51 - 50 JOHN MCCAIN RETURNS TO VOTE FOR REPEAL OF OBAMACARE (HISTORY)

51 - 50 JOHN MCCAIN RETURNS TO VOTE FOR REPEAL OF OBAMACARE (HISTORY):

US SENATE MAJORITY VOTES TO CLEAR TEST VOTE FOR FLOOR DEBATES.

AUTHENTIC AFFORDABLE UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS POSSIBLE.

NOT TAXES AND POPULATION CONTROL DISGUISED AS UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE BUT AUTHENTIC UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE.

GOP LEADERS MUST KEEP THEIR HEALTH CARE CAMPAIGN PROMISE TO AMERICAN VOTERS WHO GAVE THEM CONGRESS AND THE WHITE HOUSE.


Sources: Fox News, Euro News, Youtube


***** Senate health bill clears test vote, aided by McCain


Senate Republicans on Tuesday resuscitated their health care legislation for now, narrowly clearing it past a key hurdle with the help of Sen. John McCain’s dramatic return to the chamber for the first time since his brain cancer diagnosis.

The Senate voted 51-50 to start debate, with Vice President Pence casting the tie-breaker. The procedural vote once again brings the ObamaCare overhaul legislation back from the brink of collapse, after intense pressure from President Trump who had demanded senators skip recess until they act on health care.

The bill still faces a tough road ahead. But it was a heavy lift just to get to this point.

No Democrats supported the motion, leaving Republicans to corral the necessary 50 votes. They got exactly that, requiring Pence to break the tie, for the fifth time under the Trump administration.

The airtight vote made McCain’s return all the more significant, as the measure could not have advanced without him.

The result was kept in suspense for a while. Sens. Susan Collins, of Maine, and Lisa Murkowski, of Alaska, voted no from the start. Several other Republican senators then delayed casting their vote, with no wiggle room left for additional defections on the GOP side.

Applause then broke out as McCain entered the chamber, pointing at his colleagues and shaking hands. As he joined, the last GOP holdout, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., voted with the Arizona senator to start debate.

Trump applauded the development in a statement, urging the Senate to follow through:

"I applaud the Senate for taking a giant step to end the Obamacare nightmare. As this vote shows, inaction is not an option, and now the legislative process can move forward as intended to produce a bill that lowers costs and increases options for all Americans. The Senate must now pass a bill and get it to my desk so we can finally end the Obamacare disaster once and for all."

Tuesday’s procedural vote kicks off what is likely to be another intense round of debate on health care, in which senators are sure to propose numerous changes to the plan – which could either boost or doom its chances. If a bill passes, it would still have to be reconciled with the House version.

McCain warned colleagues after the test vote that he would not support the bare-bones, “shell” bill in its current form as he urged lawmakers from both parties to reach across the aisle.

“We’re getting nothing done my friends,” McCain said from the floor, adding “something has to be done” on health care.

As the test vote began, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., urged his Republican colleagues to follow through on campaign promises to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act.

“We have a duty to act. … The president is ready with his pen,” he said. “We can’t let this moment slip by.”

Moments earlier, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., beseeched Republicans to “turn back.”

“We know the ACA is not perfect. But we also know what you’ve proposed is much worse,” he said.

A rowdy group of protesters also interrupted the start of proceedings, chanting, “kill the bill, don’t kill us” and “shame.”

For their part, Democrats uniformly oppose the effort to tear down President Barack Obama's signature legislative achievement. Republicans control the chamber 52-48, meaning they could afford to lose just two Republicans with McCain around.

Trump had kept up the pressure on GOP lawmakers, tweeting that "After 7 years of talking, we will soon see whether or not Republicans are willing to step up to the plate!" He added: "ObamaCare is torturing the American People. The Democrats have fooled the people long enough. Repeal or Repeal & Replace! I have pen in hand."

McConnell's original bill would abolish much of Obama's law, eliminating its tax penalties on people not buying policies, cutting Medicaid, eliminating its tax boosts on medical companies and providing less generous health care subsidies for consumers. But at least a dozen GOP senators have openly said they oppose or criticized the measure, which McConnell revised as he's hunted Republican support.

For the time being, he won over Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who backed starting debate. He said McConnell told him the Senate would debate Paul's proposal to scuttle much of Obama's law and give Congress two years to enact a replacement -- an amendment that seemed certain to lose.

Moderates also were seeking additional money for states that would be hurt by cuts in Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor, the disabled and nursing home patients. Conservatives wanted a vote on a proposal by Ted Cruz, R-Texas, letting insurers offer bare-bones policies with low premiums, which would be illegal under Obama's law.

With leaders still struggling to line up enough votes to approve a wide-ranging overhaul of Obama's law, there was talk of trying to pass a narrow bill -- details still unclear -- so House-Senate bargainers could craft a compromise.

TRUMP & HILLARY'S FIRST DEBATE: WHO WON? (HIGHLIGHTS)

TRUMP & HILLARY'S FIRST DEBATE: WHO WON?

HIGHLIGHTS & FACT-CHECKING

Sources: CNN, Politifact, Youtube


**** Clinton debate fact-checks (a running collection)


Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump faced off in the first presidential debate tonight, hitting familiar notes on the economy, national security and each other’s records.

The two candidates traded attacks that were largely accurate, but they had some trouble with facts when it came to their own records.



Trump repeated false claims that he opposed the war in Iraq and that Clinton’s 2008 campaign started the birther movement. Clinton overstated when she said Trump doesn’t pay federal income tax and understated her own position on trade deals.

Here are 33 claims from Clinton and Trump, fact-checked.

Trump: "They're using our country as a piggy bank to rebuild China."

Earlier this year, Trump claimed that "we’ve rebuilt China." This is an overly simplistic description of the economic relationship between the two countries.

Experts told us China’s rapid economic growth can be largely attributed to its in-house reforms and inclusion in global trade. The United States can take some, but certainly not all, of the credit for the latter. We rated Trump’s claim Half True.

Clinton: Trump’s tax plan would deliver "the biggest tax cuts for the top percent of the people in this country."

This was accurate for Trump’s old tax plan. The top 0.1 percent — those making more than $3.6 million per year — would receive 18 percent of the tax cuts under Trump’s proposal, while the bottom 60 percent will enjoy only 16.4 percent of the cuts.

Clinton: "He started his business with $14 million, borrowed from his father."

Clinton is likely referring to a recent Wall Street Journal report on a 1985 casino-license disclosure. It shows that Trump owed his father and his father’s business about $14 million at the time.

Trump: "My father gave me a very small loan in 1975, and I built it into a company that's worth many, many billions of dollars, with some of the greatest assets in the world."

Since Trump has yet to release his tax returns, it’s hard to gauge just how much money Trump started with and how much he has now.

The "very small loan" Trump was referring to was $1 million from Trump’s father, Fred, to finance his Grand Hyatt hotel in 1978. (At this point, Donald Trump was already president of his father’s real estate company.) But Fred Trump made out many other loans to his son until his death in 1999, including a $70 million construction loan for the Grand Hyatt and a $3.5 million casino chip loan to bail out Trump’s struggling gaming empire, the Washington Post Fact-Checker reported.

Clinton: "In fact, Donald was one of the people who rooted for the housing crisis. He said, back in 2006, ‘Gee, I hope it does collapse, because then I can go in and buy some and make some money.’ Well, it did collapse."

We rated this claim Mostly True. While Trump did not welcome the tragedy of foreclosures for millions of American, he did speak optimistically about the opportunities created for an investor such as himself. Clinton’s statement leaves out that nuance, but in large measure, it matches Trump’s words.

Clinton: "Independent experts have looked at what I've proposed and looked at what Donald's proposed, and basically they've said this, that if his tax plan, which would blow up the debt by over $5 trillion."

According to the free-market oriented Tax Foundation, Trump’s revised tax plan would reduce federal revenue between $4.4 trillion and $5.9 trillion on a static basis or $2.6 trillion to $3.9 trillion. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated that Trump’s plan would add $5.3 trillion.

Clinton’s claim is True.

Trump: "I did not" say that climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese.

Trump did say this in a tweet four years ago. Though he’s since described the tweet as a "joke" and hasn’t pushed the exact theory since, he has repeatedly called climate change a "hoax" in speeches, tweets and media appearances. And he has said as recently as Jan. 18, 2016, that action on climate change "is done for the benefit of China."

We rated his statement Mostly False.

Trump: The Obama administration "has doubled" the national debt in eight years.

PolitiFact Virginia rated a previous version of this claim Half True. While Trump’s figure is correct, he leaves out some key points.

First, Obama is not the only one responsible for the added debt; Congress has to approve as well. Second, the recession that began before Obama took office in 2009 cut government revenues and led to some of the higher debt incurred during the president’s term.

Clinton: "I voted for" some trade deals. "The biggest one, a multinational one known as CAFTA, I voted against."

Clinton has zig-zagged on trade over the years. Out of the 10 trade deals Clinton could have voted on, she voted in favor of six and against two (CAFTA and the Trade Act of 2002). On two other deals (with Peru and Jordan), she didn’t vote but did vouch for them.

Trump: "You go to New England, you go to Ohio, Pennsylvania, you go anywhere you want, Secretary Clinton, and you will see devastation where manufacturing is down 30, 40, sometimes 50 percent."

Trump once accurately said Pennsylvania has lost 35 percent of its manufacturing jobs since 2001. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Pennsylvania lost nearly 300,000 manufacturing jobs since January 2001, decreasing from 856,200 to 564,900 in the span of 15 years. That correlates with a 34 percent decrease in jobs lost.

Trump: "You called (the Trans-Pacific Partnership) the gold standard of trade deals. You said it's the finest deal you've ever seen."

This is Mostly True. Clinton used those words in 2012 when discussing TPP in Australia. It’s worth noting that at this point the deal was still under negotiation and because that was done behind closed doors, there’s no way to know how much it changed. Before the final version came out, she advocated more of a wait-and-see approach.

Trump: "Now, look, we have the worst revival of an economy since the Great Depression."

The accuracy of this claim depends on what you are measuring. Looking at GDP growth, Trump is right. But looking at the employment picture, the 2001 recovery was worse.

Trump: "You will learn more about Donald Trump by going down to the Federal Election Commission" to see the financial disclosure form than by looking at tax returns.

The financial disclosure form Trump is referring to is legally required and extensive. But we found little evidence to support Trump’s argument that the financial disclosure allows observers to "learn more" than they would from a tax form. Tax filings include additional financial information that are not found on other financial disclosures.

His claim rates False.

Clinton: "He's paid nothing in federal taxes, because the only years that anybody's ever seen were a couple of years when he had to turn them over to state authorities when he was trying to get a casino license, and they showed he didn't pay any federal income tax."

This is Mostly False. The records cover five years of returns. They show Trump didn't pay income taxes in two years — 1978 and 1979. But he did pay taxes in 1975, 1976 and 1977.

Clinton: "You've taken business bankruptcy six times."

This is accurate. Trump declared four times within two years in the 1990s, once more in 2004 and once more in 2009. But experts told us Trump shouldn’t bear all the responsibility, as Clinton’s wording suggests, as the majority of bankruptcies happened as the overall casino industry struggled.

Clinton: "You even at one time suggested that you would try to negotiate down the national debt of the United States."

In two separate interviews in May, Trump suggested that he could do something to negotiate federal debt through "discounting" and that he would "refinance debt" and "buy back debt on — at a discount." But he backtracked after criticism, saying his words had been misinterpreted. We rated Clinton’s claim Mostly True.

Clinton: "The gun epidemic is the leading cause of death of young African-American men, more than the next nine causes put together."

As long as you define "young" as being between the ages of 15 and 24, Clinton’s statement is True, according to CDC data.

Trump: "In Chicago, they've had thousands of shootings, thousands since January 1st. Thousands of shootings."

This is True. According to media reports and gun violence experts, there have been more than 3,000 shooting victims in Chicago so far this year.

Clinton: "It's just a fact that if you're a young African-American man and you do the same thing as a young white man, you are more likely to be arrested, charged, convicted, and incarcerated."

The research suggests that when you compare what happens to black and whites who are engaging in the same illegal activity and have the same criminal history, African Americans are more likely to be arrested, more likely to face tougher charges, and more likely to receive longer sentences than their caucasian counterparts. This claim is True.

Trump: "I do want to bring up the fact that you were the one that brought up the words superpredator about young black youth."

This is Mostly True. While supporting her husband’s 1994 crime legislation, Clinton did use the term "superpredator" in reference to "gangs of kids." She did not explicitly say African-American youth, but the context of her speech and her subsequent apology decades later suggests it was a reasonable inference.

Trump: Top Clinton advisors "were pressing" birther movement stories "very hard."

Trump invoked Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal and 2008 campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle as evidence.

A reporter has claimed Blumenthal pushed the birther story to him in the heat of the Democratic primary that year. But Blumenthal denies it, and the reporter acknowledged he has nothing in writing. Doyle suggested on CNN that the campaign fired a volunteer for forwarding an email that promoted the "conspiracy" but later clarified that the conspiracy was about Obama’s religion, not birthplace.

We rated Trump's claim False.

Clinton: "Donald started his career back in 1973 being sued by the Justice Department for racial discrimination because he would not rent apartments in one of his developments to African-Americans."

This is True. The government in 1973 accused Trump, his father and Trump Management of violating the Fair Housing Act, part of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. The case alleged Trump’s realty company discriminated against non-white tenants and potential tenants at numerous apartment complexes.

Trump: "I settled that lawsuit with no admission of guilt."

This is also accurate. Trump and the government settled the claim in 1975, and his company agreed to train employees to comply with housing discrimination requirements. Trump never admitted guilt in the case.

Clinton: "I was so shocked when Donald publicly invited Putin to hack into Americans. That is just unacceptable."

We rated this claim Half True. At a press conference in Florida, Trump said he hoped Russia was able to find "the 30,000 emails that are missing." This was a reference to Clinton’s emails, not Americans’ emails more broadly. Trump later said he was being sarcastic.

Trump: "I've been saying for a long time, and I think you'll agree, because I said it to you once, had we taken the oil -- and we should have taken the oil -- ISIS would not have been able to form either, because the oil was their primary source of income."

Trump is right that he’s been floating this proposal for a long time, and that oil is a big revenue source for the terrorist group. But when we looked at whether the United States should take the oil, experts told us the idea is not only an endorsement of imperialism, but it’s nonsensical and illegal with massive practical challenges.

Clinton: "He actually advocated for the actions we took in Libya and urged that Gadhafi be taken out, after actually doing some business with him one time."

Clinton’s claim is largely accurate. We actually didn’t find that many comments from Trump about Libya. But when he did speak, he was emphatic. In 2011, before the first bombing runs, Trump said, "We should go in, we should stop this guy."

And Trump himself has acknowledged that he leased land to Gadhafi when the Libyan leader visited New York for a United Nations meeting in 2009.

Trump: "I'm all for NATO. But I said they have to focus on terror, also. And they're going to do that. And that was — believe me — I'm sure I'm not going to get credit for it — but that was largely because of what I was saying and my criticism of NATO."

This is False. The change he referred to was the creation of a new intelligence post — an incremental change in how the alliance addresses terrorism. It’s been engaging in counter-terrorism measures for more than 30 years.

Trump: "I did not support the war in Iraq. ...The record shows that I’m right."

The record shows the \opposite. Trump did not comment much on the invasion at the time, and was vague when he did it.

In 2002, asked if America should go to war, he said, "I guess so." Less than three months before the invasion, Trump said the president should be more focused on the economy, but he didn’t specifically speak against launching an attack. He didn’t voice full-throated opposition until almost a year and a half after the invasion. We rate this claim False.

Clinton: "John Kerry and President Obama got a deal that put a lid on Iran's nuclear program without firing a single shot."

If you define "got a lid" as "keep in check," then Clinton has a plausible case. Though there are a lot of uncertainties about how well the accord will hold up, experts said the deal is both effective and close to the best outcome the United States could have achieved. Clinton’s claim is Mostly True.

Trump: "We defend Japan, we defend Germany, we defend South Korea, we defend Saudi Arabia, we defend countries. They do not pay us."

We’ve looked into his claim about South Korea before (in 2016 and in 2011). It’s not accurate. Currently, South Korea pays well over $800 million annually to support the United States’ troop presence.

Trump: "China is totally powerful as it relates to North Korea."

During a Republican primary debate, Trump claimed China has "total control" over North Korea. That’s Mostly False. Though China does have significant economic ties to North Korea, Trump is exaggerating the amount of leverage it has. The fact that North Korea conducted a nuclear test over the strenuous objections of China suggests that Beijing lacks anything approaching "total control" over North Korea.

Trump: The Obama administration’s payment to Iran was "one of the great giveaways of all time, of all time, including $400 million in cash. Nobody's ever seen that before. That turned out to be wrong. It was actually $1.7 billion in cash, obviously, I guess for the hostages. It certainly looks that way."

We rated a previous claim from Trump — that the $400 million was "ransom" — Mostly False. On the same day as several American prisoners were released, the United States paid Iran $400 million. But experts told us this wasn’t ransom.

Iran had a legitimate claim to the money,because the United States owed it to Iran as part of a resolution to a decades-long financial dispute. It’s unclear whether the prisoner and financial disputes were connected in just the final hours of the prisoner transfer or if there was more advance coordination.

Clinton: "This is a man who has called women pigs, slobs and dogs, and someone who has said pregnancy is an inconvenience to employers."

This is accurate. Trump used those exact words to describe Rosie O’Donnell, New York Times columnist Gail Collins and Huffington Post founder Arianna Huffington. He also called a lawyer who had to pump breast milk "disgusting."

In a 2004 interview with NBC’s dateline, Trump said this about pregnant women: "The fact is it is an inconvenience for a person that is running a business."

HILLARY TO ADDRESS CHARLOTTE PROTESTERS (LAMONT SCOTT VIDEO)

HILLARY TO VISIT CHARLOTTE; CALLS FOR RELEASE OF LAMONT'S DEATH VIDEO:

PRAY FOR LAMONT SCOTT'S FAMILY.

PRAY FOR OUR LEADERS AND THE POLICE.

PRAY FOR HEALING AND PEACE.

Sources: Charlotte Observer, Fox News, YouTube

**** Hillary to visit Charlotte, urges release of police video

Hillary Clinton said Friday that the police video of the fatal shooting of a black man by Charlotte police should be released immediately as she prepared to make a pre-debate visit to the embattled North Carolina city.

Clinton wrote on Twitter that authorities in Charlotte should release the police video of the Keith Lamont Scott shooting "without delay. We must ensure justice & work to bridge divides."

The Democratic presidential nominee's campaign said she would travel to Charlotte on Sunday, one day before her first high-profile debate with Republican Donald Trump. Her campaign did not immediately release details of her visit to Charlotte, where protests have broken out in the aftermath of the shooting.

A video recorded by Scott's wife was released Friday by his family and does not indicate whether Scott had a gun. Police have said he was armed, but witnesses have said he held only a book.

leading up to the debate, both Clinton and Trump have been confronted with questions about police violence after the North Carolina shooting and a separate incident in Tulsa, Oklahoma, where a white police officer was charged with manslaughter in the fatal shooting of an unarmed black man whose vehicle had broken down in the middle of the street.

Clinton said Wednesday that the shootings had added two more names "to a long list of African-Americans killed by police officers. It's unbearable and it needs to become intolerable."

TRUMP CHALLENGES SANDERS TO DEBATE ON WOMEN'S HEALTH; HILLARY DECLINES

@BernieSanders

TRUMP CHALLENGES SANDERS TO DEBATE ON WOMEN'S HEALTH; HILLARY DECLINES

SANDERS ACCEPTS.

TRUMP PLEDGES ALL DONATIONS FROM THIS DEBATE TO WOMEN'S ORGANIZATIONS.

Sources:  CNN, MSNBC, Daily Mail, Reuters, YouTube

Highlights:

Just ahead of the June 7th California primary, 2016 presumptive GOP nominee Donald J. Trump has challenged Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton's Democrat opponent, to a debate on the issue of Women's Health.

According to news reports Sanders has wisely accepted this politically electrifying challenge.

However strangely enough Hillary Clinton has declined to participate.

Trump has pledged all donations raised for this debate to Women's Health Organizations.

Choosing to debate Sanders on the issue of Women's Health can only help Trump with 2016 Women voters, it certainly won't hurt.

****** Bernie Sanders accepts Donald Trump’s debate challenge

Over the course of the Democratic presidential race, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders faced off in 9 debates and 13 forums, each of which were televised nationally. 

When Sanders recently pushed for yet another showdown – this time, for some reason, on Fox News – Clinton surprised no one by declining. The Democratic frontrunner, after all, is gearing up for the general election.

But what about a debate featuring Sanders and that other presidential candidate?

In the latest twist to this unpredictable 2016 presidential race, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders independently agreed Wednesday night to debate each other.

On ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Trump was asked if he would consider holding a debate with Sanders.

“Yes, I am,” the presumptive Republican nominee replied. “How much is he going to pay me? If I debated him, we would have such high ratings, I think I should take that money and give it to charity.”

Soon after, Sanders published a tweet that said, “Game On. I look forward to debating Donald Trump in California before the June 7th primary.”

It’s probably worth pausing to note this gathering seems unlikely. Trump makes all kinds of odd comments, especially during talk-show appearances, and it’s very difficult to know when he’s being serious given how little he thinks things through. I don’t doubt that Sanders is sincere about his interest in such a debate, but Trump may not be.

Or maybe he is. It’s a bizarre year, and unlike most recent election cycles, it’s generally a good idea to expect the unexpected.

In case it’s not obvious, there’s no precedent for anything like this in modern American history. After a major-party candidate wraps up his party’s nomination, he’s always shifted his attention to the general election, not debating the second-place candidate in the other party who’s effectively mathematically eliminated from contention.

Of course, there’s also no precedent for a major party nominating a nativist reality-show personality to be president of the United States, so anything’s possible.

The question, though, is what the candidates would hope to gain from such an event. For Sanders, a debate like this might mean a high-profile platform for his ideas – which was originally the point of his presidential candidacy – and an opportunity to participate in an event in which Hillary Clinton was attacked from both the left and the right at the same time.

For Trump, this rationale for such a debate would be more complicated. He has literally no incentive whatsoever to criticize Sanders, which means the Republican would probably use this opportunity to agree with the senator as much as possible, downplay their differences, make some appeals to some of Sanders’ most ardent supporters, and tell the Vermonter how unfairly he’s been treated, all while encouraging him to run as an independent.

In other words, for Trump, this debate, were it to happen, would be a historic opportunity to use Sanders to move Trump closer to the Oval Office.

TRUMP vs TED CRUZ, WHO'S LYING? (NATIONAL ENQUIRER STORY)

TRUMP vs TED CRUZ, WHO'S LYING? (NATIONAL ENQUIRER STORY)

REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED TO BEN CARSON IN IOWA.

CRUZ APPEARS TO BE VERY VINDICTIVE

Sources: ABC News, Fox News, Law Newz, National Enquirer, NY Times, Salon, Stefan Molyneaux, YouTube

He said, He said.

As it relates to a story published recently by the National Enquirer regarding U.S. Senator Ted Cruz engaging in alleged extramarital affairs with at least 5 different women, many inquiring minds are no longer just taking Cruz's word that his nemesis planted the story.

Since the National Enquirer is willing to go to court over this story, many voters are now beginning to question Cruz's character.

So who is telling the TRUTH?

Are voters finally beginning to see Ted Cruz for who he really is?

Or do voters believe Trump may have played a small part in the Cruz story being published even though it's widely rumored that Marco Rubio's supporters may have leaked this info to the National Enquirer in retaliation for Cruz exposing Rubio's alleged Gay past?

Stay Tuned

Let's not forget what happened to Ben Carson in Iowa.

Cruz appears to be a very Vindictive man.

***** Experts: Ted Cruz Appears Deceptive in His Response to Sex Scandal Story

Phil Houston is CEO of QVerity, a training and consulting company specializing in detecting deception by employing a model he developed while at the Central Intelligence Agency. He has conducted thousands of interviews and interrogations for the CIA and other federal agencies. His colleague Don Tennant contributed to this report.

The eyebrow-raising story that appeared earlier this week in the National Enquirer, citing claims that Sen. Ted Cruz had engaged in five extramarital affairs, drew a sharp response from the Republican presidential contender. Sharp as it was, however, it was strikingly weak in terms of denial, and strong in terms of attack. And that combination is a telltale sign of deception that leads us to conclude that this is a matter that warrants further investigation.

The statement that Cruz released on his Facebook page on Friday immediately drew our attention:

“I want to be crystal clear: these attacks are garbage. For Donald J. Trump to enlist his friends at the National Enquirer and his political henchmen to do his bidding shows you that there is no low Donald won’t go. These smears are completely false, they’re offensive to Heidi and me, they’re offensive to our daughters, and they’re offensive to everyone Donald continues to personally attack. Donald Trump’s consistently disgraceful behavior is beneath the office we are seeking and we are not going to follow.”

Subsequently speaking about the matter, Cruz echoed that sentiment, with even more intensity (you can watch below). He said:

“The National Enquirer published a story. It is a story that quoted one source on the record: Roger Stone, Donald Trump’s chief political advisor. Let me be clear, this National Enquirer story is garbage. It is complete and utter lies. It is a tabloid smear, and it is a smear that has come from Donald Trump and his henchmen. It is attacking my family, and what is striking is Donald’s henchman, Roger Stone, had for months been foreshadowing that this attack was coming. It’s not surprising that Donald Trump’s tweet occurs the day before the attack comes out. And I would note that Mr. Stone is a man who has 50 years of dirty tricks behind him. He’s a man for whom a term was coined for copulating with a rodent. Well let me be clear: Donald Trump may be a rat, but I have no desire to copulate with him. And this garbage does not belong in politics. The National Enquirer has endorsed Donald Trump, has said he must be President. And so Donald, when he’s losing, when he’s scared, when Republicans are uniting against him, decides to peddle sleaze and slime. You know, Donald is fond of giving people nicknames. With this pattern, he should not be surprised to see people calling him, ‘Sleazy Donald.’”

We should note that these two statements constitute the only material that we currently have at our disposal to analyze, which is far from ideal. Obviously, the more material available for analysis, the greater our confidence in our findings. With that said, however, we were struck by the volume of deceptive behavior that we identified in these statements.

Behaviorally, when the facts are the ally of an individual, he or she almost always tends to focus on the facts of the matter at hand. In this case, if the key fact was that he had not had these affairs, Cruz would almost certainly have been much more strongly focused on the denial. That is, he very likely would have made a point of explicitly stating something along the lines of, “I did not have these affairs.”

Yet at no point in either statement did Cruz say that. He implied it by saying the allegations are false, and that they’re lies, but behaviorally, such statements are not equivalent to saying he never had the affairs. Even if we were to overlook that fact and consider his statements to be a denial, there is an overwhelmingly higher proportion of attack behavior compared to the effort expended at denial. This type of lopsided attack-to-denial ratio is very consistent with what we have historically seen with deceptive people when allegations are levied against them.

Given the lack of additional information upon which to conduct a more comprehensive behavioral analysis, this is nothing more than our initial opinion and assessment, and we will continue to follow this matter very closely. At the same time, we cannot help but conclude at this point that it’s not looking good for Sen. Cruz.

DONALD TRUMP CREATES WINNING POLITICAL MOVEMENT; MEGYN KELLY THOUGHT HE WAS A JOKE

DONALD TRUMP CREATES WINNING MOVEMENT; MEGYN KELLY THOUGHT HE WAS A JOKE

Sources: ABC News, Fox News, Inside Edition, Syracuse.com, YouTube

Super Tuesday after winning three states the media feud between 2016 GOP Frontrunner Donald Trump and Fox News host Megyn Kelly reignited.

Megyn started this unnecessary feud when she attacked Trump during the first GOP debate last August with a slew of questions obviously designed to paint him as a Male Chauvinistic, Woman Hater. (He's not)

No doubt Megyn has a long term beef with Trump for whatever reason and now that she is in a position of POWER, she's chosen to use that POWER for Revenge.

However it appears to have backfired.

Mr Trump is still hurt from that blind-sided incident and Megyn realizes she should not have opened Pandora's box for the sake of Revenge or Dirty Politics.

Prior to the first GOP debate perhaps Megyn viewed Mr Trump as a brash, celebrity reality tv show Joke versus seeing him as an Intelligent Billionaire who possesses years of great Business knowledge.

Trump has created a winning Political movement and he is going to be the 2016 GOP Presidential nominee.

It's time for Megyn Kelly to accept, adapt and adjust so the GOP can regain the White House.

***** Fox News' GOP debate canceled; Donald Trump won't face 'crazy' Megyn Kelly again

The next Republican presidential debate has been canceled.

GOP frontrunner Donald Trump was scheduled to face Ohio Gov. John Kasich and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz in a Fox News debate Monday night in Salt Lake City. Trump now says he will not attend, citing a scheduling conflict, and Kasich also bowed out.

"Nobody told me about debates. As you saw, I thought the last debate on CNN was the last debate," Trump said on "Fox & Friends" Wednesday morning. "I think it's enough."

Politico reports Trump said he'll instead speak at a conference for the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC, adding that it had been "scheduled a while ago."

A spokesman for Kasich said he won't debate without Trump onstage.

Karen Boe, a spokeswoman for the Salt Palace Convention Center, confirmed to the Associated Press Wednesday that the Republican National Committee event was being scrapped. Cruz would have been the only candidate on stage, Fox 13 in Salt Lake City reported.

It would've been the first presidential debate held in Utah, according to the AP, and taken place a day before Utah's caucus and Arizona's primary.

Syracuse native and Syracuse University alumna Megyn Kelly was scheduled to moderate the debate, along with Fox News Channel personalities Bret Baier and Chris Wallace. Trump previously feuded with Kelly, calling her "dopey," "overrated" and biased after she asked him about alleged sexist remarks at the first GOP debate in August.

The billionaire-turned-politician refused to participate in another Fox News debate moderated by Kelly, but faced her again in the cable news channel's third debate earlier this month. He later said that skipping the second debate could have cost him Iowa, where Cruz won in January.

It appears unlikely Trump will face Kelly again anytime soon. He took shots at "The Kelly File" host again on Twitter as Super Tuesday results came in for North Carolina, Illinois and other states.

"Can't watch Crazy Megyn anymore," he tweeted. "Talks about me at 43% but never mentions that there are four people in race. With two people, big & over!"

Trump called Kelly "crazy" in several more tweets, and retweeted others' criticisms of her coverage on Fox News.

Kelly has not responded to Trump, but Fox News released a statement Wednesday afternoon:

"On Feb. 20, the Republican National Committee announced that a GOP presidential primary debate would be held on March 21 in Salt Lake City. They offered that debate to Fox News Channel to host, provided there were enough candidates actively campaigning. This morning, Donald Trump announced he would not be participating in the debate. Shortly afterward, John Kasich's campaign announced that without Trump at the debate, Kasich would not participate. Ted Cruz has expressed a willingness to debate Trump or Kasich -- or both. But obviously, there needs to be more than one participant. So the Salt Lake City debate is cancelled."

BEN CARSON ENDORSES TRUMP; EXCELLENT CHOICE

BEN CARSON ENDORSES TRUMP; EXCELLENT CHOICE:

MARCO RUBIO SHOULD ALSO ENDORSE TRUMP.

Sources: ABC News, Business Insider, Youtube

**** Here's why endorsing Trump was a good choice for Ben Carson

During the Republican presidential primary campaign, Donald Trump called Ben Carson "pathological" and compared his temper to that of a child molester.

But no matter. As with Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, Carson had perfectly logical self-interested reasons for endorsing Trump.

Politicians are always tempted to back the inevitable winner, in an effort to get in his or her good graces. But a Trump endorsement is more likely than usual to pay off in the form of power or influence within an administration.

At the endorsement news conference on Friday, Carson was asked whether he would be interested in serving in Trump's administration. Carson said he and Trump had already agreed he would be involved in formulating policy.

"I would be very interested in helping to achieve the goal of saving America and making it great," he said.

A normal candidate comes into a campaign with a huge entourage of operatives, allies, and experts — staffers from a Senate office or a gubernatorial administration, councils of policy experts advising a campaign, longtime political supporters, major donors. When you endorse a regular candidate like Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, you're getting in line behind those people in the pursuit of power in the administration.

Trump has no such entourage. When Christie endorsed him, he became overnight Trump's most important political ally. He probably thinks the endorsement put him in excellent position to be vice president — or at least attorney general — and he's probably right.

Trump's complete lack of ideological principles is, perversely, another good reason to endorse him. If you think Trump is an empty vessel, being one of his early prominent backers puts you in a good position to fill the vessel with whatever ideas you think are good.

Now consider Ben Carson. Would a President Cruz or President Marco Rubio be likely to allow Carson within a mile of the policymaking apparatus? Of course not. They already have strongly held policy views and cadres of policy advisers more qualified than Carson. At best, he could hope to be surgeon general.

Of course, it's also possible that a President Trump would end up excluding Carson, too. Or he could make Carson the secretary of health and human services. At least with Trump, Carson has a shot at power and relevance.

RUBIO SHOULD CONCEDE AFTER THE FLORIDA PRIMARY (MR NICE GUY)

Delegates won

1,237 needed for nomination · 1,585 available

RUBIO SHOULD CONCEDE AFTER THE FLORIDA PRIMARY (MR NICE GUY)

IS RUBIO BEING DELUSIONAL BY REMAINING IN THE 2016 RACE?

HAS HE RUINED HIS NICE GUY IMAGE?

Sources: AP, Fox News, NY Mag,  USA Today, YouTube

After months of being on the 2016 presidential campaign trail and millions of dollars donated to his coffers, U.S. Senator MARCO RUBIO (Fl) has only won one state (MINNESOTA) and one U.S. Territory (PUERTO RICO).

Marco is a really nice, articulate, handsome guy. So why isn't he winning?

At one point Marco appeared to be on the comeback until he listened to some GOP Establishment strategists who advised him to go Postal on DONALD TRUMP.

Big Mistake!

Everyone knows Trump is a Marketing Genius who eats insults for breakfast.

Marco's attacks on Trump have since backfired and now his rivals Trump & Ted Cruz are calling for him to concede from the race.

In fact as the FLORIDA Primary approaches on March 15,  it's questionable as to whether or Rubio can still carry his home state.

Should Rubio remain in the 2016 race on a wing and a prayer?

Or should Rubio stop being delusional and concede immediately following the Florida primary even if he does win the primary?

Stay tuned.

**** Marco Rubio Wins the Puerto Rico Primary, But He and the GOP Establishment Are Still Doomed

While residents of Puerto Rico aren’t allowed to vote in presidential elections, they are allowed to help select the nominees, and with most of Sunday's primary results in, Republicans on the island have overwhelming chosen Marco Rubio as their candidate, according to Decision Desk HQ and ABC News. 

He has even, so far, won more than 70 percent of the vote, meaning he's met the 50 percent threshold to keep all of Puerto Rico’s 23 delegates for himself. 

Thus, Rubio gets to give his second victory speech that corresponds to an actual victory, though the win is unlikely to make much of a difference, especially after his dismal performance in Saturday’s contests. 

Just how badly did those go? 

The New Yorker's John Cassidy has the tally:

In Kansas, Rubio had received endorsements from Republican Governor Sam Brownback and Bob Dole, the state’s longtime senator and the Republican Presidential candidate in 1996. The support didn’t do Rubio any good. The result in Maine, which is known as one of the few remaining holdouts of moderate Republicanism, was equally disappointing for him. 

After Jeb Bush dropped out of the race, Rubio must have expected to pick up some of his votes. But to the extent that anybody benefited from Bush’s departure, it appears to have been John Kasich, who came third. 

In addition, the results in Kentucky and Louisiana, where Rubio got sixteen per cent and eleven per cent of the vote respectively, confirmed his failure to make inroads in the South.

But one supposedly good sign from Rubio’s landslide win in Puerto Rico is that Florida, whose winner-take-all GOP primary is on March 15, has the largest population of Puerto Ricans in the country. 

So, theoretically, the demographics mean good future news for Rubio — not that he needs any convincing. Offering yet another optimistic spin on losing on Saturday, Rubio insisted that, “This map only gets better for us as we move forward in some of the other states.” Unless it doesn’t. 

The American Conservative’s Noah Millman offers a helpful reminder:

Florida has been polled six times this year. 

Rubio has never led. 

In the most recent February polls, he has trailed Trump by between 15 and 20 points. Florida was also polled 21 times in 2015. Rubio never led in any of those polls either. 

Rubio is significantly less-popular in his home state that Cruz is in his, or Kasich is in his — or, I’d venture, than Trump is in his. 

Rubio's best chance of winning his home state is that Cruz’s efforts to out-hustle him boost the Texan’s standing at the expense of Trump rather than Rubio, and enable the Florida Senator to win a close three-way race. Otherwise, he’s probably toast.

Millman goes on to point out that Rubio's new role in the race is to play the unwitting spoiler to any effort to beat Trump, since the best way he could now help that crusade is by dropping out and allowing his voters to shift to other non-Trump candidates and maybe turn the delegate tide. 

Fat chance of that happening, argues The Week’s James Poulos:

For all his talent and good intentions, Rubio proved that there's something much worse in this populist season than being born on third and thinking you just hit a triple. 

However subliminal, his sense of upwardly mobile entitlement was weirdly off-putting and perversely reminiscent of the entitled yes-kid who thinks he should get what he wants because he knows exactly how to give his teachers and school administrators exactly what they want. 

Rather than embodying the 20th-century Republican story of increase earned through luck and pluck, he became an avatar of the 21st-century striver whose stock in trade is his special snowflakehood. 

Nevertheless, a hard core of party bigs still seem convinced he's essential to the GOP's future. 

And left to his devices, Rubio will not drop out, before or after Florida. 

He will become a pawn in a grand yet tawdry game of thrones at the convention — and in so doing, it's safe to say, put the GOP at far greater peril of being split to pieces than anything Trump and Cruz can manage together. 

Rubio is the face of a wing of the party that acts like the future but is really yesterday's news. 

And thinks it's full of winners but, so many times already, has decisively lost.

But the Republican Establishment could still push Rubio out, right? 

Not if it requires them to acknowledge some fundamental realities they have shown zero interest in accepting thus far. 

Here's Millman again:  [T]he GOP establishment doesn’t really want to stop Trump. What they want is to back the candidate of their choosing, someone they know will be reliable on the issues that matter most to them, and who they also believe they can sell. 

They have made excuses at every twist and turn of this campaign in terms of how different things would have been if just one little thing had gone differently — and bewailed the good electoral fortune showered on candidates whom they cannot abide. 

But they cannot reconcile themselves to the fact that it’s not bad luck. 

The primary electorate really, really doesn’t want to vote for someone the party leadership has blessed. 

Frankly, they’d prefer someone completely unacceptable to that leadership.

After all, those unacceptable, uncontrollable, unaccountable candidates — Trump and Cruz — have between them won an outright majority of the vote, and sometimes an overwhelming majority, in every single primary and caucus so far, save two: New Hampshire and Vermont. 

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: there is no anti-Trump majority to consolidate. 

There is an anti-establishment majority. 

And the only question has been which candidate, if any, will consolidate it.

So as the race currently stands, Rubio may think of himself as the anti-Trumpiest candidate in the GOP field, and may still believe he represents the party's best hope to defeat both Donald and Hillary Clinton, but by electing to stay in the race, even just through Florida, Rubio may be casting his and all his supporters' votes for Trump.