Sure, ISIS uses Facebook and Twitter to recruit, but should we check Facebook and Twitter to evaluate visa applicants? No so fast, you privacy pirate! Those foreigners have civil rights too, or something; from ABC News:
Secret US Policy Blocks Agents From Looking at Social Media of Visa Applicants, Former Official Says
Fearing a civil liberties backlash and "bad public relations" for the Obama administration, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson refused in early 2014 to end a secret U.S. policy that prohibited immigration officials from reviewing the social media messages of all foreign citizens applying for U.S. visas, a former senior department official said.
"During that time period immigration officials were not allowed to use or review social media as part of the screening process," John Cohen, a former acting under-secretary at DHS for intelligence and analysis. Cohen is now a national security consultant for ABC News.
One current and one former senior counter-terrorism official confirmed Cohen's account about the refusal of DHS to change its policy about the public social media posts of all foreign applicants.
Bad public relations"? Well, they are getting that.
Here's a pro tip for our hard-working government officials - if you are trying to choose between protecting the lives of Americans and protecting the civil liberties of foreigners not covered by the US Constitution, don't overthink it.
Yes, we understand that a portion of Obama's base hates America even more than ISIS does, but still, Obama is President of all Americans, even the bitter-clingers in flyover country. And that will be true for another year, regardless of how much both sides regret it. Think of it as a bad marriage with a delayed court date. Smile, be civil, don't pour hot coffee on each other - we can get through this. And think of the children.
#TheHolidaysAreHardest
WHOSE FACE IS RED NOW?
Former DHS under-secretary Cohen said he and others pressed hard for just such a policy change in 2014 that would allow a review of publicly-posted social media messages as terror group followers increasingly used Twitter and Facebook to show their allegiance to a variety of jihadist groups.
Cohen said officials from United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) both pressed for a change in policy.
"Immigration, security, law enforcement officials recognized at the time that it was important to more extensively review public social media postings because they offered potential insights into whether somebody was an extremist or potentially connected to a terrorist organization or a supporter of the movement," said Cohen, who left DHS in June 2014.
Cohen said the issue reached a head at a heated 2014 meeting chaired by Homeland Security Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, other top deputies and representatives of the DHS Office of Civil Liberties and the Office of Privacy.
"The primary concern was that it would be viewed negatively if it was disclosed publicly and there were concerns that it would be embarrassing," Cohen said in an interview broadcast on "Good Morning America" today.
But they kept the Greenwald vote.
#proudbitterclinger #Obamaisnotmypresident #othersidedoesn'tseemtoregretanything
Posted by: Sue | December 14, 2015 at 11:22 AM
#sorrynotsorry
Posted by: Sue | December 14, 2015 at 11:22 AM
Non-Americans' personal security is sacrosanct.
Americans --? meh.
Think of the compromises of personal identity for our personnel, both civilian and military--who have had clearances at one time or another, and trusted the government to keep that information secure.
Hell, LifeLock?
The govt is no paying two different organizations to monitor my identity for the next three years, Mrs Daze got the letter over the weekend saying due to information (non-)security issues, she too was entitled to three years of identity protection.
And so it goes.
Yet, we mustn't look at the social media of non-Americans who want to immigrate here.
YGBSM !
(You gotta be kidding me!)
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 11:26 AM
...now paying...
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 11:27 AM
Tell me I'm reading this incorrectly. Tell me the Federales' policy is not the following: (i) Federales, through NSA data gathering, may monitor just about any site a citizen visits; and (ii) out of fear of hurting Mohammed's and Aroob's feelings when the foreigners attempt to enter the US, Federales wouldn't check their Facebook and other social media musings, and even now checking is only spotty. I must be missing something.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | December 14, 2015 at 11:43 AM
I'm beginning to come around to the view that the number of Americans who need to be slaughtered is a single jihadist attack for Federales to take serious action is about 300,000.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | December 14, 2015 at 11:45 AM
Why is there any privacy violation of scrutinizing SOCIAL media? Do any of these clowns understand what words mean?
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPhone | December 14, 2015 at 11:46 AM
TC@11:43-- that is indeed your tax dollars 'at work'.
Posted by: NK | December 14, 2015 at 11:46 AM
New post with my views of the new federal ed legislation signed last week. The Scientizing Politics was from a 1984 conference on the probable effects. http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/scientizing-public-policy-implementing-orwellian-tyranny-by-statute-via-the-mind-and-personality/
Posted by: rse | December 14, 2015 at 11:47 AM
"Do any of these clowns understand what words mean?"
That's a joke, right?
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 14, 2015 at 11:47 AM
CH-- oh they understand. that 'explanation' is just BS to hide the ugly truth. ValJar doesn't want any muslims vetted. PERIOD. What did Goldfinger say about 'enemy action'.
Posted by: NK | December 14, 2015 at 11:48 AM
CH, I suspect they do understand that monitoring social media doesn't raise the privacy concerns that monitoring, say, private emails and text messages would. It's just that a significant portion of our federal officials have been sufficiently politically correctized that they fear asking Mohammed and Aroob about their posts about the glory of killing the infidels might suggest we are prejudiced colonialists.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | December 14, 2015 at 11:49 AM
But we're told that the loss of the NSA's monitoring of all comms by everyone is the single thing that kept the Feds from cracking this case...
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 11:50 AM
They'd rather hang the threat, if not the actuality, of monitoring your private communications over the head of each and every American citizen, then even think of looking at a wannabe immigrant's facebook postings...
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 11:51 AM
It's "For The Children"
doncha know, therefore WE MUST.
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 11:52 AM
Yeah the interwebz seem to be a one way street.
Our idiot Secretary of State can post her classified emails in a place an Alfred E Newman of hackers could find them and the rest of the government puts a "trespassing welcome" sign out on every government employees personal and private info but for fear of offending we don't even look at PUBLIC postings by potential terrorists.
What kind of mentality is it that pervades those who whose job it is to protect us that they are afraid of the blowback from looking at PUBLIC postings, while retaining the right to lob a Hellfire at the same guy before he gets his visa?
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | December 14, 2015 at 11:53 AM
Ban guns...
..."For the Children"
Allow homosexual "marriage"
..."For the Children"
Teach transexual and bisexual glory !
..."For the Children"
Ban smoking...
..."For the Children"
Ban fracking
..."For the Children"
Send weapons to Mexican cartels...
..."For the Children"
Release the GITMO Five ...
..."For the Children"
This is not who we are...
..."For the Children"
Unrestricted abortion...
..."For the Children"
What are you worried about, citizen, it's
..."For the Children"
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 11:56 AM
Let in every stinking muzzie with terrorist ties and well, it's
..."For the Children"
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 11:58 AM
Alex mayorkas, mcawful crony.
Posted by: buccaneer morgan | December 14, 2015 at 12:05 PM
Sandy, that explains banning Christmas. After receiving that list of stuff, what more could "the children" desire from some fat old white dude?
Posted by: henry | December 14, 2015 at 12:07 PM
BTW-- love TM's headline to this post. The headline is terrible but true.
Posted by: NK | December 14, 2015 at 12:08 PM
Let me see if I've got this straight:
The Federal Government refuses to even look at PUBLIC statements by prospective immigrants to evaluate their security risk to this country and its citizens.
And at the same time, that same Federal Government allows PRIVATE information about tens of millions of its employees to fall into the hands of hostile foreign governments.
Posted by: James D | December 14, 2015 at 12:09 PM
JamesD-- Oui. remember what Aurick Goldfinger said about enemy action.
Posted by: NK | December 14, 2015 at 12:12 PM
To be fair, not all social media content is public. Twitter is mainly public, but Facebook isn't, necessarily. I'm not sure about some of the others like Snapchat, Instagram, etc. because I don't use them. But the idiots at DHS don't even seem to be making that distinction.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 14, 2015 at 12:13 PM
And at the same time, that same Federal Government allows PRIVATE information about tens of millions of its CITIZEN employees, THEIR FAMILIES AND FRIENDS, to fall into the hands of hostile foreign governments.
Added a bit to your statement, if you don't mind, James D.
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 12:13 PM
Yeah. I think we passed "enemy action" a long time ago.
Posted by: James D | December 14, 2015 at 12:14 PM
If you are a citizen, say something threatening about one of our electe4d officials on a social media site, and see if the Feds come knocking...
BUT, But, but, if you are a foreigner, say something threatening about America, and the USG will give you a Visa and $$ to get settled. Hell, if you are expecting, the local rubes might even throw you a baby shower--and you do not even have to attend...
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 12:17 PM
rse's latest blog post, linked at 11:47, is absolutely horrifying.
Ryan should never have allowed that bill to even come to a vote, let alone pass it.
Posted by: James D | December 14, 2015 at 12:17 PM
You will be happy to know that Rachael Dolezal is now comparing herself to Caitlyn Jenner concerning the frangibility of identity.
And so we now get to pick out exactly who and what we want to be and it is magically so.
So I am going down to the Post Office and putting in a change of address for Warren Buffett to my P.O. Box. How can they deny me?
Posted by: matt | December 14, 2015 at 12:18 PM
Speaking of gitmo, the newest varsity quarter for the Arabian conference has quite a record.
Posted by: buccaneer morgan | December 14, 2015 at 12:19 PM
KT McFarland today on Stu Varney said, yada yada yada Trump... but "I support a two-month ban on all (yes ALL) immigration" until the immigration process is secure.
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 12:19 PM
is it "KT" or "Katie" ???
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 12:21 PM
narc @ 1219,
do you mean that the team is on offense and can throw the bombz?
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 12:22 PM
Got good arms ?
Posted by: Sandy Daze | December 14, 2015 at 12:22 PM
Just got done selling some old Fisher-Price toys to a guy who is a dealer that I have seen occasionally at the auction house. He's retired USAir employee (not a pilot, I think ground crew) and he said it will make people mad but he's supporting Trump.
He also thinks Obama is a Muslim.
This is my anecdotal report from the field today.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 14, 2015 at 12:26 PM
Jeh Johnson refused in early 2014 to end a secret U.S. policy that prohibited immigration officials from reviewing the social media messages of all foreign citizens applying for U.S. visas
So, any background on the origin of the "secret U.S. policy"?
I mean, surely if it was implemented, say, prior to Jan 21, 2009 - that would be trumpeted rather loudly . . . Blame Bush!!!
If one assumes that it is, in fact, a policy implemented since Obama became president - who authorized it and when? Is Obama's signature on a piece of paper somewhere?
Hah, I kid. Obama just found out about this "secret U.S. policy" roughly 22 minutes before TM did - using the same source...an article about it.
And make no mistak, no one is more upset about this than Obama.
Why.....Obama's upset enough about this that he will probably release multiple squirrels to "handle" it.
But not before we get a couple stories about how he is asking withering questions of people in his administration.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | December 14, 2015 at 12:28 PM
k...T
Posted by: GUS | December 14, 2015 at 12:30 PM
Matt-- that's fair enough. If you 'feel' like Warren Buffett, you are Warren B and entitled top all rights and privileges thereof.
Posted by: NK | December 14, 2015 at 12:30 PM
someone elsewhere on the interwebs (Belmont Club, i think) repeatedly asks: "If Obama were doing everything he can for the other side, what would he be doing different?'
Posted by: exdemocrat | December 14, 2015 at 12:34 PM
The Left and MFM remind me of two ten year olds standing on the playground having this discussion:
#1 "you're a poopy head"
#2 "I know you are, but what am I?"
#1 "takes one to know one"
#2 "your mama"
#1 "I'm telling"
Posted by: Gentlejim | December 14, 2015 at 12:35 PM
Jeff,
404 didn't know about the policy because ValJar doesn't think he has need to know on everything she's doing.
Posted by: Gentlejim | December 14, 2015 at 12:37 PM
Thanks James.
I was just glad I was able to come up with examples that recognized what is happening is in fact a danger.
Remember too that Ryan called the 1061 page statute for a vote less than 48 hours after it appeared to be available for reading. This was not passed after due deliberation. It was passed before it could be read and damning language discovered.
I can tie all that language to Cass Sunstein and his nudging initiatives too as well as a White House Task Force that reports to Holdren. That which makes it binding also makes it all traceable to a knowing tracker.
Posted by: rse | December 14, 2015 at 12:39 PM
One more point, every single Dem voted yes. They know precisely what kind of fundamental transformation this seeks and how it ties to economic justice as a supposed human right.
Posted by: rse | December 14, 2015 at 12:40 PM
I should have said coach,
Posted by: buccaneer morgan | December 14, 2015 at 12:44 PM
New poll has Trump at 40% among GOP voters (Monmouth poll).
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/poll-trump-tops-40-percent-national-support/article/2578294
Tick tock.
Posted by: Porchlight | December 14, 2015 at 12:44 PM
Basic explanation of what the last 7 [and more] years of central bank foolishness is bringing us.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | December 14, 2015 at 12:44 PM
Obama is about to run his mouth AGAIN.
A tree falling in the woods.
Posted by: GUS | December 14, 2015 at 12:45 PM
Sorry, 41 percent, not 40%.
Barone notes that Trump does better on robocall polls than live person calling. Interesting.
Posted by: Porchlight | December 14, 2015 at 12:46 PM
we are leading NOTHING Mr Obama.
Posted by: GUS | December 14, 2015 at 12:48 PM
I see he is reading a statement.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 14, 2015 at 12:50 PM
Miss Marple, I had to turn the Sociopathic bastard off. Anyone who still buys this fukwads SHIT SANDWICH is insane.
Our 4 star generals and admirals stand there like eunichs.
Posted by: GUS | December 14, 2015 at 12:51 PM
There were some episodes of the six million dollar man I didn't even remember.
Posted by: buccaneer morgan | December 14, 2015 at 12:52 PM
Good Morning.
Obama is giving his speech now but Momma is sitting on the couch next to me and she (Former Dem) says she hates the guy so much that she can't stand to listen to his voice, so she has forbidden me to turn up the volume and transcribe whatever he's saying, so sorry but I can't live blog his jabber this morning.
Posted by: daddy | December 14, 2015 at 12:54 PM
Not to worry, daddy; we've all heard it fifty time before.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | December 14, 2015 at 12:55 PM
Daddy, Obama is saying the same shit he always says.
Reporter: Mr Ofukwad, why haven't you committed American resources to DESTROY the JAY VEEEEEEE?
Posted by: GUS | December 14, 2015 at 12:56 PM
Wonder if there's any embarrassment by those military guys having to flank this B0zo..
Posted by: glasater | December 14, 2015 at 12:58 PM
Well Gus,
Hopefully the Climate Talks in Paris really rebuked them something fierce.
Posted by: daddy | December 14, 2015 at 12:59 PM
from twitter it seems Obama is claiming to hit ISIS "harder than ever"... #pillowfight
Posted by: henry | December 14, 2015 at 12:59 PM
Cbs stated with the soaps, while abc and nbc removed all doubt.
Posted by: buccaneer morgan | December 14, 2015 at 12:59 PM
CBS is tiptoeing towards Fox to try to steal some ratings points from the Prog Redoubts of Comcastvetzia and ABCavda.
Posted by: NK | December 14, 2015 at 01:02 PM
The gigolo SecState lives large off a dead man's family fortune:
Her Gulfstream is named after a ski run on Mt. Baldy (Sun Valley). Happens to be my favorite as well. Dammit.
Posted by: lyle | December 14, 2015 at 01:03 PM
Well their stated entertainment division is apart from their news, kidding.
Posted by: buccaneer morgan | December 14, 2015 at 01:04 PM
That dem gal on the noon show on Fox (Julie something, I think) said that is was a terrible speech and tone deaf. He didn't address the very real and justified fears Americans have HERE AT HOME.
Basiclaly, for those who missed it, he READ a laundry list of things we have done, "bombed these places, killed these leaders, etc." Continue to work with coalitionpartners blah blah.
Absolutely nothing new and infuriating.
Napolitano predicted it was a pre-Christmas PR stunt, and now that he has spoken Napolitano says it was a tone-deaf failed PR stunt.
Brett Baier says it was a lot of facts and figures, but no change in strategy. He doubts it would be comforting at all to people who are worried.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 14, 2015 at 01:05 PM
Palaver.
Anyway, I feel better knowing the IRS will check all of our social media comments.
Posted by: MarkO, brimming with the spirit of E. Scrooge | December 14, 2015 at 01:05 PM
...a secret U.S. policy that prohibited immigration officials from reviewing the social media messages of all foreign citizens applying for U.S. visas
In other words, "they can't connect the dots because they don't have any dots to connect."
Posted by: daddy | December 14, 2015 at 01:08 PM
And they don't have any dots to connect because they have their hands over their eyes.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | December 14, 2015 at 01:10 PM
A Gorelick special
Posted by: henry | December 14, 2015 at 01:13 PM
Wretchard's latest;
On the disintegrating political scene in the US.
Sorry for the length but this comment by Subotai Bahadur, one of his best regulars is worth quoting in full;
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | December 14, 2015 at 01:14 PM
exactly. These same POS Dems making excuses for Obummer's see no evil policies made heir bones screaming about GWB not connecting the 9/11 dots. Now they claim you can't even refer to any dots because..... Islamophobia. What is the word when hypocrisy goes plaid?
Posted by: NK | December 14, 2015 at 01:16 PM
Miss Marple:
Napolitano predicted it was a pre-Christmas PR stunt, and now that he has spoken Napolitano says it was a tone-deaf failed PR stunt.
Hopefully that's all it is. Obama pr stunts where he comes out and says something about how well things are going according to him lately portend an attack somewhere.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | December 14, 2015 at 01:18 PM
BTW-- as I mentioned at our Campbell Apartment meet up, the apartment has the wrong tartan drapes. Here is the Clan Campbell tartan; my son's drunken scottish friend called this to management's attention when he demanded free drinks as he was a namesake. http://ccsna.org/jsep50a.htm
Posted by: NK | December 14, 2015 at 01:20 PM
The claim by the Nomenklatura that more exposure to Muslims, next door or in the workplace, will lead to reduced fears on both sides and more integration is palpably untrue...The more you know them, the less you are willing to tolerate.
Sad but true.
Good paste, Iggy.
Posted by: daddy | December 14, 2015 at 01:21 PM
I'm seeing the 'lurker' on tv right now :-)
Posted by: glasater | December 14, 2015 at 01:24 PM
Jeff, he did kill Bin Laden with his own hands, the economy is booming, ISIS is contained on the run, fill in the blank, and unemployment is non-existant.
Good Time, ain't we lucky we got 'em.
Posted by: GUS | December 14, 2015 at 01:24 PM
Jeff,
So true. That "You're next" addressed to ISIS will probably provoke a response.
He's not doing anything different, so coming out and reading all those numbers and pretending he's doing something and then taunting them is probably the worst combination of things he could have done.
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 14, 2015 at 01:25 PM
Tim Blair (via Insty):
Posted by: lyle | December 14, 2015 at 01:27 PM
Oh, and the MFM cheer lead the climate scam that will enrich untold number of cronies and further impoverish the world:
http://soopermexican.com/2015/12/12/watch-objective-unbiased-reporters-cheering-and-applauding-global-climate-hoax-deal/
Posted by: lyle | December 14, 2015 at 01:30 PM
Miss Marple, I am at a loss as to whom Obama was speaking to. He lies, blusters, bullshits, makes stuff up, and the MILITARY BRASS takes it. Spineless bastards.
Isis was 20,000 violent rogue muzztards, and Obama let them grow and grow and grow.
How would 9,000 air strikes no finish them off. He's lying.
Posted by: GUS | December 14, 2015 at 01:31 PM
GUS, you spelled "leaflet drops" wrong
Posted by: henry | December 14, 2015 at 01:34 PM
Gus,
Obama thnks if he says something it's the same as being true. He was just speaking for himself and his wish-casting.
I think I will clean for a while. Either that or take a nap. HA!
Posted by: Miss Marple 2 | December 14, 2015 at 01:35 PM
lyle@1:03...Howie Carr likes to mention that Kerry lives off his second wife's dead first husband's fortune.
Posted by: Marlene | December 14, 2015 at 01:35 PM
Everything about the comment Ig quotes at 1:14 is spot on. I think this really makes the best point about the problems of getting along with Islam:
When you are enough of a pain in the tuchus that pacifist Buddhists go to war in self-defense against you, maybe its you and not them.
Posted by: James D | December 14, 2015 at 01:35 PM
MM - I just heard on the radio speculation that Trump may not do well in Iowa because they must come out in person and declare who they are voting for.
The discussion was that that many people who will vote for Trump will not say they will because of the negative talk against him. They said he would do better in New Hampshire and other places where the vote is a secret ballot. Your anecdotal evidence seems to lean the opposite way -- people are happy to say they support him. The radio host also said a cab driver initiated a conversation and was a Trump supporter. Interesting.....
Posted by: Momto2 | December 14, 2015 at 01:37 PM
Rush appears to be on the Ted Cruz bandwagon today in hour 1.
Not openly cheerleading, but Rush is discussing Cruz's moves up in the polls and is suggesting that the difficulty Trump has in criticizing Cruz is due to the way Cruz had handled himself. Rush is praising Cruz's character and particularly his "steadiness." It is obvious that Rush admires Cruz.
Rush is also mentioning that he finds Cruz completely authentic, but does admit that he knows that Cruz comes across to some people as artificial or contrived---same situation we've described here.
Now Rush is suggesting that there may be as much Establishment fear of Cruz as there is of Trump, possibly more.
I wonder if Rush ever browses JOM?
Posted by: daddy | December 14, 2015 at 01:47 PM
my 1:20 was meant for jimmyk and CH.
Posted by: NK | December 14, 2015 at 01:48 PM
JamesD,
My thoughts exactly. I'd copied that exact sentence for a comment, but you beat me to it.
Posted by: Gentlejim | December 14, 2015 at 01:56 PM
I'm working off a clunky old computer, so it's very hard to keep up. If anyone remembers the thing besides Wobenzym that Man Tran mentioned yesterday, pls email me, I'm intrigued. Yhmx
Posted by: clarice | December 14, 2015 at 01:59 PM
Trish Regan on FOX Business (who I don't suspect is a hard corp conservative) plays a few clips of Obama's speech this morning, and then shaking her head, asks the following of her guest, Retired Maj Gen Bob Scales:
Trish: The Question is, does he really understand the threat that we face now? Does he understand, really, that we are at War?...Let me ask you that question, do you think the President fully understands the scope of the problem right now that we are at War?
General Scales: No, I don't think so. I don't know if you caught the body language in his speech but he clearly was uncomfortable Trish, and I felt sorry for the four 4-Stars who were potted plants behind him, listening to him read this list...there's a sense that the President is not in this...ISIS gets this as well, and our Allies in the region understand the seriousness of the situation, and so everybody wants to know What's Plan B, What's the new Strategy, How do you take ISIS down, What's your plan for winning, instead of like a score card at Halftime...
Posted by: daddy | December 14, 2015 at 02:15 PM
Sandy Daze:
"But we're told that the loss of the NSA's monitoring of all comms by everyone is the single thing that kept the Feds from cracking this case..."
Actually, what I remember was initially an immediate (suspiciously well coordinated) chorus, bewailing the Feds inability to penetrate encrypted messages. Perhaps such complaints have been muted by embarrassing revelations like the social media fail, but that will be just a temporary lull. I do not doubt that legally mandated encryption back doors are Item #1 on the law enforcement wish list -- although eliminating PC rules of engagement has got to be way up there, and way easier to implement.
Posted by: JMHanes | December 14, 2015 at 02:18 PM
" instead of like a score card at Halftime..."
He can WISH that this is halftime. I think we are a long way from halfway there. What is Churchill's line about end of the beginning?
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 14, 2015 at 02:20 PM
"discussing Cruz's moves up in the polls"
12/14/15
"Trump hits a new high in national poll
According to the results of the latest Monmouth University poll surveying voters identifying as Republican or independents leaning toward the GOP, Trump earned 41 percent, nearly tripling the support of his closest rival, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who took 14 percent. "
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/poll-trump-new-high-216741
Posted by: Black Gold | December 14, 2015 at 02:20 PM
General Scales: According to what I've read we've killed 12,000 ISIS fighters in the last year, and in the last year they've grown by 30,000. That type of math doesn't play well when you're engaged in a Global War.
Posted by: daddy | December 14, 2015 at 02:21 PM
Specially when you consider what nine of these people wrought in one night.
Posted by: buccaneer morgan | December 14, 2015 at 02:30 PM
Cruz will not draw as many crossover votes. Dems can vote for Trump if they are fed up. Don't know if they could bring themselves to vote for Cruz.
People who have finally decided on Trump are pretty firm. That dealer I talked to this morning said they had left him no one else to vote for.
If Trump can get new voters to the caucus in numbers, he could still win. Those polls are based on likely caucus voters.
Posted by: Miss Marple | December 14, 2015 at 02:34 PM
OK, I'm surprised. Bergdahl to be Court Martialed.
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 14, 2015 at 02:35 PM
clarice-the other thing mt mentioned was krill pills.
Posted by: rse | December 14, 2015 at 02:36 PM
And Pete Rose still shut out by MLB.
Posted by: henry | December 14, 2015 at 02:39 PM
Now Trish has on my Fav, Former 4-Star General, Jack Keane.
General Keane: ...Most of all, what we truly need, is a sense of urgency and resolve and commitment to truly defeat ISIS and give the American people some sense of when that's going to happen and how that's going to happen.
Trish: That's been missing throughout...Overall, when you look at the President's Strategy, is this one of really trying to defeat ISIS, or is this one of simply containing ISIS? And there's a difference.
Keane: No doubt about it. His Strategy, despite the rhetoric to defeat it, by actions, by commitment of resources, by sense of urgency, by resolve, is Containment. He has said it's a multi-year Strategy, and what's dangerous about that is his Secretary of Defense and his Chairman of the Joint Chiefs both stated in Testimony last week and the week before, that we're not Containing ISIS, and therefore not even that portion of his Strategy is working. And the longer that you drag this out, it's obvious to our audience here, that the longer the ISIS is going to be able to kill and the longer the ISIS is going to be able to threaten the American people. That's the issue.
Posted by: daddy | December 14, 2015 at 02:39 PM
A counter to Iggy's 1:14 by Mark (Black Hawk Down) Bowden.
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/12/donald-trump-mark-bowden-playboy-profile#16
Well, he is a bit grating and full of himself.
Posted by: Puddin Floppy-Feet | December 14, 2015 at 02:40 PM
Well you know how it is, Henry Big Sports has to keep it clean because they know how slippery is the slope once they look the other way on matters of character.
Posted by: Old Lurker | December 14, 2015 at 02:43 PM