will change her approach. it seems almost certain, for example, that she will push hud and the epa to reshape local communities in ways pleasing to the bureaucracy. yet most americans do not seem to want a bigger state to interfere with their daily life. a solid majority<u+2014>some 54 percent<u+2014>recently told gallup they favor a less intrusive federal government, compared to only 41 percent who want a more activist washington. the federal government is now regarded by half of all americans, according to another poll by gallup, as <u+201c>an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens.<u+201d> in 2003 only 30 percent of americans felt that way. due largely to trump<u+2019>s awful persona, hillary likely will get some wins in <u+201c>flyover country,<u+201d> the vast territory that stretches from the appalachians to the coastal ranges. in certain areas with strong sense of traditional morality, such as in germanic wisconsin and parts of michigan, notes mike barone, trump<u+2019>s lewdness and celebrity-mania proved in the primaries incompatible with even conservative small town and rural sensibilities, more so in fact than in the cosmopolitan cores, where sexual obsessions are more celebrated than denounced. yet trump<u+2019>s strongest states, with some exceptions, remain in the country<u+2019>s mid-section; he still clings to leads in most of the intermountain west, texas, the mid-south and the great plains. he is still killing it in west virginia. this edge extends beyond a preponderance of <u+201c>deplorables<u+201d> and what bubba himself has referred to as <u+201c>your standard redneck.<u+201d> energy is the issue that most separates the heartland from the coasts. the increasingly radical calls for <u+201c>decarbonization<u+201d> by leading democrats spell the loss of jobs throughout the heartland, either directly by attacking fossil fuels or by boosting energy costs. since 2010, the energy boom has helped create hundreds of thousands of jobs throughout the heartland, many of them in manufacturing. at the same time, most big city democratic strongholds continued to deindustrialize and shed factory employment. no surprise then that the increasingly anti-carbon democrats control just one legislature, illinois, outside the northeast and the west coast. trump<u+2019>s romp through the primaries, like that of bernie sanders, rode on the perceived relative decline of the country<u+2019>s middle and working classes. for all her well-calculated programmatic appeals, hillary clinton emerged as the willing candidate of the ruling economic oligarchy, something made more painfully obvious from the recent wikileaks tapes. her likely approach to the economy, more of the same, is no doubt attractive to the wall street investment banks, silicon valley venture capitalists, renewable energy providers and inner city real estate speculators who have thrived under obama. yet more of the same seems unlikely to reverse income stagnation, as exemplified by the huge reserve army of unemployed, many of them middle aged men, outside the labor force. the fact remains that obama<u+2019>s vaunted <u+201c>era of hope and change,<u+201d> as liberal journalist thomas frank has noted, has not brought much positive improvement for the middle class or historically disadvantaged minorities. the notion that free trade and illegal immigration have harmed the prospects for millions of americans will continue to gain adherents with many middle and working class voters<u+2014>particularly in the heartland. we are likely to hear this appeal again in the future. if the gop could find a better, less divisive face for their policies, a reagan rather than a goldwater, this working-class base could be expanded enough to overcome the progressive tide as early as 2018. the one place where the progressives seem to have won most handily is on issues of culture. virtually the entire entertainment, fashion, and food establishments now openly allied with the left; the culture of luxury, expressed in the page of the new york times, has found its political voice by identifying with such issues as gay rights, transgender bathrooms , abortion and, to some extent, black lives matter. in contrast, the republicans cultural constituency has devolved to a bunch of country music crooners, open cultural reactionaries and, yes, a revolting collection of racist and misogynist <u+201c>deplorables.<u+201d> yet perhaps nowhere is the danger of progressive triumphalism more acute. despite the cultural progressive embrace of the notion that more diversity is always good, the reality is that our racial divide remains stark and is arguably getting worse. as for immigration, polls say that more people want to decrease not just the undocumented but even legal immigration than increase it. no matter what happens this year, the battle for america<u+2019>s political soul is not remotely over. trump may fade into deserved ignominy and hopefully obscurity, but his nationalist and populist message will not fade with him as long as concerns over jobs, america<u+2019>s role in the world, and disdain for political correctness remain. if hillary and her supporters over-shoot their nonexistent mandate and try to impose their whole agenda before achieving a supportable consensus , american politics could well end up going in directions that the progressives, and their media claque, might either not anticipate or much like.

trump will go away, but the anger he<u+2019>s stirred up is just getting started

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

5.0

73.0

8.0

8293.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

579.0

2.0

0.0

161.0

0.0

70.0

20.0

21.0

15.0

22.0

25.0

20.0

15.0

49.0

48.0

64.0

584.0

163.0

70.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump is a singular political phenomenon. hillary clinton<u+00a0>seems coordinated and almost corporate. at a time of political upheaval, it's unclear which advantage is stronger. democratic presidential candidate hillary clinton arrives to speak to volunteers at a democratic party organizing event at the neighborhood theater in charlotte, n.c., monday. to anoint hillary clinton as the official 2016 democratic presidential nominee, it takes a village. in cleveland last week at the republican national convention, donald trump<u+2019>s face was the dominant image. it loomed from videos over the stage. it stared out from t-shirts outside the arena, pointing a finger and saying stuff like, <u+201c>hillary, you<u+2019>re fired!<u+201d> three of the four convention nights mr. trump himself appeared on stage. this week in philadelphia, the democrats are using a much different, more traditional approach. the party<u+2019>s biggest names have marched to the podium one by one and praised mrs. clinton while bashing trump. except for a brief hug with president obama on wednesday night, clinton herself has stayed more behind the scenes. that will change somewhat with her acceptance speech thursday. but this contrast in stagecraft is a symbol of the essential differences between the trump and clinton campaigns. trump is <u+2013> in newt gingrich<u+2019>s word <u+2013> a <u+201c>pirate,<u+201d> a master of reaching out across global media platforms to grab the world<u+2019>s attention with a sudden, bold stroke. sometimes the move misses <u+2013> witness yesterday<u+2019>s uproar about whether he should have urged russia to hack and release missing clinton emails. but the action and resulting attention is the thing. clinton is more of a communitarian, heir and presumptive next leader of an existing political coalition. she<u+2019>s guarded by nature. her campaign seems a coordinated, almost corporate effort of many people doing many things, some visible (surrogate speeches) and some not (microtargeted emails). the result is a fascinating clash of new versus old approaches to media, organized versus insurgent marketing, and two personalities as different as july and december. it<u+2019>s a race that scholars and political pros will be studying for years. <u+201c>trump is consciously running an unrestrained and uncontrolled campaign, while it is true that clinton<u+2019>s methodology creates distance between herself and voters,<u+201d> says jeffrey engel, director of the center for presidential history at southern methodist university in dallas. clinton<u+2019>s approach is an attempt to <u+201c>dramatically cut down on mistakes,<u+201d> engel adds. <u+201c>it<u+2019>s a prevent defense.<u+201d> in part this split is rooted in traditional differences between the parties. it<u+2019>s a political truism that the republican party is more organized around ideology, while the democratic party is more transactional. the former involves what george h. w. bush called <u+201c>the vision thing<u+201d> and punchy presentations. the latter means making democratic interest groups happy with targeted policies. thus trump<u+2019>s campaign website is thin on policy details and long on assertions that it is only the gop nominee who can make america great again. clinton<u+2019>s corresponding site is so numbingly detailed that it has a section on curtailing <u+201c>horse soring,<u+201d> the use of chemicals to exaggerate gait, as new york times columnist david brooks pointed out this week. the differences are also personal. trump has been a celebrity for years and is as comfortable making media appearances as he is taking a nap. he obviously believes that there is no such thing as bad news coverage. there are only chances for attention (and possible votes) missed. in contrast, clinton herself seems almost physically absent from the campaign. trump has correctly pointed out that it has been more than 235 days since the democratic nominee last held a press conference. she sits for personal interviews, but not at trump<u+2019>s pace. she<u+2019>s begun calling in to news shows, but only since trump has demonstrated that<u+2019>s an efficient and effective way to control a media appearance. in clinton<u+2019>s case, that<u+2019>s probably a learned behavior. the drama of clinton<u+2019>s decades in public life and the clintons<u+2019> perception that they have been badly treated by the media and political opponents has caused her to retreat behind a kind of gauzy curtain. <u+201c>she<u+2019>s someone who<u+2019>s every word is very guarded publicly, because she feels she<u+2019>s kind of been burned,<u+201d> says brian rosenwald, a political scientist at the university of pennsylvania and author of a forthcoming book on the political impact of talk radio. she<u+2019>s also a policy wonk as much as a politician. when she answers a question, she<u+2019>ll often dance around it at first, looking at all angles, before concluding that essentially, <u+201c>it<u+2019>s complicated.<u+201d> asked about fracking, she<u+2019>ll talk about its environmental dangers and energy benefits, then outline when it is, or isn<u+2019>t, ok. asked about immigration reform, she<u+2019>ll talk about its history and ideals, and then get into a multipoint program. trump doesn<u+2019>t do such nuance. in his own acceptance speech he flatly declared that, <u+201c>nobody knows the system better than me, which is why i alone can fix it.<u+201d> in his surety and brevity, he<u+2019>s the twitter candidate, a fit for the new facebook age. clinton may be not unlike most candidates in her desire for word control and image protection. it<u+2019>s trump in this context who is unique, the agent of disruption. <u+201c>more and more our culture is headed towards quick sound bites. donald trump fits that very well. hillary clinton probably wants to give in-depth policy answers, and that stuff doesn<u+2019>t transfer as well to social media,<u+201d> brian rosenwald says. clinton knows that she has to up her communications game, given her opponent<u+2019>s skills. she (or more likely an aide) has sharpened her twitter approach in recent months, for instance. posts are punchier and less policy oriented. her advantage is that she is not alone. unlike trump, she has inherited a strong party network that has been building voter lists and studying new targeting techniques for years. in that sense, she may be the candidate of the brave new electronic age, while trump lags back in a traditional era. <u+201c>to understand clinton<u+2019>s use of social media, you have to go back and recognize she remains part of the broader obama coalition . . . the obama people were really revolutionary in employing data metrics and new technology in order to micro-target voters,<u+201d> says professor engel of smu. thus clinton, or the clinton team, may be good at communications efforts that are not readily apparent. take video games. the obama campaign went so far as to buy ads within popular games such as <u+201c>madden football<u+201d> in 2008 and 2012. a player scanning the virtual madden stadium would have seen a virtual obama billboard hanging over the field. these ads were targeted to those playing madden online in 10 swing states. <u+201c>more and more everything is targeted. every ad is different. everything is slicing and dicing the audience,<u+201d> says professor rosenwald. in that sense, clinton versus trump might not be not an old media candidate versus a new media one, as much as it is two competing versions of adapting to the changes wrought by the electronic age. it<u+2019>s not clear whether one is superior over the other. there<u+2019>s not great data on whether microtargeting actually drives votes. trump may find out that in the end there were days when not saying anything might have been preferable to saying something controversial. in about 100 days, we<u+2019>ll get a result that will shed some light on these questions.

to nominate clinton, it takes a village

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

39.0

8.0

7532.0

0.0

1.0

4.0

0.0

516.0

0.0

127.0

1.0

0.0

59.0

15.0

19.0

5.0

14.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

31.0

29.0

58.0

520.0

127.0

60.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

donald trump announced tuesday night that he would not participate in the fox news debate set for thursday -- after fox head honcho roger ailes told the fix's cal borchers that fnc personality (and trump nemesis) megyn kelly would stay on as a moderator. trump's campaign then released the statement below to further explain his decision. it is amazing -- even by trump standards. i annotated it using genius; sign up and annotate alongside me! as someone who wrote one of the best-selling business books of all time, the art of the deal, who has built an incredible company, including some of the most valuable and iconic assets in the world, and as someone who has a personal net worth of many billions of dollars, mr. trump knows a bad deal when he sees one. fox news is making tens of millions of dollars on debates, and setting ratings records (the highest in history), where as in previous years they were low-rated afterthoughts. unlike the very stupid, highly incompetent people running our country into the ground, mr. trump knows when to walk away. roger ailes and fox news think they can toy with him, but mr. trump doesn<u+2019>t play games. there have already been six debates, and according to all online debate polls including drudge, slate, time magazine, and many others, mr. trump has won all of them, in particular the last one. whereas<u+00a0>he has always been a job creator and not a debater, he nevertheless truly enjoys the debating process<u+00a0>- and it has been very good for him, both in polls and popularity. he will not be participating in the fox news debate and will instead host an event in iowa to raise money for the veterans and wounded warriors, who have been treated so horribly by our all talk, no action politicians. like running for office as an extremely successful person, this takes guts and it is the kind mentality our country needs in order to make america great again.

donald trump<u+2019>s statement on the fox news debate has to be seen to be believed

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

4.0

77.0

8.0

1902.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

117.0

1.0

0.0

41.0

0.0

12.0

3.0

7.0

1.0

2.0

7.0

3.0

7.0

12.0

5.0

24.0

119.0

42.0

12.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

at last night's final presidential debate, the gop presidential nominee refused to say that he would honor and accept the results of the election. instead, he said he would "keep you in suspense." this is, indeed, horrifying, as his opponent hillary clinton said. but it should come as no surprise. it has been clear from the beginning that trump does not accept small-d democratic norms. in the first republican primary debate last august, trump, running as a republican, refused to say that he would support the eventual nominee. that's fair enough, on its own, especially considering that several of the other gop candidates eventually refused to do so. but it was also a warning: trump would honor the norms of the electoral process; he would not, as a matter of course, accept its legitimacy. the rejection of both the norms and legitimacy of democracy has been a consistent theme throughout trump's public career. in 2012, after barack obama won the election, trump went on a long twitter rant, arguing that the election was "a total sham and a travesty" and that "we are not a democracy." throughout the campaign, trump has treated the norms of democracy<u+2014>peace, acceptance, respect for the electoral process and for the limits of presidential power<u+2014>with disdain if not outright hostility. at his rallies, he has explicitly encouraged supporters to engage in violent acts against protesters. since winning the nomination, he has repeatedly declared that the election is rigged, raising the specter of voter fraud that has been consistently, repeatedly proven to be almost entirely imaginary. before that, he warned darkly that if his nomination did not go through at the republican convention there might be riots. over and over again throughout his campaign, trump has disrespected the constitution and promised to violate its most essential rules. he has dismissed the idea of free speech, promised to seize the assets of foreign nationals, and suggested that muslims should be forced to register in a federal database. he has repeatedly promised to order the military to commit war crimes. he has derided core constitutional principles, arguing, dismissively, that "the constitution is not a suicide pact." trump, who clearly does not understand the constitution, does not believe in the sanctity of its provisions, or even in its general guidance. he believes only in his own ill-informed whims. trump's lack of respect for the constitution is matched only by his praise for the strength of authoritarian dictators. he has been fulsome in his praise for russian leader vladimir putin's strength, and has similarly expressed his admiration for other authoritarian leaders such as saddam hussan, muammar gaddagi, and bashar al-assad. at last night's debate, he repeatedly dismissed the notion, confirmed by multiple u.s. intelligence agencies, that russia was behind the hack of democratic emails, and seemed to side with putin for having outsmarted the united states. all the available evidence indicates that trump is not a fan of the imperfect democracy that is the united states, but quite admires foreign authoritarians specifically for their authoritarian tendencies. over and over again, trump has expressed his desire to implement authoritarian, unconstitutional policies in the u.s.<u+2014>banning muslims from entering the country, closing down mosques, retaliating against media outlets that publish critical reports about trump, and their owners. one of trump's favorite lines is that "only i can solve" the problems he says ail the country. part of the problem is that trump perceives himself as an eternal winner. therefore, any loss can only be someone else's fault. that is how we ended up with a presidential debate in which trump interrupted his opponent to declare, again, that he should have gotten an emmy for his reality tv show, the apprentice. trump had insisted that the emmy awards were also rigged against him. the man's vast personal vanity is inseperable from his authoritarian outlook. at this point, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that trump is not really running for president of a democratic republic; he is running to be its unchecked and unaccountable leader, free from the shackles of constitutionally limited democracy he so clearly despises.

it<u+2019>s no surprise that trump might not accept election results. he<u+2019>s never accepted democratic norms.

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

100.0

8.0

4294.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

311.0

1.0

0.0

90.0

1.0

0.0

46.0

11.0

12.0

11.0

22.0

10.0

15.0

9.0

23.0

30.0

34.0

316.0

91.0

47.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

as a long time observer of the political process and as someone who served twice in the white house, i remember the great anticipation for past state of the union speeches.<u+00a0> it was an activity where<u+00a0>many hundreds of hours and top level staff worked on the speech for many months before it was delivered. it was to be a recap of what had been accomplished and an agenda for the future. i remember the excitement of the president going to capitol hill to address the nation, standing before the other branches of the government, the congress and the supreme court, and either inspiring or informing all of just what the title states: this is the state of the union. part of the drama has been the grand entrance into the people's house, the house of a representatives and the president being mobbed by members trying to shake his hand or pat his back and for this one night he is treated like a rock star or to be more current like a reality tv star. the repeated standing and applauding for the key phrases that appeal to the partisans in his party and the negative responses from the opposition. everyone is there! anyone<u+00a0> of importance in our government along with<u+00a0> the ambassador contingent<u+00a0> from the diplomatic community, is there on display for the nation to see. this has historically been an opportunity for<u+00a0> a dramatic speech to the nation and the world and without question as important as any that a president might deliver. tuesday night was the last of these that president barack obama will ever give. as i watched the visuals, the new young speaker, paul ryan, sitting alongside the vice president whom he tried to replace in the last election. <u+00a0>biden, realizing daily that this is his last hurrah -- and privately telling people he wishes he would have run one more time against the faltering hillary clinton. speaker ryan, who now holds more power than anyone except maybe the lame duck president, sits in a seat he never anticipated a year ago. he will be the one who sets the legislative agenda for the future and the president<u+2019>s only retort is his veto pen. i watch the one socialist member of congress, senator bernie sanders mix and greet the members of the joint chief of staffs of our military, with their stars on their uniforms and rows of medals on their chests. there is not a member in this chamber who would ever have thought a year ago that sanders would be viewed as a serious challenger to hillary clinton, as he now is. for someone as skilled at giving a speech as our forty-fourth president, mr. obama failed miserably at either inspiring or informing us of the real state of the union. what he did do is give a political campaign speech. it was disjointed, irrelevant and disappointing. he is not running for a third term and the agenda he laid out is not what the country wants or feels. he looked tired and ready to move on. he talked about how great we are as a nation. true,<u+00a0> but what he didn't do was set an agenda for his final year or for his legacy. he set goals but failed to explain how we can accomplish them. he talked about leadership but has failed miserably as a leader. on the very day the president is delivered his speech, the iranian navy captured two us navy ships that allegedly were incapacitated and drifted into iranian waters. now iran is holding these sailors hostage. yet, there was no mention of this incident in the president<u+2019>s speech. this is an escalation of hostile behavior by the iranians who just last month fired unguided missiles at our aircraft carrier , the harry s. truman, in the same waters. i can't imagine, if he was still with us, that president truman would disregard these acts of hostility. he was a man of strength. with the country feeling that terrorism is one of our top problems, the president dismissed our concerns. don't worry! we've got the strongest military in the world. we got bin laden. this is what he said about iran: "that<u+2019>s why we built a global coalition, with sanctions and principled diplomacy, to prevent a nuclear-armed iran. as we speak, iran has rolled back its nuclear program, shipped out its uranium stockpile, and the world has avoided another war." i don't think so. bad behavior by iran is dismissed because president obama wants to protect his sacred and risky deal. the number one concern of the country is fighting terrorism. the recent home grown action by the terrorist killings in san bernardino, california has made this more of a concern. but in spite of this,<u+00a0>just this week the president is to release more prisoners from guantanamo. it is still his top priority to close this prison in spite of strong objections from the congress, the military and law enforcement officers. many of the prisoners already released have returned to the terrorist battlefield. "that is why i will keep working to shut down the prison at guantanamo: it<u+2019>s expensive, it<u+2019>s unnecessary, and it only serves as a recruitment brochure for our enemies." this is a speech that will not be remembered and will historically be irrelevant. the man who was the most partisan president in recent history, talked about how disappointed he is that the partisan divide<u+00a0> has not healed. the office of the presidency has been diminished under barack obama<u+2019>s two terms. his party has been demolished at the state house level and in the loss of both houses of congress. but he still panders on. this is not an historic presidency and he exemplified his "leading from behind" with a very forgettable farewell state of the union. no wonder the country is desperately looking for new leadership. edward j. rollins is a fox news contributor. he is a former assistant to president reagan and he managed his reelection campaign. he is a senior presidential fellow at hofstra university and a member of the political consultants hall of fame. he is a strategist for great america pac, an independant group that is supporting donald trump for president.

obama's last state of the union address in three words: disjointed, irrelevant and disappointing

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

96.0

8.0

5956.0

0.0

2.0

8.0

0.0

436.0

1.0

0.0

162.0

0.0

48.0

19.0

24.0

9.0

19.0

10.0

14.0

7.0

25.0

37.0

43.0

444.0

163.0

48.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

accepting the national rifle association's endorsement last week, donald trump warned that hillary clinton "wants to abolish the second amendment." cnn corrected him, noting that clinton "has never called for the abolition of the 2nd amendment." although that's technically true, clinton has done what amounts to the same thing. she has interpreted the second amendment so narrowly that it imposes no practical limits on gun control laws, and that interpretation is sure to guide her supreme court nominations if she is elected president. on the same day that trump addressed the nra, one of clinton's policy advisers told bloomberg politics the presumptive democratic presidential nominee disagrees with district of columbia v. heller, the 2008 decision in which the supreme court overturned the district's handgun ban. the adviser, maya harris, said, "clinton believes heller was wrongly decided in that cities and states should have the power to craft commonsense laws to keep their residents safe." since heller is the first case in which the supreme court explicitly recognized that the second amendment protects an individual right to armed self-defense, that statement is roughly equivalent to saying, "trump believes roe v. wade was wrongly decided in that cities and states should have the power to craft commonsense laws to protect unborn children." just as supporters of abortion rights would be justified in reading the latter statement as a rejection of their position, supporters of gun rights are justified in reading clinton's statement as a rejection of theirs. clinton confirms her hostility to gun rights by glossing over the details of the d.c. law that the supreme court overturned. that law, which was the strictest of its kind in the country, not only banned handguns, the most popular type of weapon for self-defense, but required that long guns be disassembled and unloaded or disabled by a trigger lock. as the court recognized, the latter rule made it impossible for d.c. residents to use even shotguns or rifles "for the core lawful purpose of self-defense." but to clinton, the d.c. ban was an eminently reasonable "safe storage law," a paradigmatic example of "commonsense" gun control. if the district's limits on gun possession negated "the core lawful purpose" of the second amendment, you might wonder, why would a candidate who claims to respect the second amendment (as clinton intermittently does) say they should have been upheld? possibly because she does not think the second amendment has anything to do with self-defense. "i know how important gun ownership, and particularly hunting, is here in northeastern pennsylvania," clinton told supporters in dunmore last month. regarding her gun control agenda, she said, "responsible gun owners have to stand up and say, 'this has nothing to do with my guns, my hunting, my sport shooting, my collecting.'" self-defense is conspicuously absent from clinton's list of legitimate things people do with guns. the australian government, whose mass confiscations of firearms clinton admires, takes a similar view. australians must demonstrate a "genuine reason" for owning a gun, and personal protection does not count. but australia has no second amendment. clinton's campaign website mentions the second amendment a dozen times (compared to more than 800 mentions on trump's site), not once in the context of self-defense. three of those references to the second amendment criticize people for taking it too seriously. after a mass shooting in oregon last fall, for instance, clinton rejected the nra's "single-minded, absolutist theology about the second amendment being sacrosanct," saying "every constitutional right and amendment can be tailored in an appropriate way without breaching the constitution." actually, it's government policy that has to be "tailored" so that it does not breach the constitution. restrictions on speech, for instance, must be "narrowly tailored" to serve a compelling government interest. rather than trim her policy agenda to fit the constitution, clinton wants to trim the constitution to fit her policy agenda. "we have to make this a voting issue," she says. i agree.

hillary clinton's second amendment

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

34.0

8.0

4199.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

307.0

0.0

69.0

0.0

36.0

15.0

7.0

5.0

18.0

4.0

9.0

2.0

19.0

25.0

29.0

311.0

69.0

36.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

peter bergen is cnn's national security analyst, a vice president at new america and a professor of practice at arizona state university. he is the author of "manhunt: the ten-year search for bin laden -- from 9/11 to abbottabad." david sterman is a program associate at new america, a washington-based think tank. (cnn) on thursday morning, four u.s. marines were killed in chattanooga, tennessee, when a gunman shot at two separate military facilities: a military recruiting center and a navy training reserve center. the suspected shooter is 24-year-old mohammad youssuf abdulazeez, who also is dead, according to the fbi. the shooter's motivations are as yet unclear. u.s. attorney bill killian told reporters that the investigation is being treated as "act of domestic terrorism." one likely reason why investigators are treating the shooting as a potential domestic terrorist attack is that there are multiple cases of jihadist extremists plotting to attack military facilities and recruiting centers in the united states. military facilities and personnel are a common target in jihadist plots to conduct violence within the united states. nearly a third of the 119 americans accused of plotting an attack inside the united states since 9/11 were alleged to have plotted to attack u.s. military targets, according to data collected by new america thursday's shooting would not be the first jihadist attack on a u.s. military recruitment office, nor even the first one with a connection to tennessee. on november 18, 2008, bledsoe was arrested in yemen for possessing a fake somali identification card. the fake identity card was part of bledsoe's ill-conceived plan to travel to somalia to wage jihad. when he was arrested, bledsoe was found to possess manuals about how to make bombs and gun silencers. on his cell phone were contacts for militants who were wanted in saudi arabia. the fbi interviewed bledsoe after his arrest in yemen, and he eventually returned to the united states. in a letter to the judge in his case, bledsoe claimed to have been sent by al qaeda in the arabian peninsula (aqap) and portrayed the little rock shooting as a jihadist attack -- though there is no evidence that he was actually sent or directed by aqap. the fort hood attack helps illustrate the particular role of military targets for jihadists who see themselves as engaged in a war with the united states and soldiers as legitimate targets. hasan's only real confidant in texas was duane reasoner jr., an 18-year-old covert from catholicism who attended his mosque. hasan told reasoner he didn't want to be deployed to afghanistan. at their final dinner together, on november 4, hasan told reasoner that what he really wanted was to quit the military because anyone fighting against fellow muslims was likely to go to hell. the next day, the 467th combat stress control detachment to which hasan was assigned was due to report at the soldier readiness processing center at fort hood -- the last stop before the unit shipped out to afghanistan. this was the day that hasan selected to conduct his deadly attack. earlier this year, an alleged plot inspired by isis to attack a military base was foiled in illinois. on march 25, hasan edmonds , a 22-year-old u.s. citizen, and his cousin jonas edmonds, a 29-year-old u.s. citizen, were arrested. the two allegedly plotted for hasan, a member of the illinois national guard, to travel to syria to fight with isis while jonas would carry out an attack on a military facility. the two were monitored by an undercover officer. another potential reason to consider jihadist terrorism as a motivation in the chattanooga shooting is that the incident comes amid a spike in terrorism cases this year, driven in large part by the threat posed by individuals inspired by isis and a law enforcement crackdown on potential plotters. already less than seven months into 2015, more americans have been charged in jihadist terrorism related cases than in any other year since 9/11, according to data collected by new america moreover, the timing of the chattanooga shooting on the final night of ramadan raises another flag. isis called for its supporters to unleash "a month of disaster" during the holy celebration of ramadan, which ends friday. regardless of the shooter's motivation, it is essential to investigate all possibilities and not jump to conclusions. on september 16, 2013, aaron alexis killed 12 people in a shooting at the washington navy yard. though the attack came on the heels of the anniversary of 9/11, occurred in the nation's capital, targeted a military facility and had other characteristics that superficially suggested it might be jihadist terrorism, alexis turned out to not be a terrorist, but a mass shooter with a history of mental health problems. even though alexis was not a jihadist terrorist, his shooting at the navy yard demonstrated in the words of a department of the navy report on the shooting that there were "critical performance gaps" in the navy yard's capabilities "against a wide range of threats" and that "the naval support activity washington's antiterrorism program" was "deficient in several areas." an issue laid bare by thursday's shootings is the challenge of securing military recruiting offices from attacks. while u.s. military bases tend to have high levels of security, military recruiting offices do not. since these offices have been the scenes of two attacks in the past six years, the pentagon should consider how to make them harder targets.

chattanooga shooting: history of attacks on u.s. military

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

10.0

57.0

8.0

5558.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

387.0

1.0

0.0

90.0

1.0

0.0

58.0

23.0

9.0

7.0

26.0

7.0

10.0

6.0

22.0

31.0

32.0

391.0

91.0

59.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

speaking from hiroshima, the site of the first war-time atomic weapon detonation, president obama on friday called for the pursuit of "a world without nuclear weapons." only a few days prior, his department of defense published new data revealing that the government obama oversees -- a government which manages the second-largest nuclear stockpile in the world -- had dismantled fewer of its nuclear devices than in any year since at least 1980. every year, the department of defense declassifies data on the size of the country's nuclear stockpile and the number of warheads dismantled. its most recent data, released this week, shows that the u.s. stockpile numbered 4,571 at the end of 2015, about 15 percent of its size at its peak during the cold war in 1967. the number of weapons dismantled was 109, the lowest figure since at least 1980. in 1945, the size of the stockpile matched the number of weapons deployed -- two. the biggest reductions came in the early 1990s during the administration of george h.w. bush and, a decade later, during his son's. at the end of 2008, the stockpile numbered 5,273; over the course of obama's two terms, it has dropped to 4,571. it is, of course, easier to reduce the size of a stockpile when it is much larger. as a fraction of the total weapon count, obama has sliced the total by a bit more than one-tenth -- 13 percent. but the federation of american scientists is still critical of obama's progress in this regard. that 13 percent is "the smallest reduction of the stockpile achieved by any previous post-cold war administration;" the 109 dismantlings last year continues "a trendline of fewer and fewer warheads dismantled" under obama. the fas notes that there are reasons outside of the administration's control for the lower number last year -- but also that political pressure discourages a push for reduction. why does the size of our stockpile matter? as data from the stockholm international peace research institute shows, the united states still controls about half of the weapons controlled by recognized nuclear states.

obama calls for end to nuclear weapons, but u.s. disarmament is slowest since 1980

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

82.0

8.0

2086.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

118.0

0.0

49.0

0.0

15.0

2.0

5.0

1.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

7.0

6.0

122.0

49.0

15.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

senior u.s. military leaders and defense officials are debating whether military force should be used to protect washington-backed syrian rebels who have come under attack by russian airstrikes in recent days. the associated press reported early friday that the question was part of a broader debate within the pentagon about the the broader dilemma of how the administration should respond to what white house press secretary josh earnest described as russia's "indiscriminate military operations against the syrian opposition." tensions between the u.s. and russia are escalating over russian airstrikes that are serving to strengthen syrian president bashar assad by targeting the so-called "moderate" rebels rather than hitting islamic state (isis) fighters it promised to attack. turkey's foreign ministry says ankara and its allies in the u.s.-led coalition are calling on russia to immediately cease attacks on the syrian opposition and to focus on fighting islamic state militants. meanwhile, a joint statement by the united states, france, germany, qatar, saudi arabia, turkey and britain expressed concern over russia's military actions, saying they will "only fuel more extremism and radicalization." the text of the statement was released by the turkish foreign ministry on friday, and confirmed by the french foreign ministry. the pentagon on thursday had its first conversation with russian officials in an effort to avoid any unintended u.s.-russian confrontations as the airstrikes continue in the skies over syria. during the video call, elissa slotkin, who represented the u.s. side, expressed america's concerns that russia is targeting areas where there are few if any isis forces operating. slotkin is the acting assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs. a key concern is the prospect of the u.s. and russia getting drawn into a shooting war in the event that russian warplanes hit moderate syrian rebels who have been trained and equipped by the u.s. military. at u.n. headquarters in new york, secretary of state john kerry said: "what is important is russia has to not be engaged in any activities against anybody but isil. that's clear. we have made that very clear." "we are not yet where we need to be to guarantee the safety and security" of those carrying out the airstrikes, he said. in an interview late thursday on cbs's "the late show with stephen colbert," kerry described the military consultations as "a way of making sure that planes aren't going to be shooting at each other and making things worse." "what is happening is a catastrophe, a human catastrophe really unparalleled in modern times," kerry said of the syrian crisis, adding that russia should help the united states "persuade assad to be the saver of his country, not the killer of his country." u.s. officials made it clear earlier this year that rebels trained by the u.s. would receive air support in the event they are attacked by either is or syrian government troops. currently, only about 80 u.s.-trained syrian rebels are back in syria fighting with their units. the u.s. policy is very specific. it doesn't address a potential attack by russian planes and does not include syrian rebels who have not been through the u.s. military training, even though they may be aligned with the u.s. or fighting islamic state militants. so far, the russian airstrikes have been in western syria. the syrians trained and equipped by the u.s. have primarily been operating in the north. u.s. officials said the issue is one of many being hashed out by top leaders within the department and the military's joint staff. one official said they are weighing the potential fallout. at worst, if russia bombs rebels trained by the u.s. and american fighter jets intercede to protect the syrians, the exchange could trigger an all-out confrontation with russia -- a potential disaster the administration would like to avoid. fueling the concerns is the fact that russia has aircraft in syria with air-to-air combat capacity, even though isis has no air force and the only aircraft in the skies belong to u.s.-led coalition or the syrian government. pentagon press secretary peter cook would not provide details of the talks with russia. but much of the discussion involved proposals for avoiding conflict between u.s. and russian aircraft flying over syria. kerry said he foresees further consultations with the russians about air operations. and cook said the u.s. side proposed using specific international radio frequencies for distress calls by military pilots flying in syrian airspace, but he was not more specific about that or other proposals. russia's defense ministry said that over the past 24 hours it had damaged or destroyed 12 targets in syria belonging to the isis fighters, including a command center and ammunition depots. a u.s. military spokesman in baghdad, col. steve warren, said he had no indication that the russians had hit islamic state targets. "while there is always danger of conflict, of inadvertent contact" between coalition and russian warplanes, "we are continuing with our operations," warren told reporters at the pentagon.

pentagon weighs using force to protect us-backed syria rebels targeted by russia

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

7.0

80.0

8.0

5192.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

428.0

0.0

94.0

0.0

53.0

14.0

7.0

4.0

20.0

3.0

9.0

4.0

21.0

24.0

34.0

435.0

94.0

53.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

**want fox news first in your inbox every day? sign up here.** buzz cut: <u+2022> wreckage in wake of bungled house coup <u+2022> baier tracks: islamist militants leave no doubt in paris <u+2022> warren to rally labor allies <u+2022> rubio comes out swinging at hillary <u+2022> lizard lips wreckage in wake of bungled house coup washex: <u+201c>republican leaders on tuesday infuriated conservatives by meting out punishment to a group of far-right gop lawmakers who tried to oust house speaker john boehner. hours after 24 republicans voted against boehner, gop leaders removed two members from a key committee. by late tuesday, reps. daniel webster and richard nugent, both of florida, were stripped from the powerful house rules committee, which governs the legislative process, including amendments and changes to bills before they reach the house floor for debate. webster was one of three candidates who announced they were running against boehner<u+2026>but gop lawmakers told the<u+00a0>examiner<u+00a0>that others could feel repercussions, including rep. scott garrett, r-n.j., who could lose his chairmanship of a financial services subcommittee.<u+201d> [the hill: <u+201c>rep. tim huelskamp [r-kan.] on tuesday said he had a chairmanship taken away from him shortly after he announced he would vote against rep. john boehner [r-ohio] for speaker.<u+201d>] mulvaney blasts bunglers - rep. mick mulvaney, r-s.c., took to facebook to vent his frustrations with the bungled coup: <u+201c><u+2026>the floor of the house is the wrong place to have this battle. the hard truth is that we had an election for speaker in november <u+2013> just among republicans. that was the time to fight. but not a single person ran against boehner. not one. if they had, we could<u+2019>ve had a secret ballot to find out what the true level of opposition to john boehner was. in fact, we could<u+2019>ve done that as late as monday night, on a vote of <u+2018>no confidence<u+2019> in the speaker. but that didn<u+2019>t happen<u+2026>and at least one of the supposed challengers to boehner today didn<u+2019>t even go to the meeting last night. that told me a lot.<u+201d> here<u+2019>s how it<u+2019>s done - some advice for conservatives from john hart, who as a senior staff member, helped execute the successful gop leadership coup of 1998. he was not impressed by the failed effort. <u+201c>in contrast, today<u+2019>s effort gives rebellion a bad name. it is tepid, poorly planned and pretends to be conservative but is conventional washington politics and posturing at its worst.<u+201d> obama to warn of gas price rise in detroit green car pitch detroit news: <u+201c>president barack obama is warning americans that cheap gas prices won<u+2019>t last indefinitely, and he<u+2019>s standing by his support of small, fuel-efficient vehicles. <u+201c>i would strongly advise american consumers to continue to think about how you save money at the pump because it is good for the environment, it<u+2019>s good for family pocketbooks and if you go back to old habits and suddenly gas is back at $3.50, you are going to not be real happy,<u+201d> obama said in an exclusive telephone interview with the detroit news on tuesday, the eve of his visit to ford<u+2019>s michigan assembly plant in wayne.<u+201d> hang time - washex: <u+201c>president obama has invited the top four democratic and republican leaders in the house and senate to a meeting at the white house next tuesday, as obama tries to build momentum for his legislative agenda at the start of the 2015 congressional session.<u+201d> swing set - the hill: <u+201c>senate republicans are reaching out to about nine democrats they see as crucial swing votes in the new congress. with his 54-seat majority, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell (ky.) is six votes short of overcoming democratic filibusters, making bipartisan support a necessity for getting most legislation to president obama<u+2019>s desk. republicans have identified six go-to centrists: democratic sens. joe manchin (w.va.), heidi heitkamp (n.d.), mark warner (va.), tim kaine (va.) and joe donnelly (ind.) and independent sen. angus king (maine), who caucuses with the democrats. several other democrats, including sens. claire mccaskill (mo.), chris coons (del.), tom carper (del.) and martin heinrich (n.m.), are also targets, though they are seen as riskier partners.<u+201d> cbc will feel the love - daily caller: <u+201c>utah rep. mia love, who recently became the first black female republican ever elected to congress, joined the congressional black caucus, according to a tuesday announcement - potentially bad news for the group.<u+00a0> love, the former mayor of saratoga springs, has stated that she would likely join the cbc but would attempt drastic change from within the group, which tends to lean to the left.<u+201d> baier tracks: islamist militants leave no doubt in paris<u+2026> <u+201c>the paris terrorist attack is another stark example of the threat the western world faces from radical islamists of all names, acronyms, shapes, sizes, and locations <u+2013> muslim extremists who seek to impose their <u+2018>law<u+2019> on everyone else. <u+00a0>today<u+2019>s version involved military style terrorist commandos dressed in black, armed with ak-47s, clearly trained and moving in a coordinated fashion. multiple reports say the terrorists yelled <u+2018>allah akbar<u+2019> as they shot reporters and cartoonists in the newsroom of the<u+00a0>charlie hebdo magazine in paris,<u+00a0>which had written satirically about islam and published cartoons about the prophet muhammad. witnesses say the gunmen yelled, <u+2018>we<u+2019>ve avenged the honor of the prophet!<u+2019> in french- before escaping. the first public reaction from the white house was to <u+2018>condemn this act of violence<u+2019>. pressed on why it wasn<u+2019>t an act of terrorism, spokesman josh earnest said <u+2018>it<u+2019>s early<u+2019>. <u+2018>if it<u+2019>s an act of terrorism we will condemn that too<u+2019>. then the french president put out a statement calling the onslaught a horrific act of terror. <u+00a0>afterwards, earnest, appearing on fox, adjusted and called it an <u+2018>act of terror<u+2019>. what this semantics game shows is that the white house still seems reticent to speak out against radical islamist terrorists in the strongest terms - early and often. we all understand<u+00a0>the <u+2018>fog<u+2019> of the early minutes of an <u+2018>attack<u+2019>, but after a short time this seemed cut and dry. and the french certainly understood it early. we<u+2019>ll see how forceful the president is about it today as he touts the u.s. economy in detroit.<u+201d> <u+2013> bret baier. with your<u+00a0>second cup of coffee... the daily mail reports on the spectacular photos of comet lovejoy, which will pass earth at its closest distance today. the comet was first spotted by amateur astronomer terry lovejoy in august and is thought to be about 43 million miles away and traveling at 15 miles per second. lovejoy has an extremely strong record in comet watching, discovering five thus far in with simple equipment. slowly gaining brightness, the striking comet with its green glow from the cyanogen and diatomic carbon should allow viewers even in light-polluted suburbs to catch a glimpse. comets are rock, gravel and dust held together by ice. got a tip from the right or left? email [email protected] poll check real clear politics averages obama job approval: approve <u+2013><u+00a0>44.3 percent//disapprove <u+2013> 51.4 percent direction of country: right direction <u+2013> 27.5 percent//wrong track <u+2013> 64.3 percent rubio comes out swinging at hillary in new book tampa bay times: <u+201c>marco rubio wastes no time in his new book,<u+00a0>american dreams, going after hillary clinton. on page nine of the forward, a lament that the dream is fading for many, the republican senator from florida argues clinton <u+2018>has proven herself wedded to the policies and programs of the past. instead of reforming a higher education system that costs too much money, is too hard for nontraditional students to access and awards too many degrees that do not lead to jobs, another clinton presidency will be about spending more money on a broken system,<u+2019> rubio writes<u+2026><u+2018>the election of hillary clinton to the presidency, in short, would be nothing more than a third obama term. another clinton presidency would be a death blow to the american dream.<u+2019> but rubio, whose book will be published by sentinel on jan. 13, knows partisan jabs only go so far.<u+2026>but the point of the book is to spotlight rubio as someone who can bring it all home. he doesn't declare himself a candidate for president, of course, but the 43-year-old leaves no mystery that he thinks he's qualified to lead a movement to <u+2018>restore the land of opportunity.<u+2019><u+201d> offers new immigration plan - national journal: <u+201c>marco rubio won<u+2019>t apologize for attempting to pass a comprehensive immigration bill that included a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants. but he will, in the run-up to a potential presidential campaign, offer a new, pared-down, conservative-friendly approach to immigration reform<u+2026>here are some key passages from rubio<u+2019>s book pertaining to immigration. chamber political guru engstrom joins up with jeb ap: <u+201c>former florida gov. jeb bush on tuesday announced the formation of a political action committee designed to lay the groundwork for a 2016 presidential campaign<u+2026>bush<u+2019>s new organization is already adding high-profile operatives to his team. rob engstrom, political director at the u.s. chamber of commerce, informed colleagues on tuesday that he is moving to florida to volunteer for the right to rise pac.<u+201d> power play: hot rise - with the 2016 nomination contest heating up, chris stirewalt explains the whys and wherefores of the launch of jeb bush<u+2019>s super pac, the right to rise, and the impact on its fundraising prowess. watch here. <u+201c>today,<u+00a0>jeb bush<u+00a0>launched the right to rise, a leadership pac dedicated to making america a place of unlimited opportunity. laura and i are proud to support my brother and contribute.<u+201d> <u+2013> former president george w. bush in a facebook post. indiana lawmakers ice pence white house bill indianapolis [indiana] star: <u+201c>indiana<u+2019>s top legislative republicans said tuesday that a bill allowing gov. mike pence to run for the white house and governor on the same ticket is unlikely to be approved this year. senate president pro tem david long, r-fort wayne, said tuesday he plans to send it to the senate rules committee, shorthand for killing legislation in the statehouse<u+2026>gov. mike pence called a proposal that would allow him to seek the white house without having to sacrifice the governor<u+2019>s office <u+2018>well-intentioned,<u+2019> but would not dismiss the controversial measure tuesday<u+2026>but pressed later on whether he had asked for the legislation, pence only repeated, <u+2018>the first i heard about it was when i read it in the paper.<u+2019> state law bars candidates from seeking two offices on the same ballot, forcing politicians to choose one office or another<u+2026>pence has stoked talk of a possible presidential run, most recently with a highly touted trip to israel, but has said he will not announce his plans until after the session ends in april.<u+201d> warren to rally labor allies the hill: <u+201c>sen. elizabeth warren [d-mass.] will fuel speculation that she<u+2019>s plotting to challenge former secretary of state hillary clinton in 2016 when she delivers a keynote address before the afl-cio national summit on raising wages [today] in washington d.c.. it<u+2019>s her first major address this year and will likely only add to the growing questions about her plans for the upcoming election cycle. the address also comes as senate democrats are planning to make income inequality a focus in 2016.<u+201d> ready for warren rallies set for iowa - des moines register: <u+201c>house parties are planned wednesday night in des moines and iowa city by political activists encouraging u.s. sen. elizabeth warren, a massachusetts democrat, to run for president<u+2026>activists at both parties plan to write postcards to warren to urge her enter the 2016 presidential campaign, organizers said. they described the iowa parties as part of a national grassroots effort to draft warren as a presidential candidate.<u+201d> hillary staff build out continues - politico: <u+201c>hillary clinton is beginning to put together the pieces for a likely campaign, tapping two top strategists <u+2014> including president barack obama<u+2019>s pollster <u+2014> to work with her in the lead-up toward an ultimate decision. robby mook, who worked on clinton<u+2019>s 2008 campaign and is widely expected to be clinton<u+2019>s campaign manager, and joel benenson, obama<u+2019>s pollster who had for months been eyed for a role on her team, have been working with her as she makes a final decision and begins to put together a framework for a staff, according to people close to the former secretary of state.<u+201d> koch bro calls for criminal laws to lighten up billionaire industrialist charles koch, who along with his brother david helped propel republicans to victory in the midterms, offers a plan to reduce poverty and improve race relations by rethinking our justice system, in a politico oped: <u+201c>overcriminalization has led to the mass incarceration of those ensnared by our criminal justice system, even though such imprisonment does not always enhance public safety.<u+00a0> indeed, more than half of federal inmates are nonviolent drug offenders. enforcing so many victimless crimes inevitably leads to conflict between our citizens and law enforcement.<u+00a0>as we have seen all too often, it can place our police officers in harm<u+2019>s way, leading to tragic consequences for all involved.<u+201d> lizard lips south florida<u+2019>s sun sentinel reports that the owner of a reptile store, benjamin siegel, has been charged with battery and animal cruelty for allegedly using a bearded dragon lizard to beat his employees. he also allegedly put a lizard in his mouth. in 2012, siegel had a cockroach-eating contest at the store where the winner, edward archbold died after choking on the bugs. siegel<u+2019>s attorney, ken padowitz, said he will <u+201c>vigorously defend<u+201d> his client. <u+201c>i<u+2019>m in the process of conducting an investigation and looking into all the facts so i can best represent my client against these allegations,<u+201d> padowitz said. siegel also faces pending cocaine charges from a christmas eve arrest. and now, a word from charles<u+2026> <u+201c>[president obama is] the fourth quarter, he<u+2019>s never running again. the reason he<u+2019>s doing x, y, and z is not because <u+2026> he<u+2019>s working his way to the left or the right. he doesn<u+2019>t need anybody. this is obama the way he really is.<u+201d> <u+2013> charles krauthammer on <u+201c>special report with bret baier<u+201d> watch here. chris stirewalt<u+00a0>is digital politics editor for fox news.<u+00a0> want fox news first in your inbox every day? sign up here. chris stirewalt joined fox news channel (fnc) in july of 2010 and serves as digital politics editor based in washington, d.c. <u+00a0>additionally, he authors the daily "fox news first" political news note and hosts "power play," a feature video series, on foxnews.com. stirewalt makes frequent appearances on the network, including "the kelly file," "special report with bret baier," and "fox news sunday with chris wallace." <u+00a0>he also provides expert political analysis for fox news coverage of state, congressional and presidential elections.

wreckage in wake of bungled house coup

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

105.0

38.0

8.0

14974.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

1007.0

0.0

236.0

0.0

111.0

43.0

58.0

21.0

47.0

28.0

33.0

21.0

76.0

58.0

108.0

1009.0

236.0

111.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

it was bad news for bernie sanders that he lost in nevada saturday. but there may be a bigger crisis embedded in the loss: it suggested he isn't delivering on a key ingredient needed for his "political revolution." on saturday, about 80,000 voters participated in nevada's caucus <u+2014> roughly two-thirds of the total that came out in 2008. sanders's reason for running, as he describes it, is to upend how money and special interests shape american politics by empowering voters. this means bringing out an unprecedented number of people on election day. so as bad as it was to lose nevada on saturday night, the tepid voter turnout in itself is almost a more significant problem for him. throughout the course of his campaign, sanders has promised to transform american government by bringing "millions and millions" of new voters to the ballot box. this is in contrast to the incrementalism of clinton's campaign, which recognizes the confines of a bitterly divided american electorate and offers to fight for whatever gains are available. sanders rejects the limits of this system. his "political revolution" is based on the idea that democrats could win big with a message that gets a massive number of new lower- and middle-income voters continually engaged in the political process. it's an inspiring vision. but there is little sign that it's actually happening. low turnout in nevada wasn't an outlier. new hampshire saw 10 percent fewer voters in 2016 than it did eight years ago. in iowa, turnout was also down <u+2014> from 287,000 in 2008 to 171,000 this year. (by contrast, voter numbers are exploding on the republican side, with records for gop turnout being crushed in iowa, new hampshire, and, from the early results, south carolina.) sanders needs this to change, and quickly, to validate one of his key arguments against clinton. as vox's ezra klein has written, sanders thinks "the core failure" of obama's presidency is its failure to convert voter enthusiasm in 2008 into a durable, mobilized organizing force beyond the election. sanders vows to rectify this mistake by maintaining the energy from the campaign for subsequent fights against the corporate interests and in congressional and state elections. the relatively low voter turnout in the democratic primary so far makes this more sweeping plan seem laughably implausible. three states have voted, we've had countless debates and town halls, and there's been wall-to-wall media coverage for weeks. sanders has drawn close to clinton in the polls, and there are real stakes in a closely divided race. and yet ... we have little evidence that sanders has actually activated a new force in electoral politics. if he can't match the excitement generated by obama on the campaign trail, how can he promise to exceed it once in office?

why nevada was a bad sign for bernie sanders's "political revolution"

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

69.0

8.0

2812.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

203.0

0.0

44.0

1.0

0.0

23.0

14.0

11.0

6.0

14.0

8.0

15.0

7.0

9.0

19.0

21.0

208.0

44.0

24.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

hillary clinton and donald trump scored resounding wins in new york tuesday. the results underscored bernie sanders's limitations, but still leave much to play for in the gop race. how snl's 'the bubble' sketch about polarization is all too true former president bill clinton (l.) applauds, as his wife, democratic presidential candidate hillary clinton, celebrates after winning the new york state primary tuesday in new york. this time it was personal. on tuesday, hillary clinton emphatically underlined her front-runner status and won a resounding victory over her previously surging rival, revealing the limits of bernie sanders<u+2019>s rally-based campaign and his focus on anti-wall street economic populism. mrs. clinton won the new york primary by nearly 16 percentage points <u+2013> an unexpectedly wide margin of<u+00a0>victory crafted by assembling a diverse coalition of democratic voters. clinton had come to new york weeks ago, campaigning during a stretch in which senator sanders of vermont had been reeling off convincing wins in eight of the previous nine contests. sanders<u+2019>s momentum included his massive, record-setting rallies in new york, hollywood star power, and the enthusiasm of tens of thousands of young and boisterous supporters during the past two weeks. and in many national polls, sanders had all but erased the former secretary of state<u+2019>s lead of nearly 15 percentage points in february. clinton, however, kept it small and local throughout the campaign, fanning out into the state<u+2019>s democratic establishment bases. she danced dominican bachata at a block party in washington heights, played dominoes with locals in harlem, sipped chinese bubble tea in queens. she pressed the flesh with local officials at organizing events, visited black churches throughout the state, and bored into local concerns <u+2013> just like she had when she twice ran for the united states senate here. in a closed primary <u+2013> where only registered democrats could vote <u+2013> the strategy worked. <u+201c>today you proved once again, there<u+2019>s no place like home,<u+201d> clinton said during her victory party at the sheridan near times square, beaming and with an almost palpable sense of relief. <u+201c>in this campaign, we<u+2019>ve won in every region of the country,<u+201d> she continued. <u+201c>but this one<u+2019>s personal. new yorkers, you<u+2019>ve always had my back. and i<u+2019>ve always tried to have yours.<u+201d> just a few blocks away at trump tower in manhattan, billionaire donald trump reestablished his role as the republican front-runner, also winning the new york primary in dramatic <u+2013> if expected <u+2013> fashion with nearly 60 percent of the vote and taking at least 89 of the 95 delegates at stake. mr. trump, too, had stumbled in recent weeks as sen. ted cruz of texas had strategically outmaneuvered his campaign, which relies on big rallies to galvanize followers. senator cruz had swept up all the delegates from the colorado republican convention earlier in april and continued to pick up stray delegates even in states the real estate mogul had received a majority of votes. the gop leader had been decrying the party<u+2019>s delegate system, calling it rigged against outside candidates like him. but new york voters overwhelmingly chose the queens-born billionaire, giving new life to his hope of winning a majority of delegates before the convention in cleveland. "we don't have much of a race anymore," trump told his supporters in his victory speech in the trump tower lobby. "we're going to go into the convention i think as the winner," saying cruz was "just about mathematically eliminated." to the contrary, the math still shows a steep climb for trump to get the 1,237 delegates he needs to avoid a contested convention. the latest estimate by nbc news suggests trump will need to win about 57 percent of the remaining delegates to reach 1,237. to this point, he's secured 47 percent of the delegates on offer, according to a politico tally. for both cruz and gov. john kasich of ohio, as well as the #nevertrump establishment forces within the gop, the strategy remains to deny trump a majority of delegates and then take their chances within a contested convention. on the democratic side, however, clinton is more and more poised to become the nominee. the nbc estimate suggests she now needs to win less than 33 percent of the remaining delegates (including super delegates) to secure the nomination. to this point, she's won 59 percent of the delegates on offer, according to politico. "we started this race not far from here on roosevelt island," clinton said during her victory speech. "and tonight, a little less than a year later, the race for the democratic nomination is in the home stretch and victory is in sight." sanders had hoped a victory here <u+2013> or even a closely-contested loss on clinton<u+2019>s adopted home turf <u+2013> would further damage the front-runner. his campaign spent nearly $2 million more in television ads than clinton<u+2019>s, and sanders and his followers had ramped up their criticisms, questioning her ties to wall street and past support for harsh criminal justice measures. the vermont senator traveled to pennsylvania for a rally at a college on tuesday, but in the evening he flew home to burlington, vt. <u+2013> without his press entourage <u+2013> to get <u+201c>recharged and take a day off.<u+201d> <u+201c>bernie sanders got very negative attacking hillary clinton and dividing the party in new york, and i think he now has to ask himself if he wants to keep going down that path,<u+201d> said jay jacobs, the democratic chairman in long island<u+2019>s suburban nassau county, according to the new york times. <u+201c>after new york, we<u+2019>re moving into a phase of the campaign where we have to start uniting the party.<u+201d> sanders complained about the built-in advantages clinton had as an establishment candidate. since new york is a <u+201c>closed<u+201d> primary, independents and those registered with other parties had to re-register as democrats by october of last year <u+2013> well before sanders began his surge. but the same problems sanders faced in new york will only<u+00a0>multiply in the days ahead.<u+00a0>connecticut,<u+00a0>delaware, maryland, and pennsylvania hold closed primaries next tuesday. moreover,<u+00a0>the vermont senator has performed best within states with few minority voters. polls show that clinton maintains significant leads in diverse states like pennsylvania and maryland, as well as connecticut. the sanders campaign said it would <u+201c>assess where we are<u+201d> after those contests, the associated press reported late tuesday. and while many of sanders<u+2019>s young supporters had sometimes expressed deep animus towards clinton, exit polls on tuesday revealed that a vast majority of democratic voters in new york would support either candidate in the general election. <u+201c>to all the people who supported sen. sanders,<u+201d> a rejuvenated clinton told her supporters tuesday night, <u+201c>i believe there is much more that unites us than divides us.<u+201d>

new york restores order for 2016 front-runners

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

6.0

46.0

8.0

6859.0

0.0

426.0

0.0

126.0

0.0

35.0

9.0

15.0

7.0

6.0

12.0

10.0

12.0

22.0

23.0

44.0

426.0

126.0

35.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

berlin <u+2014><u+00a0>pope francis called on religious communities and catholic parishes across europe on sunday to take on the crush of migrants that have been pouring into the continent recently. he said the vatican will shelter two families who are "fleeing death." francis cited mother teresa, the european-born nun who cared for the poorest in india, in making his appeal. "faced with the tragedy of tens of thousands of refugees who are fleeing death by war and by hunger, and who are on a path toward a hope for life, the gospel calls us to be neighbors to the smallest and most abandoned, to give them concrete hope," francis said, adding that it's not enough to say, "have courage, hang in there." the pope<u+2019>s plea comes as thousands more refugees from war-torn countries such as syria and afghanistan were expected to arrive in austria and germany on sunday. the migrants were traveling from hungary where they had been stranded for days as european leaders debate how to best handle the surge. on saturday, about 7,000 people crossed the border on foot from hungary to austria. a similar amount arrived into munich's central train station by saturday evening. "i appeal to the parishes, the religious communities, the monasteries and sanctuaries of all europe to ... take in one family of refugees," pope francis said after his sunday address in the vatican, according to reuters. there are more than 25,000 parishes in italy alone, and more than 12,000 in germany, where many of the syrians fleeing civil war and people trying to escape poverty and hardship in other countries say they want to end up. the pope<u+2019>s call was another in a series of recent public interventions by the vatican to end conflicts and reconcile differences between countries, from mideast peace meetings to brokering talks between the u.s. and cuba. according to reuters, the crowd in st. peter's square on sunday applauded as the pontiff, himself the grandson of italian emigrants to argentina, said: "every parish, every religious community, every monastery, every sanctuary of europe, take in one family." authorities in budapest had refused to let the migrants travel amid confusion from european union member states about what to do with the new arrivals. europe is absorbing tens of thousands of people this year from africa, the middle east and asia who are desperate to reach the region. people from syria, afghanistan and eritrea fleeing conflict and repression in those nations represent the largest number of people on the move. more than 3,700 people around the world have died in 2015 as they attempt to escape war, persecution and economic hardship, according to the international organization for migration. europe, with its relatively robust welfare states and infrastructure for asylum seekers, is better placed, many argue, to handle the influx than nations in the middle east region. persian gulf states have donated millions of dollars but have not resettled people in significant numbers. that inaction has brought them criticism from some quarters.<u+00a0> australia's prime minister tony abbott said sunday his government was considering accepting more syrian refugees. around half of syria's population of 20 million have fled the country or been displaced internally amid a civil war that has raged for over four years. authorities in cyprus rescued 114 people sunday about 50 miles off the coast of the mediterranean island after the fishing boat they were in ran into trouble. german chancellor angela merkel meanwhile is holding crisis talks on the thousands of refugees and migrants who want to come to germany. she wants other eu member states to take more refugees. berlin estimates that up to 800,000 people may seek asylum in germany before the end of the year, far more than any other eu country, and the chancellor is also concerned that extremists may try to stoke anti-refugee sentiment. some far-right groups in germany, for example, protested the arrival of refugees and migrants<u+00a0>from hungary in dortmund overnight.

pope calls on catholics to shelter europe's migrants

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

52.0

8.0

4067.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

247.0

1.0

0.0

68.0

0.0

22.0

9.0

17.0

3.0

16.0

5.0

14.0

4.0

15.0

26.0

23.0

249.0

69.0

22.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

one might have expected the<u+00a0>ninth republican presidential debate to be a cut above the earlier edition. with chris christie out of the race and ben carson present but basically out of the running, it was a chance for the race to get serious, for the five candidates who could potentially win this thing to make their cases without much distraction from the b players. instead, donald trump accused jeb bush of threatening to moon the kind people of new hampshire. it was an anarchic evening where even disciplined moderators had trouble keeping things on track. that's par for the course for these things at this point, but the particular kind of chaos this time around was different, and didn't always play to the favor of donald trump, lord of chaos. we won't know who "really" won until poll results trickle in. but in the meantime, here are the candidates who ended the night better off than they started it <u+2014> and the ones who slipped. after a long campaign in which his name has become almost synonymous with failure and pathos, jeb finally <u+2014> finally <u+2014> had a good night. it may not have come to him entirely fairly. the whole debate he appeared to have the support of the live audience, who even raucously applauded his characteristically dull and platitudinous closing statement. this makes sense: apparently only 600 of the 1,600 tickets to the event were given to the candidates, and the state and national party controlled most of the rest. the result was an enthusiastically pro-jeb crowd. but whatever the reason for their bush love, it worked. trump was frequently booed <u+2014> and when he tried to argue the audience was stacked against him, he was booed even harder. and jeb was given the chance to throw red meat not to gop base voters, but to typical gop establishment types. that distinction is crucial. defending the iraq war is not something that, say, tea party activists are all that excited about doing. but it's something longtime republican activists who were involved in the south carolina state party in the 2000s had to do all the time. george w. bush was their guy for eight years. they stood by him. they knew all the attacks about him and recoiled at each one. so when trump decided to attack the iraq war, and point out that the president who presided over 9/11 cannot reasonably claim to have "kept us safe," the crowd took it personally. and booed. and applauded when bush fought back: applause, applause, applause. the republican base might have moved on from george w. bush, but the professional party operative class in the audience in south carolina has not, and gave bush one hell of a moment, which likely helped him with viewers in the state without that emotional attachment to the bush legacy. even better, he didn't have to answer for his flip-flop on whether iraq was a mistake, even as trump pressed him to do so. and best of all, marco rubio, jeb's main rival for the establishment vote, helped bush out, declaring, "i just want to say, at least on behalf of me and my family, i thank god all the time it was george w. bush in the white house on 9/11 and not al gore." jeb also did something he's been hesitant to do for much of this campaign: he embraced being a bush. this is clearly part of a broader strategy, what with w coming back to campaign for his brother in south carolina. but it's a smart strategy. bush was never going to win by hoping that people forgot he's related to one of the most controversial figures in republican history. but there is some residual goodwill in the party toward w, especially on national security, and bush is uniquely positioned to exploit that at a moment when isis has made terrorism and islamist radicalism much bigger issues than they've been for years. jeb is still languishing in fourth in south carolina polls. it's too soon to declare he has momentum. but he gave about the best performance he could've hoped for, which should give him a decent chance of outpacing rubio and maybe even cruz too in the state: the longer, the bloodier, and the sillier this campaign season is, the better it is for the eventual democratic nominee. and it doesn't get much longer, bloodier, or sillier than the debate tonight. here's some stuff that actually happened tonight. after a campaign that's mostly involved candidates falling over themselves to show their commitment to screwing over latino undocumented immigrants, ted cruz and marco rubio started arguing over who spoke better spanish <u+2014> in spanish: donald trump, the gop frontrunner who won new hampshire in a landslide and will almost certainly win in south carolina too, stuck up for planned parenthood. to repeat: less than a year after doctored undercover videos made the organization anathema to all republicans and its defunding a key priority of the congressional gop, the republican frontrunner for president praised it: and trump accused jeb bush of threatening to expose his buttocks to crowds of voters, an accusation that is, amazingly, not entirely without merit! if it had been scripted, it would've been the greatest surrealist masterpiece this side of luis bu<u+00f1>uel, but to any general election swing voters watching, it was just a clown show. the most reasonable person onstage was defending the iraq war at great length. that's bananas! worse still for republicans, it left the race still largely unsettled. probably the best hope for a swift end to the primary is for trump to just keep winning everything <u+2014> but trump had one of his worst nights to date. probably the best hope for an establishment contender to win is for john kasich to realize he can't do well outside new hampshire and drop out, for rubio to acknowledge that he's toast and do the same, and for jeb! to rise up and save the day. but while jeb had a good night, it wasn't a so-good-he-knocked-out-his-rivals night. and ted cruz gave a perfectly fine performance that should keep him firmly in second place, or even give him the potential to repeat his iowa victory over trump a few more times and throw the race into still further chaos. the takeaway from tonight was that this race will last a long time, it will involve a lot more ridiculous debates like this, and it will continue to make the republican party look like a silly mess. that's all great news for hillary and bernie. no moderator could've completely contained the madness that was tonight's debate. jeb and trump were too committed to going after each other, as were rubio and cruz, for them to respect time restrictions or refrain from demanding a right to respond when their names were so much as mentioned in passing. but cbs's john dickerson nonetheless did a fine job, asking productive follow-up questions and, with a couple exceptions (like a question about trump's profanity), mostly sticking to the substance. his back-and-forth with ted cruz pointing out that anthony kennedy was confirmed for the supreme court in an election year earned him boos from the audience, who saw him as nitpicky and eager to defend obama's nomination. but he was right, and he was keeping cruz to the facts <u+2014> which is crucial for a moderator. another highlight was major garrett's questioning on cruz's tax plan. garrett took it for granted that cruz is proposing a value-added tax <u+2014> which cruz has denied, but which is<u+00a0>absolutely true if you look at how it's structured. cruz denied it, but garrett pressed him. but perhaps the best question went to trump: trump just didn't answer the question, even after dickerson pressed him. the upshot was clear: trump isn't capable, or isn't willing, of conceding literally any error. he really is exactly as arrogant as you think he is. and dickerson demonstrated this not by saying it or arguing it but by having trump show it for himself. that's moderating at its finest. and he mostly got booed for having a point. he attacked the audience as stacked to be pro-bush <u+2014> which it appears to have been. he defended planned parenthood as doing important work besides abortions <u+2014> which it does. and he attacked george w. bush for launching a war in iraq when there were no weapons of mass destruction and for failing to prevent 9/11 <u+2014> both totally legitimate criticisms. but they are not criticisms you make in a republican debate. trump has strayed from party doctrine before, but when he's done so, it's been on issues where the gop is in a very different place from the establishment. he opposes cutting social security and medicare, which enrages libertarian economic types within the party but delights actual voters, especially elderly ones. he wants big tariffs on china, which free-traders in the party hate but white working-class workers who actually vote for the party love. here, though, he's on his own. there's not a huge republican constituency for the idea that the iraq war was not just bad but built on a lie: now, the general point here is true. bush and dick cheney made claims about wmd and iraq's relationship with al-qaeda that weren't just false, but which they knew to be false given the intelligence they had at the time, or for which they had no evidence at all. but it's something that you'd expect a democratic primary contender to say, not a republican. (and throwing in "they knew there were none" is even a bit far for a democrat.) trump is allowed his heterodoxies on some issues, but accusing the most recent republican president of deliberately misleading the nation into a war is unlikely to appeal to just about any goper. same with his claim on 9/11. here, trump isn't merely critiquing bush's iraq policy, something that's a bit more acceptable within the gop. he's critiquing bush's terrorism record in general <u+2014> and, implicitly, the overall republican foreign policy consensus that the correct way to fight terrorism is through overwhelming force. that's a consensus that's lasted since bush left office and isn't really challenged by any other candidate. trump's planned parenthood comments are perhaps most baffling at all. there really aren't that many pro-choice republicans out there, or even many pro-life republicans open to the aggressive promotion of birth control through groups like planned parenthood. and however many there were before the organization became a right-wing media boogeyman last year, there are almost certainly fewer now. there's no reason for an undecided pro-life activist to watch that exchange and come away preferring trump to his rivals. all of this is bad for trump on his own, but it's especially bad given that trump was unabashedly liberal before 2011 or so. he said in 2008 that bush deliberately lied to start the war in iraq, and attacked congressional democrats for not impeaching him over it. in 1999, he told tim russert he was "strongly for choice": republican rivals have tried to attack him for this before, mostly without success. voters saw trump as authentic now, whatever his past beliefs; why not believe the message? but seeing elements of the old, more liberal trump sneak through might give that critique new force. trump is still winning this primary. he will probably win in south carolina, and the rest of the field remains scattered enough that he stands a good shot of winning a majority of states in the "sec primary" on march 1. but tonight, more than any other debate, felt like a momentum where the tide could shift against him. if his name weren't marco rubio, this guy would've dropped out by now. think about it: if, say, chris christie had gotten third in iowa and then fifth in new hampshire, and totally botched the pre<u+2013>new hampshire debate, would anyone look at him and think, "yeah, this is a guy with a plausible path to the nomination"? of course not. but because rubio has been the one true hope of the republican establishment for most of this cycle, he's been given something of a pass. but he still needs a way to take advantage of that lenience. he needs a way to beat back bush and kasich and emerge once again as the natural establishment rival to cruz and trump. and he needed, tonight, to overcome his last disastrous debate performance and prove to the establishment that he won't fail them again. what happened instead was a basically fine debate performance, devoid of any obvious gaffes, that nonetheless was woefully insufficient to turn around his dying campaign. his decision to attack cruz more than trump might have made strategic sense, but in practice it mostly gave cruz a chance to remind voters, once again, that rubio favors letting some undocumented immigrants become citizens. and every minute rubio's immigration views are the topic at hand, he loses. and when it came time for rubio to attack trump, he <u+2026> defended jeb bush. "i just want to say," he declared, "at least on behalf of me and my family, i thank god all the time it was george w. bush in the white house on 9/11 and not al gore." that is a great thing for a bush surrogate to say, so as to build up the family reputation and give jeb a hand. it's a gracious but tactically baffling thing to say if you are trying to defeat jeb bush. rubio wasn't a disaster. but he didn't need not-a-disaster. he needed a blockbuster performance that got him back to where he was immediately post-iowa, with strong momentum and a media narrative of rubio rising. he didn't get that, and it's difficult to see now how he's ever going to put himself back in contention.

3 winners and 2 losers from saturday night's republican debate

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

10.0

62.0

8.0

13408.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

910.0

0.0

280.0

0.0

104.0

34.0

38.0

25.0

40.0

31.0

28.0

18.0

51.0

61.0

93.0

913.0

280.0

104.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

a militia protesting the "tyranny" of the federal government seized the headquarters of a federal wildlife refuge in oregon on january 2 and, in a video posted to facebook, called on "patriots" from all over the country to come to the refuge with their guns to join their fight. on january 26, six members of that militia, including leaders ammon and ryan bundy, were arrested on charges of conspiracy to impede federal law enforcement officers from their official duties. the arrests happened after a shootout in which one militia member was killed, and another injured. ammon bundy's father cliven bundy became a fox news star in 2014 for his armed standoff in nevada with the federal government over cattle-grazing rights. on the surface, the 2016 wildlife-reserve occupation is about a father and son from oregon who were ordered by the court to return to prison to serve additional time for a 2012 arson on federal land. but, as with cliven bundy's standoff, the anti-government militiamen driving this crisis believe it's about standing up to a tyrannical federal government. the apparent goal of the takeover is ultimately to induce the federal government to turn over government-owned land to local ranchers, loggers, and miners for their use. here is ammon bundy, one of the militia leaders, explaining it in his own words: but the men involved in the takeover <u+2014> including ammon bundy, ammon's brother ryan, jon ritzheimer, blaine cooper, and ryan payne <u+2014> are not locals. rather, they are a small group of individuals who travel around the country attaching themselves to various local fights against the federal government, usually over land rights. several of them were involved in cliven bundy's 2014 standoff. now they have latched onto the cause of two local ranchers from burns, oregon: dwight and steven hammond. dwight hammond, age 73, and his son steven, age 46, are scheduled to report to federal prison on monday. dwight, the father, faces nearly five years in prison; son steven faces up to four years. the hammonds were convicted of arson in 2012 for setting fire to public land adjacent to their ranch land. they have already served prison sentences for their crimes, but they now must return for an additional term after federal appellate judges said they had been illegally sentenced the first time. but the hammonds' political cause isn't primarily about sentencing. rather, it's about federal land use <u+2014> and opposition to what is seen as an intrusive or outright illegal federal government. federal agencies own and regulate huge chunks of land in western states like oregon and nevada. as such, <u+00a0>those with anti-government views, particularly in western states, often focus on the federal government 's land-use policies. hence the significance of the hammonds' case <u+2014> and the change to their sentencing, which just further fed into views of a tyrannical federal government out of control. here again is zaitz, the oregonian journalist: on saturday, members of the militia attended a demonstration in burns that had gathered to protest the hammonds' case. after the protest, the militiamen drove to the wildlife refuge and took it over. it seems that the militiamen may have initially planned to seize the wildlife refuge headquarters in order to establish a "sanctuary" where the hammonds could go to evade prison. as ammon bundy sees it, the locals are "not strong enough" to stand up for themselves, so the militia must act as the "tip of the spear" and lead the fight on behalf of the locals. thus, bundy and his fellow militiamen have seized the headquarters of the malheur national wildlife refuge <u+2014> located in a remote area some 50 miles southeast of the city of burns <u+2014> in hopes of creating a "base" where "patriots" like themselves can come, with their guns, to live and make their stand against the "tyrannical" federal government. no. for one thing, it turned out that the hammonds don't actually want the militia's help <u+2014> or at least, not anymore. at first, according to the oregonian, the hammonds "accepted the militia's offer of help to avoid prison." but they "changed their minds after being warned by federal prosecutors to stop communicating with the militia" and have now "professed through their attorneys that they had no interest in ignoring the order to report for prison." ammon also tried to recruit residents from the surrounding area, reportedly meeting with 10 or so locals, but they all turned him down. the oregonian interviewed some locals who expressed sympathy for the hammonds and for the militia's "constitutional arguments" but ultimately rejected the militia for its extremism. the militia, the local fire chief told the newspaper, "seems like a bunch of people ready to shoot. i don't want that in my county." a local rancher woman said, "we're not from the militia. we're not going to come in with guns and overthrow the government." on january 26, law enforcement officials arrested six of the militia leaders <u+2014> including ammon and ryan bundy <u+2014> after an encounter with law enforcement resulted in a shootout. one militia member was killed and another was injured (and is recovering in a local hospital). no law-enforcement agents are reported to have been killed. as of tuesday night, it is not clear whether the other militia members are being ordered to leave the refuge, or will leave of their own volition <u+2014> or whether the standoff will continue after the leaders' arrest. it has been unclear throughout the occupation exactly how many militia members are inside the occupied building and what kind of weapons they may have. as reported by the<u+00a0>oregonian: a reporter for the oregonian also tweeted this: as mentioned earlier, several of the men behind this takeover were also involved in the standoff in nevada in 2014, which very nearly ended in bloodshed as hundreds of heavily armed militia members stood off with federal agents. thankfully, disaster was averted when federal authorities made the decision to pack up and leave without any prior announcement. that may not necessarily be the case this time around. in fact, at least one militia member seems to be expecting things to go very differently this time. jon ritzheimer, the former us marine whose anti-muslim rhetoric and activities raised alarms with the fbi in november 2015, posted a video to youtube on december 31 in which he seemed to be saying goodbye to his family and explaining the reason why he felt compelled to fight the us government in oregon. here's the video:

the oregon militia standoff, explained

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

3.0

38.0

8.0

6536.0

0.0

4.0

0.0

452.0

1.0

0.0

159.0

1.0

0.0

85.0

20.0

13.0

6.0

29.0

3.0

12.0

6.0

18.0

34.0

26.0

456.0

160.0

86.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

being jeb bush these days means coping with a series of petty humiliations. at a weekend conference in miami, fundraisers questioned the direction of the campaign and worried it<u+2019>s too late for a rebound. during a foreign policy speech in washington, people slipped out of the room to go see rival chris christie instead. the jebbush.com domain was redirected to donald trump<u+2019>s website because the bush campaign failed to lock it down. and on the campaign trail, the press corps following the former florida governor is dwindling and focused mostly on his terrible polling numbers, now mired in the low single digits. while front-runner trump packs arenas with thousands, fifth-place bush rarely musters more than a couple hundred at any given stop. at an event in newton, iowa, last week, bush sounded almost incredulous at his position in the race. <u+201c>who has the leadership skills to actually make the tough decisions to fix the things that aren<u+2019>t working right now that are holding people back?<u+201d> bush said in front of the crowd of about 100. <u+201c>and who has the ideas going forward that will allow us to rise up as a nation?<u+201d> <u+201c>and finally,<u+201d> he added, <u+201c>who can beat hillary clinton for crying out loud?<u+201d> the crowd applauded. a few minutes later, an older gentlemen in the back nodded off. [is jeb bush ready to embrace his last name?] no presidential candidate named bush has been in this position before. george h.w. bush lost his 1980 bid for president, but never slipped as low as jeb bush has. after an early setback in the 2000 new hampshire primary, george w. bush rebounded and cleared the gop field. it doesn<u+2019>t show in the polls, but bush has become a stronger campaigner <u+2014> maintaining a grueling schedule of early morning coffee meet-and-greets, interviews with small-town television reporters and nighttime town halls and speeches. and he still has more money than the rest of the field, traveling in a packed suv with a bodyguard, a personal aide, a press spokesperson and a campaign videographer. he seems more comfortable in his own skin. but no matter how hard he tries, nothing has helped reverse his slide. <u+201c>we have had success raising money. i<u+2019>ve had success connecting with crowds <u+2014> you guys have been there, i<u+2019>m not making this stuff up,<u+201d> bush told reporters last week in iowa. <u+201c>we<u+2019>re garnering support at each and every event. i<u+2019>m confident that we<u+2019>re doing all the right things.<u+201d> then he turned to the democratic party<u+2019>s presidential front-runner, who is neck and neck with bush in many polling matchups. <u+201c>in spite of all the pundits saying the end is near, which is totally untrue, if you look at the head-to-head polls, where i<u+2019>m head-to-head with hillary clinton, i beat her,<u+201d> bush said. <u+201c>gosh, it must not be as bad as you think.<u+201d> regardless of how he might fare against clinton, bush has stalled at around fifth place among republican primary voters, both in national and early state polls. he sits between the top-tier contenders <u+2014> trump, ben carson and sens. ted cruz (r-tex.) and marco rubio (r-fla.) <u+2014> and the rest of the pack, including new jersey gov. chris christie, who is enjoying a resurgence in bush<u+2019>s must-win state of new hampshire. a monmouth university poll of iowa released monday ranked bush at 6 percent behind cruz, trump, rubio and carson. in new hampshire, a public policy polling survey released friday gave bush 5 percent <u+2014> for eighth place. on the same day, a cnn/orc poll of republicans nationally gave bush just 3 percent nationally <u+2014> fifth place. bush supporters are hunkering down for a drawn-out nomination fight, hopeful that he will ultimately emerge as the party<u+2019>s strongest white house contender. <u+201c>sooner or later people are going to have to get rid of the fun and figure out who<u+2019>s best to run the country,<u+201d> said sen. orrin g. hatch (r-utah), one of bush<u+2019>s most prominent supporters. <u+201c>and he has to be in there. he has to be there.<u+201d> former colorado governor bill owens, who is co-chairing bush<u+2019>s campaign in that state, said the candidate <u+201c>has high name id, an excellent record to run on and is well-funded.<u+201d> he also said bush<u+2019>s recent emphasis on criticizing clinton is a wise strategy. <u+201c>the republican party has nominated lots of candidates over the years who were great in the primary process but couldn<u+2019>t win the general election,<u+201d> he said. <u+201c>for jeb bush, the only thing that matters is winning the general election.<u+201d> charlie pelton, 75, who heard bush speak last week in clinton, iowa, said he appreciated the candidate<u+2019>s increased focus on foreign affairs and national security. he conceded that <u+201c>you don<u+2019>t win elections in iowa on foreign policy, generally, but that<u+2019>s what our nation needs.<u+201d> bush<u+2019>s diminishment was visible at the republican jewish coalition<u+2019>s all-day candidate summit on thursday, precisely the sort of forum where he might have been expected to dominate. right to rise usa, the super pac supporting his bid, held a breakfast for interested donors, and bush held a closed-door meet-and-greet. in the main room, bush earned a standing ovation when he took the stage and gave an energetic speech about his ability to <u+201c>whup<u+201d> clinton. but numerous would-be donors sneaked out for a session with christie. later that night, stuck in traffic because of the white house christmas tree lighting, bush jumped out of the vehicle and walked to a fundraiser in dupont circle. when he arrived, bush greeted guests who gave at least $1,000 to attend the fundraiser at the home of former bush administration official c. boyden gray. at another fundraiser at a georgetown bar, bush snacked on hummus with young professionals, capitol hill staffers and students. tickets ranged from $50 to $2,700. donors, who request anonymity to speak frankly about the state of the campaign, are mixed on what could come next. <u+201c>this is always the [fundraising] quarter to pick your guy and hunker down,<u+201d> said a donor who attended a meeting of bush<u+2019>s top donors in miami over the weekend. <u+201c>we know it<u+2019>s a rough patch.<u+201d> another emerged from the miami meeting to say he<u+2019>s <u+201c>reenergized<u+201d> and confident that bush and his team are <u+201c>the whole package.<u+201d> but a donor who attended the fundraiser at the georgetown bar said that many supporters are struggling to accept bush<u+2019>s troubles. so how are they coping? the same day bush visited washington, his older brother, george w. bush, reunited with members of his administration at the u.s. capitol for the unveiling of a bust of vice president richard b. cheney. <u+201c>the last time i was in washington, i was hanged in the white house,<u+201d> the former president joked, a reference to the unveiling of his official portrait. <u+201c>this time, i<u+2019>ve returned to find my vice president getting busted in the capitol.<u+201d> he said that his father had asked his son to <u+201c>send my best regards to old iron ass<u+201d> <u+2014> a nickname of endearment the elder bush once bestowed on cheney. there was no reference to jeb. matea gold, dave weigel and scott clement contributed to this report.

this is what it<u+2019>s like to be a bush stuck at the bottom of the polls

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

7.0

68.0

8.0

6971.0

0.0

5.0

0.0

490.0

3.0

0.0

135.0

1.0

0.0

39.0

10.0

18.0

9.0

6.0

13.0

14.0

8.0

29.0

23.0

47.0

495.0

138.0

40.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

(cnn) donald trump is ratcheting up his rhetoric about american muslims, saying there's precedent for monitoring some mosques amid the recent terror wave. at a birmingham, alabama, rally on saturday -- which included a physical altercation between a black protester and several white trump backers -- the 2016 republican front-runner suggested law enforcement keep an eye on certain islamic houses of worship which, in his view, could pose terrorist threats. "i want surveillance of certain mosques if that's ok," trump told the often-raucous and approving crowd. "we've had it before." the remarks echo a call trump made earlier in the week, when he said on msnbc he'd "strongly consider" shutting down mosques in the u.s. the billionaire businessman also linked current terrorist concerns, after the paris carnage and other attacks, with 9/11. "i watched the world trade center go down," trump asserted, adding he watched in new jersey, "as thousands of people were cheering as the building was coming down." trump then denounced calls to resettle syrian refuges on u.s. soil, which his republican rivals for the nomination also oppose. "i want surveillance. i will absolutely take (a) database on the people coming in from syria. "if we can't stop it -- but we are going to if i win -- they're going back." several attendees at the rally punched and kicked a protester who tried to disrupt trump's speech. at least a half-dozen attendees shoved and tackled the protester, a black man, to the ground as he refused to leave the event. at least one man punched the protester and a woman kicked him while he was on the ground. all of the attendees who were involved in the physical altercation with the protester were white. the protester appeared to be shouting "black lives matter" and later removed his sweatshirt to reveal a shirt with those words. at least one attendee shouted "all lives matter" as the protester was eventually led out by police officers on the scene. birmingham police lt. sean edwards told cnn that three people were asked to leave the event following the scuffle. no arrests were made, and the protester did not require medical attention. campaign spokeswoman hope hicks told cnn that "the campaign does not condone this behavior." trump has fended off criticism recently that he was accused of backing a u.s. database on all muslims in the country. trump has denied making that remark but hasn't dismissed the idea out-of-hand. the database controversy began thursday when trump told yahoo news that he would create new anti-terrorism measures if he's elected. "we're going to have to do things that we never did before. and some people are going to be upset about it, but i think that now everybody is feeling that security is going to rule," he told yahoo news. "and certain things will be done that we never thought would happen in this country in terms of information and learning about the enemy. and so we're going to have to do certain things that were frankly unthinkable a year ago." the yahoo reporter asked about the possibility of a database for muslims or "a form of special identification that noted their religion." trump did not say no to either idea. then, after an iowa campaign event later that day, an nbc reporter asked trump if he favored a database to track muslims in the country. trump responded in a way some took as backing that idea. at saturday's rally in alabama, trump said he decided not to answer once he heard the reporter identified as being with nbc news.

donald trump: 'i want surveillance of certain mosques'

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

7.0

54.0

8.0

3536.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

198.0

0.0

72.0

0.0

16.0

11.0

7.0

14.0

7.0

10.0

7.0

14.0

23.0

22.0

201.0

72.0

16.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

morehead, ky. <u+2013> an attorney for jailed rowan county clerk kim davis said friday that the marriage licenses issued by her deputies to several same-sex couples are invalid. <u+201c>they are not worth the paper they<u+2019>re written on,<u+201d> mat staver said outside<u+00a0>the carter county detention center, where davis is being held on a contempt charge. speaking at an afternoon news conference in grayson, about 35 miles from the rowan county courthouse, staver said:<u+00a0><u+201c>our position and the position of the clerk of rowan county is that those licenses are void.<u+201d> the licenses issued to same-sex couples friday aren<u+2019>t valid, staver argued, because they were issued under the county clerk<u+2019>s authority <u+2014> but davis hasn<u+2019>t granted that authority. the marriage forms issued friday did not bear davis<u+2019>s name<u+00a0>because of her refusal to endorse them. instead, the clerk<u+2019>s<u+00a0>office included a space for a deputy clerk to sign his or her name. u.s. district judge david l. bunning sent davis to jail and ordered the deputy clerks to issue licenses in her absence.<u+00a0>a representative for bunning could not be reached for comment friday. as<u+00a0>the lexington herald-leader noted,<u+00a0>rowan county attorney cecil watkins has previously said deputy clerks don<u+2019>t need davis<u+2019>s approval to issue valid marriage licenses.<u+00a0>reached at his office friday, watkins declined to comment. in other kentucky counties, marriage licenses are routinely signed by a deputy, even though the clerk<u+2019>s name appears on the form. [<u+2018>he has guts': david bunning, the same-sex marriage decision<u+2019>s unlikely enforcer] staver<u+2019>s<u+00a0>remarks came more than seven hours after the opening of the rowan county courthouse, where brian mason was waiting behind a sign reading: <u+201c>marriage license deputy.<u+201d> james yates and william smith jr. entered the media-filled courthouse, hand-in-hand, and began the process of applying for a marriage license. again. they had been rejected five times previously, as davis refused to issue marriage licenses to any couples since the supreme court declared in june that gay couples had a constitutional right to wed. by 8:15 a.m., yates and smith had finally obtained the elusive $35 license. mason, the deputy clerk, congratulated the couple and shook their hands. as the couple exited the courthouse, same-sex marriage supporters erupted in cheers, chanting: <u+201c>love won! love won!<u+201d> yates and smith said they now had to set a wedding date. then, they walked hand-in-hand to their car, followed by cameras and boom mikes. they were later followed by tim and mike long, a couple who had obtained a name change years ago. there were cheers for the pair when they walked outside, and a woman they didn<u+2019>t know, who had traveled from louisville, gave them flowers. april miller and karen roberts weren<u+2019>t at the courthouse when it opened friday. miller had a morning class to teach at morehead state; roberts had a migraine. but miller and roberts, who were among the couples who filed suit after davis denied marriage licenses, arrived later in the day, picked up their license<u+00a0>and told reporters about their<u+00a0>ceremony<u+00a0>plans. <u+201c>i don<u+2019>t want to be a hero <u+2014> just a woman who got her marriage license,<u+201d> roberts said. one day earlier, davis was sent to jail by bunning, who also ordered five of the six deputy clerks in the county to begin issuing marriage licenses to all couples. the deputies agreed, under oath. the exception was kim davis<u+2019>s son, deputy clerk nathan davis. bunning, a federal judge, ordered the 49-year-old clerk to be taken into custody for refusing in the face of multiple court orders to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. staver said she is expected to remain in the facility until at least tuesday. <u+201c>i feel sorry that she<u+2019>s there, but she done it to herself,<u+201d> tim long said. davis<u+2019>s attorneys plan to appeal a<u+00a0>federal judge<u+2019>s contempt order before the end the end of friday, and pursue writ of habeas corpus to have her released from the jail. <u+201c>we will not allow her to continually sit here and have her constitutional rights violated or trampled,<u+201d> staver said. [kim davis ordered to jail for refusing to issue gay marriage licenses] davis,<u+00a0>an apostolic christian, has said repeatedly that she could not issue such marriage licenses because of her religious beliefs. pressure on davis intensified after the supreme court on monday decided not to grant her a reprieve. <u+201c>to issue a marriage license which conflicts with god<u+2019>s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience,<u+201d> davis said in a statement tuesday. <u+201c>it is not a light issue for me. it is a heaven or hell decision.<u+201d> she<u+00a0>consigned herself to jail thursday, sparking a fresh round of legal wrangling and political calculation in the face of the most audacious display of defiance on the issue of same-sex marriage since the supreme court declared in june that gay couples had a constitutional right to wed. <u+201c>personal opinions, including my own, are not relevant to today,<u+201d> bunning, a federal district judge, told davis and the courtroom thursday. <u+201c>the idea of natural law superseding this court<u+2019>s authority would be a dangerous precedent indeed.<u+201d> davis<u+2019>s husband, joe, said that his wife would remain in jail <u+201c>until our governor does something.<u+201d> he told reporters in morehead on friday that kim davis would not resign from her position. <u+201c>david bunning is a punk, a coward, and a bully <u+2014> you tell david bunning that joe davis said that,<u+201d> he said. davis stayed overnight in a cell by herself, and has been reading scriptures from the bible, staver said. her attorneys spoke to reporters friday afternoon after a meeting with davis in which she told them <u+201c>all is well,<u+201d> staver said. <u+201c>kim davis slept well last night. she slept with a very good conscience<u+00a0>and she is in very good spirits.<u+201d> staver <u+2014> the founder<u+00a0>and chairman of liberty counsel, the christian legal organization representing davis <u+2014><u+00a0>said in an earlier statement<u+00a0>friday that davis <u+201c>joins a long list of people who were imprisoned for their conscience.<u+201d> <u+201c>people who today we admire, like rev. dr. martin luther king, jr., jan huss, john bunyan, dietrich bonhoeffer, and more,<u+201d> staver said in the statement. <u+201c>each had their own cause, but they all share the same resolve not to violate their conscience. <u+201c>we can only hope future generations look back on this moment with disgust at what happened and admiration for a woman who may be incarcerated but whose conscience remains free.<u+201d> shortly after staver finished addressing the media in grayson,<u+00a0>david ermold and david moore appeared at the rowan county courthouse to make yet another attempt at securing a marriage license. ermold and moore have previously documented their efforts to secure a license in rowan county, about an hour from lexington. a video of a july attempt has more than 1,800,000 views on youtube; another trip to the courthouse was recorded in mid-august. tuesday, they tried yet again. after that attempt failed, davis emerged from a back office to explain that she would not be issuing any licenses. but on friday, with davis in jail, ermold and moore tried once more, then received their license, then stepped outside and cried. somashekhar, larimer and izadi reported from washington. j. freedom du lac contributed to this report, which has been updated.

ky. clerk<u+2019>s attorney: new marriage licenses <u+2018>not worth the paper they<u+2019>re written on<u+2019>

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

1.0

84.0

8.0

7303.0

0.0

2.0

3.0

0.0

515.0

2.0

0.0

139.0

2.0

0.0

55.0

12.0

22.0

11.0

19.0

18.0

12.0

11.0

41.0

22.0

48.0

518.0

141.0

57.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

the supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg executed a full u-turn on thursday morning, over remarks about the presumptive republican presidential nominee donald trump that ignited controversy on the eve of the gop convention. her remarks about trump were <u+201c>ill-advised<u+201d>, she said, adding: <u+201c>i regret making them.<u+201d> in an interview with the new york times last week, ginsburg said she could not <u+201c>imagine what the country would be with donald trump as our president<u+201d> and suggested her late husband would have taken such a scenario as a reason to emigrate <u+2013> as far away as new zealand. ginsburg, 83, was the first supreme court justice in decades to comment publicly on a candidate in the middle of the presidential campaign. her comments sparked indignation, dismay and accusations that she had violated judicial ethics. trump called for her to resign. despite this, ginsburg doubled down, calling trump a faker and telling cnn in an interview published on tuesday: <u+201c>he really has an ego.<u+201d> by thursday, she appeared to have considered her words and their implications more deeply. in a statement, she said: <u+201c>on reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and i regret making them. <u+201c>judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. in the future i will be more circumspect.<u+201d> supreme court justices are expected to adhere to a code of conduct issued for us judges, which stipulates that they refrain from publicly endorsing or opposing any candidate for public office. they are not officially bound by the code but generally agree to follow it. ginsburg<u+2019>s comments were not only rare but also particularly colorful for someone in her position. she has however gained something of a celebrity aura in recent years, with liberal supporters using the affectionate moniker <u+201c>notorious rbg<u+201d>, echoing the nickname <u+201c>notorious big<u+201d>, which was given to the late rapper biggie smalls. earlier this week, the white house spokesman, josh earnest, commented that ginsburg, who is currently writing a book called my own words, did not become known as the notorious rbg <u+201c>for nothing<u+201d>. although she has long been known as a member of the liberal wing of the court, ginsburg<u+2019>s frank and blatantly political and personal comments about trump appeared to come out of the blue. on monday, she told cnn that she had first thought trump<u+2019>s candidacy was <u+201c>funny<u+201d>. as he was about to become the gop nominee, though, she slammed him in personal terms, saying: <u+201c>he has no consistency about him. he says whatever comes into his head at the moment.<u+201d> trump told the new york times her comments were <u+201c>highly inappropriate<u+201d> and <u+201c>beneath the bench<u+201d> and that she had let her fellow justices down. the times and the washington post have both published editorials agreeing with trump.

ruth bader ginsburg regrets 'ill-advised' remarks about donald trump

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

8.0

68.0

8.0

2811.0

0.0

3.0

0.0

202.0

0.0

62.0

0.0

18.0

8.0

9.0

5.0

2.0

7.0

4.0

13.0

23.0

205.0

62.0

18.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

new york (cnn) he calls his church a field hospital for the spiritually wounded. and on friday, pope francis spoke to hundreds who are still trying to heal. praying with families of victims of the september 11 attacks at a ground zero memorial and speaking at an interfaith service, francis offered a message of hope at a place of horror. "the name of so many loved ones are written around the towers' footprints. we can see them, we can touch them, and we can never forget them," francis said. "here, amid pain and grief, we also have a palpable sense of the heroic goodness which people are capable of. ... hands reached out, lives were given. "this place of death became a place of life, too, a place of saved lives, a hymn to the triumph of life over the prophets of destruction and death, to goodness over evil, to reconciliation and unity over hatred and division," francis said. his visit to the national september 11 memorial & museum was billed as a moment to pause and reflect in a day packed with large events in the public eye. but even there, it was far from quiet. 'this really is the beginning' at a place that's often the site of somber memorials, the arrival of pope francis brought a chorus of cheers and chants. outside the national september 11 memorial & museum, about 1,000 family members of victims of the 2001 terror attack greeted the pope. standing steps away from where their relatives perished, they lined up along guard railings to catch a glimpse of francis. some got the chance to talk with him one-on-one. others watched from behind barriers, trying to catch his attention. a man shouted: "francisco! our whole family's here! a blessing, please!" it wasn't long before the crowd joined him: "our blessing, please! francisco! francisco! francisco!" nixia mena-alexis held a bouquet of yellow roses in one hand and wore a photograph of her sister pinned to her shirt. the flowers, she said, symbolize the catholic church -- and hope. she said she hoped to give some to the pope and place some beside her sister's name -- one of thousands surrounding the reflecting pools at the memorial. diarelia mena worked in it for cantor fitzgerald. she had just turned 30 and had a 2-year-old daughter when she was killed on september 11. "she was full of life and her laughter was contagious," her sister said as her eyes filled with tears. the lifelong catholic said coming here fills her with a mix of emotions. but mena-alexis knew she wanted to be here when the pope came. "to me, he symbolizes peace, and that's part of what we're striving for after what happened here," she said. "this is sacred ground, so i wanted to be present when he came." jean colaio, 50, lost her two brothers on 9/11. both worked at cantor fitzgerald. being in the pope's presence, she said, will help heal her family. "we were here on that day and witnessed everything and evacuated. we had our horrible experience here," colaio said. "and this really is the beginning. we've been working on our healing. but i think this really has propelled it. "i feel close and connected to my brothers because he's here." marjorie kane, whose father was killed on 9/11, said she felt differently after seeing the pope than she ever had at the site. "it's honestly the first time i can recall being on this ground and feeling this peace and calm," she said. "i'm usually full of such sorrow and such sadness coming here." it wasn't just catholics who said they were inspired by the pope's message. dr. gunisha kaur, who offered a sikh prayer onstage at the ceremony, is pregnant and asked the pope to bless her baby. onstage, before the crowd, he placed his hand on her belly. "that is the power of this pope, that he means something to all religions," her husband, simran jeet singh, said after the service. kaur said she was moved by francis -- and all the faiths that were part of the program. "during prayers that were in languages that i don't know, i i found myself singing along," she said. "it really felt like we were all there praying together."

pope francis at 9/11 memorial: 'we can never forget them'

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

2.0

57.0

8.0

4075.0

0.0

7.0

3.0

0.0

259.0

1.0

0.0

120.0

1.0

0.0

30.0

8.0

20.0

7.0

13.0

21.0

16.0

14.0

23.0

21.0

38.0

262.0

121.0

31.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

fights over 'religious freedom' and gay rights are costing republicans following a firestorm of criticism, republican governors in indiana and arkansas signed revised versions of their states' religious freedom restoration bills thursday night. in indiana the language was adjusted, and in arkansas it was significantly scaled back to more closely align with the federal law. national republicans, especially the ones running for president, have to hope it's enough to get them out of the hole they dug themselves on religious freedom and gay rights. it's worth taking a look at what the whole brouhaha has cost the gop. in the spirit of passover, here are four questions about what this issue means for the gop: it's possible that republicans' big electoral victories in november blinded them to just how controversial this would be. gov. asa hutchison, r-ark., and gov. mike pence, r-ind., seemed genuinely taken aback by the demand for boycotts and the backlash from big corporations like eli lilly, walmart and apple, as well as the ncaa. it's as if republicans <u+2014> particularly in the deep-red states of arkansas and indiana <u+2014> operate according to a different political calculus, insulated from the divide between their own conservative constituents and changing national opinion. because of redistricting and the phenomenon of a midterm electorate that leans a lot more republican than a presidential-year electorate, there are now many more gop governors and many more conservative majorities in state legislatures. and those majorities are moving forward with an agenda that satisfies their base of social conservatives but is seen as intolerant and divisive by the business community and a growing majority of voters in the country. this week, those two opposing dynamics reignited the culture war, with republican politicians as the first casualties. 2) is this about more than just religious freedom? yes! it's about a much bigger, much more fundamental problem for the gop. a new pew poll showed that 61 percent of young republicans favor gay marriage. hutchinson said his own son signed a petition asking him to veto the bill that he instead sent back to the legislature for revision. the republicans can't appeal to young voters if they're on the wrong side of gay marriage, because gay rights is a symbol of tolerance for so many young voters <u+2014> not to mention suburban women. the same is true for one of the fastest-growing parts of the electorate <u+2014> hispanics. how do republicans show hispanics that they are welcoming and inclusive if they oppose a path to legalization for hard-working immigrants here illegally? the views of the gop's white, older, conservative primary electorate are farther away from the center of american public opinion than the democratic base is right now. that's the challenge for the gop <u+2014> it needs to project an image of tolerance in order to win the white house while at the same time satisfying its conservative base, which, in this case, wants christian florists, bakers and photographers to have the right to refuse services to gay weddings. it will take a very talented candidate to square that circle. 3) ok, so how will republican candidates resolve this larger tension? good question! the debates during the primaries will, presumably, reveal the answer. of all the gop presidential hopefuls, jeb bush has given this the most thought. he seems determined not to fall into the trap that mitt romney did in 2012 <u+2014> moving so far to the right during the gop primaries (remember "self deportation"?) that he couldn't make it back to the center to win the general election. bush has said his strategy is to run as if he's willing "to lose the primary in order to win the general." 4) how's that working out for jeb bush so far? not so great. all the leading republican presidential hopefuls, including bush, came out in favor of the arkansas and indiana bills. by wednesday, though, bush was backtracking, insisting that religious freedom is a core value but that we also shouldn't discriminate based on sexual orientation. bush didn't explain how he would balance those two values, only that he was sure indiana would "get to that place." so, for bush, the "lose the primary" strategy sometimes means sticking to his principles in opposition to the gop base (as he has on immigration reform and common core education standards) but sometimes, on issues like religious freedom, he seems to fuzz it up. meanwhile, sen. ted cruz, r-texas, has no doubts about what side he's on. in iowa on wednesday, cruz blasted the "big business" wing of the gop, saying they are "running shamelessly to endorse the radical, gay marriage agenda over religious liberty. "

fights over 'religious freedom' and gay rights are costing republicans

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

12.0

70.0

8.0

4715.0

0.0

2.0

7.0

0.0

357.0

0.0

95.0

0.0

40.0

11.0

10.0

3.0

7.0

9.0

6.0

21.0

18.0

30.0

364.0

95.0

40.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

there's good news and bad news about sentences in federal prison. the good news: prison sentences are getting shorter. the bad news: black defendants are still getting longer sentences than white ones for the same crimes <u+2014> and the racial gap is actually growing. that's the conclusion of a new study conducted for the bureau of justice statistics,<u+00a0>based on data from 2005 <u+2014> after a supreme court decision gave judges more flexibility in sentencing <u+2014> through 2012. but it's certainly not the first study to find that even when the criminal justice system as a whole is getting more lenient, that leniency varies depending on the race of the defendant. and it's a big challenge for criminal justice reformers <u+2014> who end up caught in a terrible double bind. after someone's convicted of a crime in federal court, the judge determines a prison sentence by consulting a set of federal guidelines. the guidelines consider a bunch of factors related to the defendant's criminal history and the seriousness of the crime, plug them into some complicated calculations, and spit out a recommended range for the prison sentence to fall into. this study looked at how judges responded to those recommendations. what they found was not great. for pretty much every type of crime, white offenders who get a certain recommended sentence (under the guidelines) end up getting a shorter sentence than black offenders who get the same recommendation. and the difference between white and black sentences has grown since 2005. how big the disparity is depends on the type of crime and how severe it is. for a relatively minor drug offense that doesn't involve weapons <u+2014> something where the recommended sentence might be around two and a half years <u+2014> a black man and a white man would actually get around the same sentence in 2005. in 2012, the black man would be sentenced to about two months longer than the white man would. for a relatively minor crime that doesn't involve drugs but does involve weapons <u+2014> something where the recommended sentence might be a little over four years <u+2014> a black man would have gotten about five months longer in prison than a white man in 2005. in 2012, the black man would get a sentence over a year and a half longer than his white counterpart. the sentencing guidelines, like the name says, are supposed to be guidelines. but for decades, most judges followed them as rules, and rarely (if ever) gave out sentences that were higher or lower than the guidebook recommended. in 2005, the supreme court clarified that judges really could go above or below the recommended sentence if they thought it was appropriate for the case. (a second decision, at the end of 2007, clarified that judges were supposed to calculate the sentencing range recommended by the guidelines, but could then decide whether to follow it or not.) that's why this study's time period matters: it's looking at the era in which judges have had more power in sentencing. it's become incredibly common for judges to hand out shorter prison sentences than the guidelines recommend. over the summer of 2015, judges actually handed out "below-guideline" sentences in a majority of all cases (50.6 percent); they handed out "above-guideline" sentences only 2.6 percent of the time. when judges get to decide whether someone deserves to get a shorter sentence than the guidelines recommend, they might find some kinds of defendants more deserving than others <u+2014> based on factors that happen to be racially skewed (like education or employment), or based on plain old implicit racial bias. it's hard to judge this just by looking at average sentence length for a given crime, just because there's so much variation in the recommended sentences for each crime. two people can be convicted of robbery, but if one of them has a long criminal history and the other one was coerced into the robbery by an abusive boyfriend, federal policy says the second one should get a shorter sentence for it. to actually calculate whether judges are using their discretion to favor white defendants more than black ones requires some serious statistical analysis. but other researchers who've done that analysis, just like the authors of the new study, have found that racial disparities have persisted. interestingly, the researchers found that prosecutors' behavior didn't appear to change much over this time. the difference was because judges had more power to use their discretion, and they appear to have exercised that discretion to help white defendants more than black ones. the sad irony is that criminal justice observers have known this for a long time: the more that sentences are left up to a judge to determine, the more racial bias will come into play. this was a big criticism back in the 1960s and 1970s, when sentencing was so all over the place that a judge in california could sentence someone to a single day, or to years, for the same crime. reformers told legislators and governments that they needed to set clearer standards for how long a sentence should be for a given crime. one result was the development of the federal sentencing guidelines to begin with; another result was the use of mandatory minimum sentences that judges couldn't go below if they wanted to. if you're familiar with mass incarceration, you know where this is going. both of those policies have led to people going to prison for far longer than they used to, because stiff sentences were imposed across the board. and the length of sentences is one of the major factors in the explosion of america's prison population. that's why federal judges are beginning to move away from the guidelines, and why criminal justice reformers are calling for mandatory minimum sentences to be reformed or abolished. this study (and other evidence that racial disparities in sentencing persist) shows reformers haven't escaped the terrible double bind they're in. give the power in setting sentences to judges, and you choose a system where people who commit the same offense aren't treated the same way for it. take that power away, and you choose a system where everyone is treated too harshly. of course, even when everyone is treated harshly by judges, black americans end up suffering the most. that's because there's more to the criminal justice system than what happens in court; police decide whom to arrest, prosecutors decide whom to charge. those factors feed black americans into the system disproportionately, even before a judge lays eyes on them. as depressing as this sounds, it also means the sentencing double bind doesn't have to be as much of a problem as it is. in a world where black people weren't overpoliced (and underpoliced), setting across-the-board sentences would actually improve equality. on the other hand, if there weren't racial disparities in housing, employment and education that made it harder for black defendants to persuade a judge they could make something of themselves, judges might be just as likely to help black defendants as white ones. there's no right answer on sentencing, but that's because sentencing isn't the answer to begin with.

prison sentences are getting shorter. but racial disparities are getting worse.

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

0.0

79.0

8.0

7145.0

0.0

7.0

0.0

442.0

0.0

137.0

1.0

0.0

55.0

17.0

14.0

11.0

21.0

7.0

20.0

2.0

18.0

29.0

19.0

449.0

137.0

56.0

na

true

ti_cnn

real

na

train

na

"there's a special place in hell for women who don't help each other," says former secretary of state madeleine albright. the comment was supposed to help hillary clinton but it has also exposed her problem appealing to women voters. an email has just popped into my inbox from hillary clinton, asking "are you by my side?" well of course i don't have a vote in this race, but it's a question she should be asking the young women who do. because there she has problems. and they're serious. she may have left millions of cracks in the glass ceiling when she ran to become the first female us president eight years ago, but it hasn't shattered yet - and it might not do so in 2016. i'm sure a lot of people outside the us will look at this and reach for one word - misogyny. and yes, in the bars and cafes, and on the bleachers at football games, trackside at a nascar race, and in myriad other places where men gather to sweat and swear you will find - err, how can one put this - a slightly less than fully developed feminist perspective on having a woman president. but it is much more than that. i was in las vegas a few months ago for the first democratic debate at the wynn hotel. so where better to go to find out who was going to win the political jackpot than on to the casino floor. this is what we call a vox pop. i think in the american media they are called man-on-the-street interviews. they give colour and texture to a piece. ordinary voices, giving unfiltered opinions. except when we did this set of vox pops and asked people (rather surreptitiously, because the security guards would have kicked us off the casino floor very quickly) what these men and women thought of hillary clinton, they spoke with one voice: they didn't like her and didn't trust her. now normally when you do these type of interviews you go back and edit them - and have a script line, something along the lines of "some said this, and some said that" and you play the divergent views. except in vegas they didn't. the random group of people i approached all loathed her ok so far, so anecdotal. let's look at some actual figures. in the iowa caucus last week, 84% of women under the age of 30 voted for the 74-year-old bernie sanders; just 14% for hillary. the projection for new hampshire is even more striking. 92% of that age group say they will back sanders. among women aged 30-39 it is not a whole lot better. just 11% say they are going to back hillary. the american people feel they have known hillary intimately for a very long time. and with any longstanding relationship feelings get complicated. for better or worse some people never forgave her for sticking by bill when he was embroiled in the whole lewinsky scandal. if she was a proper feminist, she would have left him, goes the argument. all of which would be explicable if it was an older cohort rejecting her, but it is predominantly young women who say they're not going to vote for her - and for whom the shenanigans of bill are ancient history. some people hate her for being a clinton. a lot of people - men and women alike - think that the clintons have had a modus operandi that is uniquely theirs, and that no other us citizen would be able to get away with. if you were to focus group these people, the words that would get bandied around would be - entitled, arrogant, elitist, rich, takers of shortcuts, legally dodgy. these concerns were highlighted by the email arrangements mrs clinton had while secretary of state. all her communications were going through a private server. something that is now the subject of an fbi investigation. others in high office may have done similar things, but it fed the narrative of clinton exceptionalism. that they do things their way. it may not be fair, but politics is not fair. which leaves the clinton campaign with difficult questions about why they are failing to win this demographic group, which early on in the campaign i bet her team would have had down as low-hanging fruit. is it a post-feminist generation who feel that the gender of their next leader is irrelevant? is it that they want something shiny and new - and yes, i know it's a stretch to describe the veteran bernie sanders as anything other than wrinkly, but he was an unknown quantity six months ago. is it that people are yearning for change, and sanders certainly offers that with his socialist prescription for america? so what does she do about it? well what she did this weekend was to go to flint in michigan where there is the mother and father of a public health scandal over the supply of clean water to a predominantly black and impoverished population. the african american constituency has always turned out for the clintons - and when the protracted primary race turns to the southern states, this is where she hopes she will be able to do sanders most harm - and ultimately win. but what you don't do is laugh uproariously with madeline albright when she's campaigning alongside you in new hampshire and opines "there's a special place in hell for women who don't help each other". because that is like saying: "you should vote for hillary because she's a woman." or worse: "any woman supporting bernie is betraying the feminist cause." telling the voters they're wrong is not a good look, and never ends happily.

us election: hillary clinton's problem with young women

noauthor

na

https://t4.rbxcdn.com/c5695e5f087535e2066dc473e03b1819

na

nocountry

na

null

na

null

na

null

ti_cnn_train.parquet

na

0.0

na

nothread

na

1.0

0.0

6.0

55.0

8.0

5328.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

367.0

0.0

137.0

1.0

0.0

50.0

11.0

17.0

5.0

17.0

13.0

8.0

15.0

31.0

35.0

373.0

137.0

51.0

na