*LIVE STREAMING* CBS News Republican Presidential Primary Debate (02/13/16 – 9:00pm ET)



…………………………Click on image above for live stream.

Alternate Stream 1
Alternate Stream 2
Alternate Stream 2
Alternate Stream 4
Alternate Stream 5
Alternate Stream 6

Participants: Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, Marco Rubio, John Kasich, Donald Trump and Jeb Bush

.

.

*VIDEO* Yes, There Actually Was Another Democrat Debate Last Night… Really!

.

.

*VIDEO* Vermin Supreme Makes Last-Minute Pitch To Democrat Voters In New Hampshire

.

.

*PODCAST* The Andrew Klavan Show

THE MEDIA LEVEL THEIR GUNS AT CRUZ AND RUBIO


……………………………Click on image above for podcast

MORE:

THREE REASONS OBAMA VISITED A TERRORIST MOSQUE

TRUMP’S NO TOUGH GUY, HE JUST PLAYS ONE ON TV

IOWA MAKES CAUCUSES GREAT AGAIN

IOWA: HOW SCREWED ARE WE?


.

*PODCAST* The Ben Shapiro Show

#BEYONCEHALFTIMESOBLACK



MORE:

HILLARY CLINTON IS A FLAMING GARBAGE HEAP

TRUMP FINALLY GOES NUCLEAR

THE GREATEST IOWA CAUCUSES EVER

IOWA IS TONIGHT – I HATE EVERYONE AND EVERYTHING


.

*AUDIO* Mark Steyn And Howie Carr Discuss The Presidential Primaries (02/05/16)

.

.

Seven More Hitlery E-mails Too Secret To Release

Seven More Hillary Server E-mails Too Secret To Release In Any Form – Hot Air

.
…………….

.
The State Department has decided to withhold seven more e-mails from Hillary Clinton’s unauthorized and nonsecure homebrew system as too sensitive to release even in redacted form. That brings the total number of such messages to 29, and one member of Congress who has seen them is aghast at what may have been exposed:
.

“There are more than 22, and it’s not just one or two more,” Rep. Chris Stewart told the Washington Examiner, referring to the 22 emails deemed top secret by the State Department last week. “It’s a more meaningful number than that.”

Stewart said the State Department has classified seven additional emails as “top secret.” The agency will now withhold 29 emails from the public due to their sensitive content.

“These were classified at the top secret level, and in some cases, above that,” he said.

.
Yesterday, Stewart told Fox News what kind of information went through the server – and it’s every bit as bad as one would imagine:
.

“They do reveal classified methods, they do reveal classified sources, and they do reveal human assets,” he said during an appearance on Fox’s “America’s Newsroom” earlier in the day.

.
Be sure to watch it, as Stewart uses a hypothetical that should have eyebrows raised. “My heavens,” he tells Martha McCallum, “if I received an e-mail saying, ‘here are the names and addresses and phone numbers of ten of our undercover agents in Pakistan,’ I would know … that was classified. I wouldn’t look for a heading.” Stewart then says that his hypothetical isn’t what was found in the e-mails, but clearly Stewart believes it to be as obvious as the hypothetical suggests. And if these messages disclosed human assets, as Stewart explicitly accuses in this interview after having seen the e-mails, then it would be obvious that they could not be transmitted through or retained within an unauthorized and non-secure system.

It’s no surprise, then, that the House Oversight Committee will start an investigation into exactly what went wrong and how much damage has been done to American intelligence by the State Department – and perhaps to put some pressure on the Department of Justice:
.

House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz says he’s forging ahead with an investigation into the federal government’s record keeping – a probe he acknowledges could put Hillary Clinton in the cross hairs.

But Speaker Paul Ryan and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy have been clear: They believe the FBI and Justice Department should handle the investigation into Clinton’s use of personal email for government business, and that congressional involvement could disrupt the criminal probe and appear overly partisan. Taking that cue, the House Science Committee, which had planned its own investigation into Clinton’s email server, on Wednesday opted to delay its inquiry and defer to the FBI, an aide on the panel told POLITICO.

As for Chaffetz, Ryan (R-Wis.) is giving him the green light to proceed – with caution. The speaker authorized Chaffetz to investigate systematic problems within his committee’s broad jurisdiction, while making clear his preference that Chaffetz steer clear of Clinton personally.

.
A House probe will put the FBI’s efforts under a microscope, whether Chaffetz chooses to avoid taking on Hillary directly or not. It will also send a signal to the DoJ that simply running out the clock will not suffice. Chaffetz could choose to work on this as a probe to determine the amount of damage done by the mishandling of classified information at State – methods that had to be changed, opportunities lost, agents who had to be recalled, or even sources who might have dried up or vanished altogether. Making the damage clear will undercut any claims from Clinton and the White House of “no harm, no foul,” but more importantly will actually emphasize the need to properly protect national-security data pour encourager les autres.

.

.

*VIDEO* Juan Ellis Bush Begs His Audience For Applause

.

.

*VIDEO* Move Over Pajama Boy, Sticker Boy Is Newest Democrat Star

.

.

*VIDEO* Yes, Bernie Sanders’ Supporters Are Dumber Than Dirt

.

.

Iowa Democrats Prove They’re Completely Insane (Videos)

Clinton Won At Least 6 Iowa Precinct Votes By A Coin Toss – Chicagoist

.

.
That American democracy would allow even one vote to be decided by a coin toss seems bizarre – but somehow the outcome of six separate Iowa Caucus precinct elections were decided by the flip of a coin Monday. And Hillary Clinton won them all.

The Democrats’ Iowa Caucus appears to be a “virtual tie” between Bernie Sanders and Clinton – or a hairline win for Clinton, depending on whom you ask. But before eking out the narrowest of victories against Sanders, Clinton won a truly bizarre-sounding six coin tosses used to decide which candidate would get the votes of several Iowa precincts that were too tied up to call.

Precincts in Des Moines, Newton, West Branch, Davenport and Ames were decided by coin tosses, according to Reuters, and became crucial parts of Clinton’s Monday night win. Democratic Party counts show Clinton ultimately winning the Iowa Caucus by just four delegates.

If you’re still scratching your head over how this could happen, the Iowa Democratic Party sort of explains: On the night of the caucus, Iowans vote for their favorite candidate. Each precinct receives a set number of delegates, and the number of precinct delegates each candidate gets is proportional to the votes he or she got from the precinct’s population. Votes from those delegates ultimately determine the night’s big winner. When a precinct’s delegates vote and it results in a tie, the precinct leaders can flip a coin to figure out which candidate should win their majority.

You can watch some Democracy in action below:
.

.

.
Apparently Iowa is just one of 35 states to use “chance procedures” – a.k.a. throwing a coin in the air in exasperation and walking away in shame – to determine tied elections, according to the Washington Post.

.
————————————————————————————————–
.

Related article:

.
Sanders Campaign: Party Lost 5 Percent Of Iowa Vote – Roll Call

The Iowa Democratic Party informed the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernard Sanders late Monday night that it has no results for 90 precincts across the state, which could account for as much as 5 percent of the total vote. And the party has asked the campaigns for help in getting a tally for those missing results.

“We are, right now, calling all our precinct captains on precincts where we have knowledge of what’s missing, to report what we think happened there,” a visibly irate Robert Becker, Sanders’ state director told Roll Call after Sanders’ speech at the Holiday Inn near the Des Moines airport.

“They’ve asked the other campaigns to do the same thing. At the end of the day, there’s probably going to be squabbles on it,” he added.

An Iowa Democratic Party official disputed Becker’s characterization.

“We are currently getting results from our small number of outstanding precincts, and results continue to be reported on our public website,” an Iowa Democratic Party official told Roll Call. “The reports of precincts without chairs are inaccurate. These outstanding precincts have chairs who we are in the process of contacting to get their results. It is inaccurate to report that these precincts did not have chairs.”

“We have reached out to the campaigns for help in contacting the chairs for our outstanding precincts. We are not taking results from the campaigns. We are taking them from the chairs who are in these precincts,” the official added.

Clinton and Sanders were locked in a virtual tie for most of the evening, with the state party announcing early Tuesday morning that Clinton achieved a slight edge in delegate counts.

“The party has a responsibility to staff 1,681 individual precincts. And what we’re seeing right now is that they had no-shows. People not showing up with the materials, not showing up with the app to report it. And when they’re telling us an hour ago that they have basically lost 90 precincts, it’s an outrage,” Becker said. “It’s insulting to the people who worked their asses off across this state that they can’t come up with people to cover these things.”

Attempts to reach the Clinton campaign early Tuesday were unsuccessful.

“I’m assuming they’re in the same boat. And they should be just as outraged as we are,” Becker fumed.

.

.

*VIDEO* While You’re Worried About The Results Of The Iowa Caucuses, Ed Considers Life, The Universe And Everything

.

.

*VIDEO* Prissy Holly: Exposing Mark Zuckerberg And A Direct Message For The Rape-ugees In Europe

.

.

Iowa: Cruz Campaign’s Last-Minute Voter Shaming Tactic Not Going Over Well

Unbelievable: Ted Cruz Campaign Sends Out Personal “Shaming Letters” To Iowa Voters – Conservative Treehouse

It has now been confirmed – The photograph of Ted Cruz campaign shaming letters is legit (see below). The letters are officially from the Ted Cruz campaign.
.

Cruz spokesman Rick Tyler confirmed to IJ Review that the mailer was theirs in a phone call Friday evening, saying that the targeting had been “very narrow, but the caucuses are important and we want people who haven’t voted before to vote.” (link)

.

.
The personalized letters target individual Iowa voters and identifies them as having failed to vote in prior elections. They are admonished and then encouraged to vote this year. In addition the letters identify the neighbors of the voter, and provides their voting history.

The text reads:
.

“You are receiving this election notice because of low expected voter turnout in your area. Your individual voting history as well as your neighbors’ are public record. Their scores are published below, and many of them will see your score as well. CAUCUS ON MONDAY TO IMPROVE YOUR SCORE and please encourage your neighbors to caucus as well. A follow-up notice may be issued following Monday’s caucuses”.

.

.
In an effort to shame the recipient, the notice also informs the targeted voter their neighbors have also been notified of the recipients poor voting record.

How the Cruz Team would think a public shaming campaign is a good idea is just staggeringly unbelievable.

The campaign scheme was exposed via Twitter where “Tom Hinkeldy, a resident of Alta, Iowa, tweeted a photo (which was later deleted because it included his personal address) on Friday evening of a mailer Sen. Ted Cruz’s campaign sent addressed to his wife, Steffany” – link

Word spread rapidly.

————————————————————————————————–

Apsinthos
@YugeMilo

Hey @tedcruz your brilliant public shaming campaign has inspired me to caucus on Monday… For @realDonaldTrump

10:30 PM – 29 Jan 2016
————————————————————————————————–

The first name on the mailer list matches the name on the envelope at the top of the page. The envelope also has a returned address as “Paid for by Cruz for President”, the official campaign name of Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign (not a super-pac):

.

.
Another Iowan, Braddock Massey, tweeted a photo of the mailer he received:

————————————————————————————————–
RBe
@RBPundit

@Braddock_Massey Black out the address and resend!
————————————————————————————————–
Braddock Massey
@Braddock_Massey

@RBPundit pic.twitter.com/FBjxaipH9p
11:29 PM – 29 Jan 2016


————————————————————————————————–

This has the very real potential to be a massive fail and seriously backfire against the Ted Cruz campaign. He might have just given Marco Rubio a considerable gift with the Iowa election only two days away.

From the candidate who prefers to keep his own records, well,… sealed.

UPDATE 5:00am: It looks like Howie might have found the trail, via a professor in Northern Iowa named Christopher Larimer. Describing a previous stunt like this in Alaska. As outlined in a 2014 PBS article:
.

[…] “Why would they think that shaming would make people comply?”

Because, well, it does. That’s according to Chris Larimer, associate professor of political science at the University of Northern Iowa. And he’s done the research to prove it.

“We found that when you make people aware of the norm of voting and that somebody else is going to observe whether or not you vote, people are more likely then to vote,” he said.

The letter from the so-called Alaska State Voter Project is nearly identical, word for word, to one that Larimer and other researchers tested in Michigan, right down to the typography and punctuation. In that 2006 research, Larimer and colleagues sent voters one of four different letters.

The softest message just urged people to do their civic duty and vote. The most aggressive letter matched the Alaska mailer. It included the addressee’s voting history as well as those of their neighbors, and contained something of a threat by promising a follow-up letter to show the results of the upcoming election.

Larimer says they got complaints, but the technique worked quite well. (read more)

.
That emboldened segment describes the current Cruz Campaign mailer 100%. Also, Chris Larimer is noted in this recent Texas Tribune article about the controversial debate:
.

[…] For Cruz, the No. 2 candidate in many polls, Trump’s snub could make him the center of action at the Iowa Events Center, a role that comes with both risks and rewards.

“If Trump’s not there, it affects the strategy other candidates take toward Cruz,” said Christopher Larimer, a political science professor at the University of Northern Iowa. “Do they treat Cruz like the frontrunner, or do they talk about Trump?”

At the same time, Larimer added, the debate could be a “lost opportunity” for Cruz to challenge Trump on his conservative credentials in what’s likely their last meeting before the caucuses. (read more)

.
Looks like another one of those ever brilliant political consultant types sold the Cruz campaign on a version of their already extensive “psychographic analytics“. Wouldn’t be surprised if billionaire Phd Robert Mercer, via Cambridge Analytica targeting – isn’t involved in the engineering of this too.

.

.
UPDATE: Chris Larimer distances himself from this fiasco via the Washington Post:

————————————————————————————————–
Christopher Larimer
@chriswlarimer

The blogosphere rumor is completely false. I do NOT work for the Cruz (or any) campaign and have absolutely nothing to do with mailings.

2:13 PM – 30 Jan 2016
————————————————————————————————–

.

[…] “As a researcher who has done randomized field experiments with get out the vote mailings,” Larimer wrote in an email, “what I can say is that mailings that call attention to an individual’s vote history as well as that of their neighbors’ have been shown to be effective in terms of significantly increasing voter turnout. We draw on norm compliance theory which suggests that publicizing behavior regarding a social norm increases the likelihood of norm compliance.”

That was if the ad was crafted in a smart way. “The Cruz mailing is more negative than anything we have done and has the potential to elicit a negative response or what psychologists call ‘reactance’ or ‘boomerang effect,’” warned Larimer. “The mailing also states that a ‘follow up notice’ will be sent following the caucuses on Monday. This is not possible as caucus turnout is private and maintained by the parties.” (link)

.

.

*LIVE STREAMING* Fox News Republican Presidential Primary Debate (01/28/16 – 9:00pm ET)



…………………………Click on image above for live stream.

Alternate Stream 1
Alternate Stream 2
Alternate Stream 3
Alternate Stream 4
Alternate Stream 5

Participants: Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, John Kasich, Rand Paul and Jeb Bush

.

.

*LIVE STREAMING* Trump Special Event To Benefit Veterans (01/28/16 – 9:00pm ET)



…………………………Click on image above for live stream.

Alternate Stream 1
Alternate Stream 2
Alternate Stream 3
Alternate Stream 4
Alternate Stream 5

.

.

*VIDEO* Steven Crowder: Gun Show “Loophole” Exposed

.

.