Joining us for today's show ae Mark Halperin, Steve Rattner, Kasie Hunt, Ron Fournier, Andrea Mitchell, Chris Jansing, April Ryan, Mike Allen, Michael Warren, Keir Simmons, Ian Bremmer, Christopher Dickey, Secy. Ernest Moniz, Sara Eisen and more
CNN/ORC poll: Trump elbows his way to the top. In the first national telephone poll since Donald Trump earned rebukes from Republican leaders over his comments about Senator John McCain's military service, the real estate mogul has increased his support among GOP voters and now stands atop the race for the party's nomination.
The new CNN/ORC Poll finds Trump at 18% support among Republicans, with former Florida governor Jeb Bush just behind at 15%, within the poll's margin of error.
They are joined at the top of the pack by Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, with 10% support among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents who are registered to vote. Trump's backing has climbed 6 points since a late-June poll, while support for Bush and Walker has not changed significantly. None of the other 14 candidates tested in the new CNN/ORC survey earned double-digit support.
Though Trump currently tops the race for the nomination, his advantage is by no means firm. A majority of Republican voters, 51%, say they see the field as wide open, and that it's too soon to say which candidate they will ultimately get behind. Among that group that see the contest as wide open, Bush has 14% support, while Trump has the backing of 13% and Walker stands at 9%.
Trump does much better among those Republicans who say they've narrowed it down to one or two candidates, 24% of that group backs him, 16% Bush and 12% Walker. Trump's popularity among Republican voters does not translate to the broader pool of registered voters. When tested in hypothetical general election matchups against top Democrats, he trails both frontrunner Hillary Clinton and upstart Senator Bernie Sanders by wide margins. Bush and Walker run just behind Clinton and about even with Sanders.
Trump's unfavorability rating is sky high. Overall, 59% of all registered voters have an unfavorable opinion of Trump, though that dips to 42% among GOP voters.
None of the other Republicans landing near the top of the field have such a negative image nationwide, though many remain little known.
Clinton is the only candidate who is about as well-known as Trump, and while she is more well-liked than the developer, her favorability rating is net negative among registered voters nationally: 49% have an unfavorable view while 44% have a positive impression.
Still, the poll suggests Republican voters haven't yet had their fill of Trump. A majority (52%) say they'd like to see Trump continue his run for the GOP nomination, including nearly six in 10 conservatives, tea party supporters and white evangelicals. Even among those Republican voters who support someone other than Trump, 42% say they'd like him to remain in the field.
The Republican electorate is more enthusiastic about next year's vote than the Democrats are. The poll finds 46% of Democratic voters say they are extremely or very enthusiastic about voting for president next year, compared with 55% of Republican voters. But enthusiasm is down in both parties compared with June of 2011, when 61% of Republican registered voters and 55% of Democratic registered voters were that enthusiastic.
In another positive sign for Trump's candidacy, among those Republicans who are enthusiastic about voting next year, Trump holds a larger edge over his competition: 22% say they would back him for their party's nomination, compared with 14% who back Bush and 12% behind Walker.
Overall, about three-quarters of Republicans are satisfied with their choices, more so than in 2011 at this time (about two-thirds were satisfied then), but still, just 23% say they are "very satisfied" with the field.
Meanwhile, an NBC News/Marist poll on Sunday showed Trump leading among New Hampshire GOP primary voters and narrowly trailing Walker in Iowa.
Trump took 21% of the New Hampshire GOP primary vote, with Bush running second at 14%, while in Iowa Trump was at 17% and Walker at 19%, according to the NBC/Marist survey.
On the Democratic side, the CNN poll found Clinton remains the clear frontrunner, though Sanders has increased his support slightly since last month's poll. Clinton is backed by 56% of registered Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters, while Sanders has inched up to 19% from 15% in June. The rest of the field is about even with where they were before.
The CNN/ORC International Poll was conducted July 22-25 among a random national sample of 1,017 adults, including 898 registered voters. Results for all registered voters have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. The registered voter sample included 419 Republicans and Republican-leaning independents as well as 392 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents.
For the past six weeks, an overarching concern for the Republican Party has been the impact that Donald Trump might have on the GOP primary election — particularly the damage he could do on the debate stage by turning an already unmanageable 10-candidate forum into a full-on circus.
On Sunday, though, Trump himself gave one of the clearest examples yet of why his candidacy is doomed to fail, and why, if handled properly, the debate stage could be his Waterloo.
Trump called in to CNN's State of the Union on Sunday morning to speak with host Jake Tapper.
Much of the appearance was, in fact, more of a Trumpian soliloquy, which appears to be his favorite form of expression, than an interview. When Tapper was eventually able to interrupt him and press for some policy specifics, however, the cracks in Trump's façade quickly became evident.
Trump has staked much of his campaign on his promise to solve what many of his supporters see as a major immigration crisis. As anyone serious about the issue of illegal immigration recognizes, at least 11 million workers are residing in the US illegally right now, and rounding them up for deportation is not a viable option.
Tapper asked Trump to expand on his policy beyond building a wall on the border. The host may have been hoping for a considered reply revealing Trump's detailed thinking on immigration.
What he got was a sort of immigration-related word salad.
"We're going to get the bad ones out," Trump vowed. "We have some really bad dudes who are here in this country and we're getting them out. We're sending them back where they came from."
Donald TrumpAPTrump at a rally and picnic on Saturday in Oskaloosa, Iowa.
Tapper tried again. What about the 11 million already here?
"The bad ones are going to get out. Then from that point on, we're going to look very, very strongly at what we do. And I'm going to formulate a plan that I think people are going to be happy with. But we're going to look very, very strongly at what we do."
No really, what about the 11 million?
"I'm gonna get rid of the bad ones fast, and I'm gonna send them back. We're not going to be putting them in prisons here and pay for them for the next 40 years."
One more try. There will be millions left. What's your plan?
"We're going to see what we're going to see," Trump finally said. "It's a very hard thing from a moral standpoint, from a physical standpoint, you don't get them out. At least 11 million people — I've heard the number's much higher …
"We're going to take the high ground. We're going to do what's right. Some are going to have to go and some — Hey, we're just going to see what happens. It's a very, very big subject and a very complicated subject."
He added: "The wall's going to be built. We're going to have a great border. People can come into the country legally, but not illegally, and the people that come in are going to be good people are going to be great people and I want that. That's very important to me."
Tapper asked Trump for his thoughts on the mass shooting last week in a Louisiana movie theater, with a follow-up asking him whether he approved of policies that would make it more difficult for the mentally ill to obtain firearms.
After declaring, "These are sick people. These are very, very sick people," Trump told Tapper the problem wasn't easy access to guns, but the "mentality" of the people wielding them.
"I'm a big Second Amendment person," Trump said. "I believe in it so strongly.
"You need protection from the bad ones that have the guns. You take the guns away from the good people and the bad ones are going to have target practice."
Pressed by Tapper to take a position on whether the mentally ill should be denied access to firearms, Trump declined to come out in favor of a ban.
"I think that if a person is mentally ill and it's proven and documented, you have to be extremely careful not to let them kill people," was as far as he would go.
Donald TrumpScott Olson/Getty ImagesTrump at the Republican Party of Iowa's Lincoln Dinner at the Iowa Events Center on May 16 in Des Moines, Iowa.
Referring to the shooter in Louisiana, who had a documented history of mental problems, Trump suggested that the problem was not that he was allowed to buy a gun, but that he hadn't been locked up in the first place.
"He should be in an institution," Trump said. "He was a very sick puppy."
The former reality-TV star also jumped on the opportunity to attack Hillary Clinton, the Democratic front-runner who is being pummeled by the ongoing investigation of her use of a private email server for her correspondence while secretary of state. On Friday, The New York Times published a story reporting that two federal inspectors general had asked the FBI to open a criminal investigation into the handling of classified information on her email server.
That fact, however, didn't deter Trump from not only declaring Clinton a criminal, but also positing a Democratic conspiracy within the Justice Department to shield her.
"What she has done is criminal. What she has done is criminal," he repeated. "I don't see how she can run. Because if the prosecutors, who are all Democrats by the way — that's part of the problem with fairness here, they're all Democrats so they're protecting her. But if you had an impartial prosecutor and they were honorable — and maybe they are — we're gonna find out but what she's done is criminal."
Asked by Tapper to outline exactly what he thought Clinton had done that was criminal, all Trump could manage was, "The whole email scandal. It's a scandal. And she's been protected."
If any of Trump's potential debate opponents were watching, it should have been a very instructive few minutes. Even on Trump's signature issue, his policy positions are tissue-thin and don't stand up to the lightest questioning.
Why he begins to be required to answer substantive questions — and to defend his answers — in a forum he doesn't control, The Donald may just end up firing himself.
This story was originally published by The Fiscal Times.
On the Dem side of the aisle, Sanders Surges, Clinton Sags in U.S. Favorability. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders' favorable rating among Americans has doubled since Gallup's initial reading in March, rising to 24% from 12% as he has become better known. Hillary Clinton's rating has slipped to 43% from 48% in April. At the same time, Clinton's unfavorable rating increased to 46%, tilting her image negative and producing her worst net favorable score since December 2007.
Sanders' increased favorability reflects the broader increase in the public's familiarity with him since March. Overall, 44% of Americans are able to rate him today, up from 24% in March. Not only has the percentage viewing him favorably increased, but also the percentage viewing him unfavorably has risen, up eight percentage points to 20%.
Clinton's Inauspicious Rivals
Clinton maintains a higher absolute favorable rating from Americans than any of her official rivals for the 2016 Democratic nomination. In contrast to the relative prominence of numerous candidates on the Republican side, she remains the only Democratic candidate known well enough by a majority of Americans for them to rate her, which helps Clinton maintain a higher overall favorable score.
Sanders is still an unknown to a majority of Americans, with just 44% able to rate him compared with Clinton's 89%. Total familiarity drops still further among the other three announced Democratic candidates: to 23% for former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb, former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley at 22% and former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee at 17%. With slightly more Americans viewing each of these candidates unfavorably than favorably, their favorable scores reach no more than 11%.
The favorable scores of Sanders, Webb, O'Malley and Chafee are not much more encouraging for any of them among their key target audience -- Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents. While Sanders' +29 net favorable rating among Democrats is considerably more positive than it is among the general population, still barely half of all Democrats know of him. And the picture is considerably bleaker for the other candidates, none of whom stirs much positive excitement among his or her base or cracks 30% familiarity.
Clinton Enjoys Broad Democratic Appeal
Clinton's favorable rating has slipped slightly among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents since April, falling to 74% from 79%. This partly accounts for her overall decline in favorability among the public. The other factor is a drop among non-leaning independents, from 44% to 36%, while her image among Republicans and Republican leaners is essentially unchanged at 14%.
Among Democrats and Democratic leaners, Clinton is currently viewed more favorably by older than younger adults, by nonwhites than whites and by liberals than moderates or conservatives. However, she retains solid majority favorable scores from all of these groups. And she enjoys equally high ratings from men and women as well as in each of the four major regions of the country.
Sanders' Democratic favorable scores significantly trail Clinton's in all subgroup categories, but he comes the closest to her among whites, men, young adults and liberals. The gap between the two candidates is also closer in the East, where Sanders lives, than in the rest of the country. But he does especially poorly among nonwhites and conservative Democrats, trailing Clinton by more than 50 points in each group.
Bottom Line
Clinton's national image has taken a slight turn for the worse, which is also evident in her image among Democrats. But she remains the only Democratic candidate for president with a national name, and Clinton continues to stand head and shoulders above her next closest competitor -- Sanders -- in popularity for the presidential nomination.
Survey Methods
Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted July 8-21, 2015, on the Gallup U.S. Daily survey, with a random sample of 2,374 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±2 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.
For results based on the total sample of 966 U.S. adults who identify as or lean Democratic, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. All reported margins of sampling error include computed design effects for weighting.
Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 50% cellphone respondents and 50% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods.
Learn more about how the Gallup U.S. Daily works.
The problem with the Democratic race and with Hillary Clinton is that she is just not trusted whereas you now have Bernie Sanders which is totally honest. That is the issue with regard to the perception with the American people towards them. It is still so hard to get any answer out of a Hillary Clinton and its so easy to get a straight answer out of Bernie Sanders. Bernie Sanders has always stood forthe same thing which is all about the people. Hillary Clinton says she stands for things that are progressive but everything thinks it is calculated for her to say in that political way.
Anyway, Sean Spicer at the WSJ wrote an article about the debate situation:
How We Improved the GOP Debates. The frustrating approach in 2012 demanded change. This cannot come as a surprise to today’s candidates. As the start of the Republican presidential-primary debates approaches next month, there has been a great deal of discussion about the formats. In the weeks since Fox News and CNN released the criteria for the first debates airing on their networks, the debates themselves have become a source of debate.
But let’s step back for a moment and add some context to the discussion. In 2008 there were 23 GOP debates; in 2012 there were 20, and the first debate of that cycle occurred in May 2011. Most observers concluded after the 2012 election that the packed debate schedule was a disservice to the candidates—and, more important, to the voters. The schedule kept candidates off the campaign trail, robbing them of time that otherwise could have been spent meeting with voters, listening to their concerns and trying to earn their support.
There was also frustration about debate hosts and moderators, some of whom had concocted bizarre and irrelevant questions.
So the Republican National Committee, where I work, decided to take action—to do what it could within the law to achieve three goals.
First, we sought to give the process predictability so that candidates would know the schedule in advance and could spend more time meeting with voters and taking part in other forums where they could engage in longer, more in-depth discussions. We succeeded in doing that with a schedule that includes one debate a month starting in August and then two a month beginning in 2016, for a total of nine televised debates.
Second, we wanted to add an element of conservative media to the debates. We have succeeded in that as well. NBC is partnering with National Review, CNN is partnering with Salem Radio, and ABC is partnering with the Independent Journal Review. This ensures that the concerns of grass-roots Republicans will be more likely to be addressed.
Third, we wanted to spread the debates into more states so that they were not concentrated in only a handful. We have done so. The nine scheduled debates will take place in nine different states, and that will bring more people into the process.
But now some observers, in and out of the campaigns, have expressed concern about the criteria used to determine who will appear onstage for the first two debates.
It is important to acknowledge that the networks and the networks alone are responsible for determining such criteria. Federal election law states that only two types of entities may host a debate: a 501(c)(3) organization or a media outlet. The Republican National Committee is neither. It is therefore up to the staging organization to set the criteria and the format. Those who call on the RNC to change the criteria misunderstand the law.
Such criteria must be clear, transparent, objective and neutral. No special exemptions can be made; special treatment cannot be given to certain candidates. Fox News and CNN have met these standards.
Right now the Republican Party suffers from an abundance of riches when it comes to the historic quantity of quality candidates: They can’t fit on one stage. The maximum of 10 candidates appearing on a debate stage for 2016 matches the highest for debates in either party. Fox News and CNN have taken it upon themselves to guarantee second debates for the declared Republican candidates not in the top 10. So to everyone who says “let them debate,” the top 16 candidates will debate. Is the arrangement perfect? No. It is, however, the most inclusive setup in history.
Some have suggested that the criteria should be changed to include all “legitimate” candidates on the debate stage. But who decides who’s “legitimate”? By late July, 114 candidates—yes, 114!—had filed paperwork to seek the Republican nomination. Is every governor legitimate? How about every senator or member of the House of Representatives? Former members and governors? Statewide officials? Without using an objective standard like national polling, as Fox News and CNN will, the criteria become much more subjective.
To those who say all candidates deserve a chance to have their voices heard, they will. There will have been 25 candidate forums before the first debate, Fox’s on Aug. 6 followed by CNN’s on Sept. 16. These forums, from CPAC to Citizens United to the forum on SiriusXM on the Wednesday before the first debate, allow the candidates to address voters directly without the back-and-forth of a debate.
The fact that we have primary debates and a field larger than a stage can handle should surprise no one. So even before the criteria were announced, candidates or prospective candidates and their teams certainly were aware that their strategic decisions could affect whether they would qualify for a debate. They were free to plan accordingly.
Those who dispute the use of national polls as the basis of deciding who’s onstage for the first two debates should keep in mind that networks may use different criteria for subsequent ones. That includes polls of the voters in the state where the debate is held. But also keep in mind we are a national party trying to win a national election.
Debates are not the be-all and end-all. They are just a part of the larger process. Mitt Romney did not participate in the first debate of the 2012 cycle, but he still went on to win the nomination.
This system may not be perfect, but had the RNC not tried to improve the debate process, I can assure you that the debates would be neither this inclusive nor this orderly.
Mr. Spicer is the chief strategist and communications director of the Republican National Committee.
Beauty queen and vigilante female hackers declare online war on ISIS. A nearly all-female online vigilante hacker group, which boasts a former Jordanian beauty queen among its ranks, has vowed to eliminate Isis's online presence to disrupt the group's capacity to organise terror attacks.
Ghost Security, or GhostSec was formed in the wake of the terrorist attacks against the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris in January. The group works to disrupt the recruitment and communication abilities of the jihadi group, as well as "collecting threat intelligence to prevent terror attacks from becoming a reality". It also contacts intelligence organisations when it learns of a potential terror threat.
On one such occasion, a few days before the 4 July weekend, GhostSec alerted the FBI and CIA to a tweet by an Isis supporter who appeared to hint at a terror attack on US soil. Days later, the FBI announced it had foiled attacks planned around the holiday, and arrested more than 10 people who were inspired by Islamic State's online recruitment.
![Lara Abdallat, Miss Giordania 2010, oggi attivista hacker per la GhostSec]({"default":{"load":"default","w":"66","h":"66","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAcXrL2.img?h=660&w=660&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=391&y=156"},"size3column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"62","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAcXrL2.img?h=624&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=391&y=156"},"size2column":{"load":"default","w":"62","h":"62","src":"//img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AAcXrL2.img?h=624&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f&x=391&y=156"}})
Former Miss Jordan Lara Abdallat is taking on ISIS as part of the GhostSec hacker group. Courtesy of Lara Abdallat
One of the hackers is Lara Abdallat, a former Miss Jordan and a runner-up in the 2011 Miss Arab World pageant, who decided to join the group after Islamic State soldiers burned a Jordanian pilot alive inside a cage in February.
"I think people find it interesting and inspiring that a former beauty queen and a woman has engaged in war with the Islamic State," Abdallat tells Newsweek. "However I also feel that Isis puts everyone at risk and therefore it does not matter if you are male or female but rather the fact that we must come together for the common cause of destroying Isis."
According to one of the group's hackers, who goes by the name of DigitaShadow: "Enough was not being done by the governments of the world to combat the insidious threat of the Islamic State, thus we decided to dedicate ourselves to eliminating their online presence as much as possible."
The group, which is made up of around 12 mostly female hackers based in the US and Europe, has to date shut down more than 55,000 Islamic State Twitter accounts and terminated over 100 websites. More than 1,000 YouTube propaganda videos have also been removed.
The websites were taken down through DDoS (distributed denial of service) attacks, which involve directing traffic from hundreds of thousands of compromised computers at the same time so that the traffic overwhelms a website, says Caroline Baylon, a Research Associate in Cyber Security at the London-based Royal United Services Institute. She calls the attack a "very basic tactic but highly effective".
GhostSec also claims that its strong female presence helps it take down extremist Twitter accounts, as women are more adept at gaining the confidence of online jihadis. "We feel that females have a critical role in these operations due to their ability to extract information from the enemy without using force," says DigitaShadow, explaining that female hackers "serve as spies and are embedded with the enemy to gain sensitive information".
‘Flat-out lie’: Cruz calls McConnell a liar on Senate floor. An extraordinary scene unfolded on the Senate floor Friday as Republican Sen. Ted Cruz bluntly accused Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of lying and said he's running the Senate like his Democratic predecessor.
The charges from the Texas senator and GOP presidential candidate were a rare departure from the Senate's usual staid decorum, even for a politician famous for his fiery speeches.
At issue were assurances Cruz claimed McConnell, R-Ky., had given that there was no deal to allow a vote to renew the federal Export-Import Bank -- a little-known federal agency that has become a rallying cry for conservatives. Cruz rose to deliver his remarks moments after McConnell had lined up a vote on the bank.
"It saddens me to say this. I sat in my office, I told my staff the majority leader looked me in the eye and looked 54 Republicans in the eye. I cannot believe he would tell a flat-out lie, and I voted based on those assurances that he made to each and every one of us," Cruz said.
"What we just saw today was an absolute demonstration that not only what he told every Republican senator, but what he told the press over and over and over again, was a simple lie."
Reports had emerged earlier this year that McConnell privately pledged a vote on the Ex-Im Bank, in exchange for winning support on President Obama's trade agenda. Cruz says he was assured at the time there was no deal.
He also charged that the Senate under Republican control is no different from when Harry Reid of Nevada ran the chamber and was accused by the GOP of shutting down debate and limiting amendments.
"Now the Republican leader is behaving like the senior senator from Nevada," Cruz complained. He also derided an announcement from McConnell that the Senate will vote Sunday to repeal Obama's health care law, calling it "an empty show vote" and "exercise in meaningless political theater" because the legislation will inevitably fail to get the 60 votes needed to advance.
"We keep winning elections and then we keep getting leaders who don't do anything they promised," Cruz said.
The majority leader was not on the Senate floor when Cruz issued his attack, and ignored reporters who tried to ask him about it in the Capitol's hallways. A spokesman said McConnell would have no response.
McConnell and Cruz have never had a thriving relationship. The new majority leader's allies earlier this year derided Cruz's Senate record, complaining that he often speaks out but has skipped important developments.
Some close to McConnell call Cruz, "Mr. 1 percent," referring to his share of support in the crowded race for the GOP presidential nomination. Recent polls have him a few points higher among more than a dozen contenders.
Cruz has grown increasingly outspoken about his contempt for McConnell and other Republicans, using his newly published book, "A Time for Truth," to attack his colleagues on various fronts and accuse them of failing to stand up for their principles.
It is rare for a senator to launch such a heated attack on the floor. Senate rules say, "No Senator in debate shall, directly or indirectly, by any form of words impute to another Senator or to other Senators any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming a Senator."
Fox News' Chad Pergram and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Senior Senate Republicans Rebuke Cruz After He Criticizes McConnell. Senior Senate Republicans lined up Sunday to rebuke Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz for harshly criticizing Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, an extraordinary display of intraparty division played out live on the Senate floor.
As the Senate met for a rare Sunday session, Sens. Orrin Hatch of Utah, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and John Cornyn of Texas each rose to counter a stunning floor speech Cruz gave on Friday accusing McConnell, R-Ky., of lying.
None of them mentioned Cruz by name but the target of their remarks could not have been clearer. The drama came as the Senate defeated a procedural vote to repeal President Barack Obama's health care law and took a step toward reviving the federal Export-Import Bank, both amendments on a must-pass highway bill.
"Squabbling and sanctimony may be tolerated in other venues and perhaps on the campaign trail, but they have no place among colleagues in the United States Senate," said Hatch, the Senate's president pro tempore. Cruz is running for president.
"The Senate floor has even become a place where senators have singled out colleagues by name to attack them in personal terms, to impugn their character, in blatant disregard for Senate rules," Hatch said. "Such misuses of the Senate floor must not be tolerated."
After Hatch spoke, Cruz rose to defend himself for making the accusation that McConnell had lied when he denied striking a deal to allow the vote to revive the Export-Import Bank.
He said he agreed with Hatch's calls for civility but declared, "Speaking the truth about actions is entirely consistent with civility."
And far from backing down, Cruz reiterated his complaint about McConnell. "My saying so may be uncomfortable but it is a simple fact, entirely consistent with decorum, and no member of this body has disputed that promise was made and that promise was broken."
Around 20 senators of both parties were on the floor watching some of the speeches. Cruz's floor speech Friday had brought nearly unheard-of drama and discord to the Senate floor. But the responses to it were just as remarkable, as senior Republicans united to take down a junior colleague of their own party who poses a growing threat to their attempts to show voters that Republicans can govern.
No senator rose to Cruz's defense. And by voice vote, the Senate defeated an attempt by Cruz to overturn a ruling made Friday that blocked him from offering an amendment related to Iran, with senators refusing even to agree to his routine request for a roll-call vote.
Cruz's behavior was the latest example of a Republican presidential candidate causing problems for McConnell. In May, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., infuriated fellow Republicans when he forced the temporary expiration of the Patriot Act when it was up for renewal. Some of Hatch's remarks seemed to apply to him as well.
For his part, McConnell said that given support for the Export-Import Bank, despite his own opposition no "special deal" was needed to bring it to a vote.
The little-known bank is a federal agency that helps foreign customers to buy U.S. goods. Conservatives oppose it as corporate welfare and are trying to end it. They won an early round, when congressional inaction allowed the bank to expire June 30 for the first time in 81 years.
But on Sunday, senators voted, 67-26, to advance legislation to revive the bank across a procedural hurdle, making it likely that it will be added to the highway bill.
On a separate vote, legislation to repeal Obama's health care law failed to advance over a procedural hurdle. Sixty votes were needed but the total was 49-43.
The action came as the Senate tries to complete work on the highway bill ahead of a July 31 deadline. If Congress doesn't act by then, states will lose money for highway and transit projects in the middle of the summer construction season.
With the Export-Import Bank likely added, the highway legislation faces an uncertain future in the House, where there's strong opposition to the bank as well as to the underlying highway measure.
The Senate's version of the highway bill, which is on track to pass later in the week, sets policy and authorizes transportation programs for six years, though with funding for only three of those years.
The House has passed a five-month extension of transportation programs without the Export-Import Bank included, and House leaders of both parties are reluctant to take up the Senate's version.
Complicating matters, Congress is entering its final days of legislative work before its annual August vacation, raising the prospect of unpredictable last-minute maneuvers to resolve the disputes on the highway bill and the Export-Import Bank.
Turkey Launches Bombing Campaign Against ISIS, PKK Bases. Turkey began bombing campaigns over Iraq and Syria and arrested hundreds of people suspected of having ties to the Islamic State, also known ISIS. Turkey also is targeting more than the Islamic State. Turkish fighter jets carried out twin bomb attacks on Kurdish militants in northern Iraq and Islamic State positions in Syria as fighting continues to escalate in the troubled region. The strikes targeted ISIS bases and strongholds belonging to the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), whose affiliates have been effective in battling the Islamic State group. It is the first since 2013 that Turkish airstrikes have hit PKK militants, breaking the peace deal between the Turkish government and the US designated terror group. The strikes further complicate the US-led war against the extremists, which has relied on Kurdish ground forces, particularly the YPG and Peshmerga, in making gains in Iraq and Syria.
A spokesman in Iraq for the Kurdistan Workers' Party (known as the PKK), said the strikes spelled the end of a peace deal announced in 2013. 'Turkey has basically ended the ceasefire,' the PKK's Zagros Hiwa said. The first wave of strikes launched overnight did not appear to cause casualties.' The PKK is considered a terrorist organisation by Ankara and its allies including American. It has been fighting Turkey for autonomy since 1984. Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu announced a few hours later that he had ordered 'a third wave' of raids against the IS in Syria and a 'second wave' of strikes against the PKK in northern Iraq - which were ongoing. The decision to finally join the coalition and actively attack ISIS comes after mounting pressure from the international community, reaching boiling point after the Suruc suicide bomb attack. 'Turkey's operations will, if needed, continue until the terror organisations' command centres, all locations where they plan (attacks) against Turkey and all depots used to store arms to be used against Turkey are destroyed,' Mr Davutoglu said.
The government statement said the first strikes targeted seven areas including PKK bases in the Qandil mountains.
The statement did not detail Islamic State targets but described the airstrikes in both Syria and Iraq as being 'effective'.
Turkey's military also shelled IS and PKK positions in Syria from across the Turkish border, the government said.
It vowed to press ahead with operations against the PKK and IS, insisting it was 'determined to take all steps to ensure peace and security for our people'.
US warplanes being given permission for the first time to fly from a major southern Turkish base at Incirlik.
And Turkey's own F-16 fighter jets attacked jihadi positions inside Syria and hit three targets, killing nine militants.
The overnight bombing raids are the first by the Turkish air force on IS since the Islamists began their advance across Iraq and Syria in 2013, seizing control of swathes of territory right up to the Turkish border.
Prime minister Ahmet Davutoglu said the air strikes completely destroyed their targets.
The moves come as activists claimed today that two Kurdish held checkpoints in Tel Abyad were targeted by ISIS suicide bombers.
But a dramatic change appeared to have been triggered following Monday's attack by a suspected IS suicide bomber that killed 32 anti-IS activists in the southern Turkish border city of Suruc.
Tensions increased further after IS militants fired at a Turkish border position in Kilis last Thursday, killing a soldier and wounding two others security members.
rom British agents at dawn yesterday.
Almost 300 suspects were arrested in the crackdown in the Turkish city that has become the gateway for UK citizens seeking to join the terror group.
MI6 is said to have provided some of the intelligence used for the raids at 140 addresses by 5,000 police. Telephone intercepts were crucial in pinpointing the support network for Britons travelling to Syria and Iraq.
Seized documents and laptops are said to link IS recruiters of European jihadis to some of the addresses which had been used to house men and women during their transit to join the group.
Target: The Turkish Prime Minister confirms that three F-16 fighter jets targeted two ISIS command posts and an assembly point yesterday morning
Armed: Turkish armed forces patrol Turkey's borderline, fearful of a reprisal attack from the jihadis
Armed vehicles patrol the main road near the town of Kilis, where one Turkish soldier was killed recently
Turkey's hardened stance against ISIS has been welcomed by the international community.
Huckabee: Obama marching Israel to 'door of the oven'. resident Barack Obama is marching Israelis to "the door of the oven" by agreeing to the Iran nuclear deal, Mike Huckabee said Sunday.
The Republican presidential candidate invoked the Holocaust in an interview with Breitbart News.
"This president's foreign policy is the most feckless in American history. It is so naive that he would trust the Iranians. By doing so, he will take the Israelis and march them to the door of the oven," Huckabee said.
He continued: "This is the most idiotic thing, this Iran deal. It should be rejected by both Democrats and Republicans in Congress and by the American people. I read the whole deal. We gave away the whole store. It's got to be stopped."
Asked to elaborate on Huckabee's "door of the oven" remark, campaign spokeswoman Alice Stewart told CNN that "the comment speaks for itself."
Huckabee's campaign highlighted the comment later Sunday on Twitter.
Huckabee and other GOP presidential candidates have pledged to undo the deal, which the United States and five other world powers struck with Iran this month after weeks of negotiations in Vienna.
The United States would lift its economic sanctions in exchange for Tehran curbing its large-scale nuclear capabilities and allowing international inspections.
Obama has defended the deal in news conferences, and Secretary of State John Kerry sparred with Senate Republicans over it during a committee hearing. The White House needs 34 out of 100 senators to support the deal to keep its implementation from being blocked.
Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz compared Huckabee's comments to questioning whether Obama is an American.
"This rhetoric, while commonplace in today's Republican presidential primary, has no place in American politics," she said in a statement. "Cavalier analogies to the Holocaust are unacceptable. Mike Huckabee must apologize to the Jewish community and to the American people for this grossly irresponsible statement."
Proposed Raise for Fast-Food Employees Divides Low-Wage Workers. Rebecca Cornick cheerfully chopped 120 heads of lettuce, wiped tables and rang up some Baconators, fries and chicken club sandwiches. For most of her customers, it was just another afternoon at a Wendy’s restaurant in the East New York section of Brooklyn. Not for Ms. Cornick. She was celebrating.
It was Thursday, one day after a state panel recommended that the minimum wage for fast-food workers be raised to $15 an hour, and Ms. Cornick was savoring congratulations from some regulars and the knowledge that soon, very soon, she would have more money to pay her bills.
But her jubilation dimmed after her shift, as soon as she stepped onto the street. On her stretch of Pennsylvania Avenue, the low-wage workers outside the fast-food industry will remain untouched by the pay increase. That includes her 24-year-old granddaughter, who earns minimum wage — $8.75 an hour — at a day care center two blocks from Wendy’s.
Fast-food workers and supporters gathered on Wednesday in Manhattan to watch a live video of the wage board’s decision. The governor hailed it as an example of New York’s progressiveness.New York Plans $15-an-Hour Minimum Wage for Fast Food WorkersJULY 22, 2015
“It’s heartbreaking,” Ms. Cornick, 61, said. “So many people are desperate.”
Advocates for workers across the country cheered last week when New York became the first state to recommend a $15-an-hour minimum wage specifically for fast-food workers. But in New York City, the decision has created a stark new divide between low-wage workers who will receive the boost in their paychecks and those who will not.
About 50,000 fast-food workers in New York City are expected to benefit from the wage increase, according to James Parrott, the chief economist at the Fiscal Policy Institute, a nonprofit research group. But about 1.25 million workers who earn less than $15 an hour do not work for fast-food chains and will not benefit, he said. In opposing the raise, fast-food companies also point to that gap, arguing that they will be unfairly required to increase wages while other businesses will not.
Near the bustling corner of Pennsylvania Avenue and Linden Boulevard, that chasm is impossible to ignore.
Employees at the Checkers, the Denny’s, the Wendy’s and the Popeyes — fast-food chains with 30 or more restaurants nationally — will see their minimum wage increase to $10.50 in December, to $12 in 2016 and, gradually, to $15 in 2018, according to the panel’s recommendations, which are expected to be put into effect by an order of the state’s acting commissioner of labor.
But minimum-wage employees at the Home Furnishings Depot, at the mom-and-pop Jamaican eatery and at the gas stations and the bodegas will see their wages go up to $9 an hour in December, as a result of a previous accord, and remain there, unless the political stalemate in Albany over increasing the minimum wage statewide is broken.
Eve George, 29, isn’t holding her breath. She works at the Home Furnishings Depot, just a block from Wendy’s, and has been earning minimum wage for four years.
“As much as I would like it,” Ms. George said of a statewide increase, “I don’t think it’s happening for the rest of us.”
Advocates for low-wage workers are more optimistic, saying they believe the new mandate will spur pay raises in other sectors. Stephanie Luce, a professor of labor studies at the City University of New York, said the decision might lead “to pressure for the state to raise the minimum wage statewide” and inspire employees in other industries to rally for better pay. And for those who are getting the raise, Ms. Luce said, “the increased wages are definitely going to have a big impact in terms of people’s quality of life.”
Ms. Cornick was already imagining what it would be like to pay her rent on time, to have enough food in the refrigerator, to put money aside to buy life insurance.
“I’m giddy with happiness,” said Ms. Cornick, who has worked for Wendy’s for nine years and now earns $9 an hour.
But her celebration was tempered by worry for her granddaughter, Taniqua Hayes. The two share an apartment. But now the grandmother is moving forward, while the granddaughter feels left behind.
Ms. Hayes said she was thrilled for her grandmother, who participated in several fast-food protests and strikes.
But she feared that she would never get ahead on $8.75 an hour. “I was a little disappointed,” Ms. Hayes said of how she felt when her grandmother explained that the $15-an-hour mandate would apply only to fast-food workers.
Now, for the first time, Ms. Hayes and her colleagues at the day care center have begun looking wistfully at the big chain restaurants down the street. Maybe flipping burgers might get them closer to their dreams.
“A job is a job, right?” Ms. Hayes said. “As long as it pays good money.” Rachel Swarms of the New York Times wrote this portion of the article. Email: swarns@nytimes.com Twitter: @rachelswarns
Regardless of it all today, please stay in touch!
