john: i am john heilemann. mark: i am mark halperin. with all due respect to bernie sanders, when it comes to your inaugural address, we have you covered. this has got to change. , together wedent are going to change it. i said it before and i will say t again --

mark: the sanders campaign gets it hand caught in the cookie jar. team is now facing accusations that it exploited a security glitch in the democratic database of voter information and swiped data. today at a press conference in campaignon, sanders' manager says they have no intent to use that information. >> after discussion with the dnc, it became clear that some of our staffers accessed some of the data from another campaign. that behavior is unacceptable

and we fired the staffer immediately. any information obtained was not utilized. the leadership of the democratic national committee is actively trying to undermine our campaign. this is unacceptable. individual leaders of the dnc can support hillary clinton in any way they want, but they will not sabotage our campaign. a threatened lawsuit, the dnc has so far not the campaignying "violated the agreement that all the presidential campaigns have signed." know, willat we now this hurt the sanders campaign? long one question is how the sanders campaign will not have access to its own data, not being able to access its own data.

it could be hugely problematic. then there is the issue of perception. the clinton campaign is on the warpath about this, claiming that sanders campaign has engaged not just in dirty pool, but now trying to do misdirection and play down the severity of what has been done. there could be some perceptual issues as well as the data. mark: if hillary clinton's campaign had been caught doing this, it would be leading the network news, a giant story, and the sanders campaign would be on about it. as much as the sanders campaign is staffed by nice people and that this is isolated, as the clinton campaign has pointed out, there are lots of unanswered questions. what exactly did the sanders campaign know and when did they know it?

sanders himself will have to speak in detail about this. campaignclinton's had done this, they would want to know. john: there argument is that this can never be unlearned. if they have the data and --inquish and, the knowledge again, there are all lot of facts that needed to be sorted through. the sanders campaign is baiting reporters to focus on the dnc. the media is falling for that and should not be. ted since marco rubio and cruz sparred over immigration,

attacks, kept up pushing out quotes and videos from ted cruz's past showing him as inconsistent and hypocritical on whether undocumented immigrants might ever attain legal status. ted cruz is rolling out this new tv ad in iowa. >> securing our borders and stopping illegal immigration is a matter of national security. so hardhy i've fought to defeat president obama and his gang of eight. their plan would have given president obama the authority to admit syrian refugees, including terrorist. that is just wrong. we need to discover ronald reagan's strategy, we win and they lose. john: do you think ted cruz and

his campaign are doing enough in the face of this marco rubio offensive on immigration? mark: they are not. the perception is marco rubio is doing well there. ted cruz is soaking up his base. the ted cruz people believe that marco rubiohat being part of the gang of eight will be worse than anything they pinned on ted cruz so far. when the marcong rubio people might regret making this an issue. substance, on the the merit, the marco rubio has a point about ted cruz. that he isthe hawk now. they are driving that with data and documents. mark: a lot of opposition research is being planted in the

media. john: the marco rubio campaign many months ago and its staff said we will never engage in -- we will not due process stories. now they are in the paper coming out and saying, gloating over how they set ted cruz up and are scoring on this front. it is bad for them in the sense that they are seeming hypocritical themselves, but attention to an area where marco rubio has his own weaknesses. yesterday, donald trump got a shout out from vladimir putin. today, donald trump return the favor, saying that he would have a different kind of relationship with the russian leader than president obama. >> do you like vladimir putin's

comments about you? >> sure. when people call you brilliant, it's always good, especially when the person heads up russia. >> he also kills journalists, political opponents, and invades countries. that would be a concern, would it not? leader,ast he is a unlike what we have in this country. >> he kills journalist who don't agree with him. country does plenty of killing also, joe. tell, jebar as we can bush is the only republican presidential candidate who has reacted to donald trump's remarks. on twitter, bush said "a real leader would stand up, not suck up, to belize and desperate like

putin." john: i was sitting on the set at morning joe when this happened. trump is saying putin is somehow a superior figure in the world than barack obama, but not only does he killed journalists, invade crimea, putin is not a good guy. he's not a figure to be venerated. in doing that weird kind of deflecting voice, it was a strange performance. it is weird. mark: i believe it gives jeb bush another hook to be the alternative. in january, when donald trump is dominating the news, if jeb bush is the one engaging him, i think the bush people think that is true.

it gives an opening. if you ask conservatives to look -- hat donald trump said john: it's ridiculous. mark: creating a moral equivalency between the united states and vladimir putin. where jeb bush is putting his hand up and saying, at least i am trying. john: that's fair. resident obama is leaving the white house and heading west. with theeet privately families of the shooting victims in san bernardino, california. then he continues on to hawaii for christmas vacation with his family. pardonsident issued to victs. he talked about his 2016 domestic agenda, the challenges of stopping homegrown terrorism,

and what he means when he says the u.s. is making progress against islamic state. >> whenever i say that we have made progress squeezing the territory that they control or made inroads against them, what people will say is, well, if something happens around the world, then obvously that must ,ot be true, but in any fight even as you make progress, there are still dangers involved. john: we anchored this on bloomberg television. what stands out to you most from this press conference? mark: a lot of detractors in terms of the president today, but he still does not see things in black and right. was honest about his perspective. he did not get angry.

he clearly wanted to leave having the country feel like this is a guy who is on top of it and this is a guy who is relaxed about where things stand. housee goals of the white communications staff, he executed perfectly. his critics will not be pacified. somehow he has absorbed the notion that after paris and san bernardino that he was not in touch with the american people enough, and that he went to the pentagon and tried to do a course correction and try to be more tough and resolute about laid-back press conference, there were a couple of notes of resoluteness. also, him trying to set the table for 2016, talking about the possibility that a new dynamic was playing out in congas and there could be some stuff they got done in the second half of the fourth quarter. mark: we have got to go and come

back and talk to bernie sander'' enior campaign strategist. that's after 60 seconds of break. ♪

john: we talked earlier about the bernie sanders data flap. here to get his side of the story, the senior campaign strategist for the bernie sanders campaign. beengine you have not spending as much time on that as you expected. is that correct? >> correct. john: have you talked to senator sanders about this story?

>> this morning we all talked about it. bernie is very upset that some people who work for his campaign did something wrong. one of them was fired. he is upset that the dnc is trying to grind our campaign to a halt in iowa and new hampshire weeks before voting begins. john: let's focus on the first of those things. there are four sanders campaign aides who have been involved in this. one of them, the top one, has been fired. why have the other three not been fired? >> we are accusing the dnc of being arbitrary and capricious, and we don't want to be arbitrary and capricious ourselves. the campaign manager will look at all the facts and circumstances and will see what is warranted for the discipline for each of those individuals paid mark. mark: debbie wasserman schultz

has said your campaign has not divided a full account. >> we provided an account earlier today. he has been available to answer any questions they have. we don't understand why the not giving us access to voters files that we paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for. mark: you've answered every question they have asked you? >> yes, we have. mark: what would you say if the clinton campaign had done this? theark, i would like to say clinton campaign has never seen our data, but knowing what i know about the way the data is being shared from the dnc vendor -- two months ago, when our firm acquired the data, not only was the sanders data downloaded, the clinton data came with it. accusing them of

having secretly and improperly looking at your data? >> i know what happened to us. mark: what would you do if the shoe were on the other foot? clinton aides had downloaded your data and looked at it? >> sure, we would complain about it, absolutely. to say that we have engaged in some the various thing here, because here are the facts, a couple of months ago when we first found out that the firewalls which are supposed to be in place to protect everybody's data were not in place, we immediately notify the dnc and told them that the firewalls were not in place, and they ensured us that they would be put back in place, and obviously they were not. that's why a couple of people had access to the data. has: the guy who was fired been quoted as saying that he was not trying to steal data, that he were trying to probe the firewall. do you believe that?

>> here is what i believe. mark: do you believe -- >> i don't know. it is hard for me to say i believe something who i have never met. mark: why was he fired? >> because he made a bad and wrong choice. when this happened a couple of , we immediately locked it down and told the dnc about it and did not call the press and say that they have a dysfunctional system over there. when josh made a mistake, he should have done the same thing, told the campaign about it, acted responsibly and immediately, because that is what bernie sanders would want us to do. he did not do that. that is why he was fired. john: you had for staffers who did targeted searches to look at

it mcclendon's targeting operations, particularly in iowa clinton's hillary targeting operations, particular he in iowa. even if you fired all four of them, gave up all the data that to had taken, or alleged have taken, you still would have gained a huge competitive advantage by looking at that data. what do you say about the allegations that clinton campaign is making? >> we figured out their multimillion dollar modeling program in minutes. i understand what they are doing. communication workers, endorsed by a democracy in america, 2 million contributions in the campaign, and we are doing well. single digits and iowa, ahead in rapid or pulling in new hampshire.

i understand they want to stop this momentum, but they will not. we will continue to fight. john: we will talk about the race in a second. it seems odd to me that -- thee's no one arguing that campaign has done anything wrong here. there is a tacit admission on that someone has done some thing wrong here. how can you adopt that posture when you are the ones, in some sense, who are guilty of doing something wrong? >> we are on offense for a simple reason, the democratic national committee is trying to shut down bernie sanders campaign. it has information that we put in their. we paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for accidents -- access to this. john: don't go anywhere.

we will be right back to talk with you more about the 2016 democratic presidential race and the upcoming debate tomorrow night in new hampshire after this quick break. ♪

mark: preparations for tomorrow's debate underway, but slightly disrupted over this flap over data. democratic voters, bernie sanders still has a lead over hillary clinton in new hampshire. assess the state of the operation, the ground game, the voter file, of the two campaigns.

are you on par with the clinton campaign or behind them or ahead of them? >> we are way behind with voter file at the moment. hopefully we will get our voter file back and can then compete. we have outstanding campaigns on the ground in iowa and new hampshire. better than hillary clinton's campaign. on the groundff in iowa, supplemented by a norman's outpouring of volunteers who have organized through social media and other means. we have the resources to run a full-fledged campaign. and we will have resources for states thereafter. we are superbly positioned to do well in the process and get in the position to win the nomination. john: we talked in the last day about the perception, even on a , theday like yesterday

perception among a lot of political elite that bernie sanders is basically doomed. how big of a problem do you think that is? money theere raising traditional way from bundlers, it would be a huge problem. but because we don't raise money that way, it is not a problem at all. this perception that bernie sanders has too much ground to saw what gary hart did when he won the new hampshire primary. i have worked for other candidates who have won both iowa and new hampshire. i understand the momentum out of those early victories, and i think we can demonstrate to the people that bernie sanders can't mobilize the kind of coalition that barack obama mobilize, bernieindependent, that sanders is the strongest candidate. i think support from hillary will move to us very quickly. mark: your candidate had a

better second debate than a aboutt debate, talk his focus getting ready for this one. been in session with the senate. he was voting there today. he did a couple of hours yesterday. we will do a couple of hours tonight. he has experience at debating on the big stage. he knows exactly what he wants to say. his message will be delivered. mark: we will come back and talk more with tad. we will continue when we come back right after this. ♪ . . .

john: we are back in the third part of our tripleheader with tad devine, bernie sanders

senior strategist in vermont. your campaign has filed a lawsuit in the d.c. court against the democratic national committee for breach of contract. earlier when we were talking to you, you were making serious accusations about the d.n.c. they seem to go broader than the question of what they are doing with their data. is the claiming not only d.n.c. breaching contract with you and doing something unfair, but that the d.n.c. is now trying to in some financial way throttle the sanders campaign? tad: i think they are, john, as much as i regret saying that, i think they are. this has been going on for a while. this is the debate the saturday night before christmas. i don't think that timeslot was picked so we could have maximum viewership. we have tried to cooperate with the d.n.c. it is unfortunate in recent days and weeks we are getting the feeling they are putting more

than their finger on the scale. in the case of taking away our voter files, they are putting the foot on the scale against us. john: do you think this is because the d.n.c. and the chairwoman engaged in a clinton protection racket or do they feel sanders must be stopped? those are not mutually inconsistent. which one or both? tad: i think the structure was put in place because everyone believed hillary clinton had won the nomination before anyone voted. i think that is why the debate decisions were made early on. i think now people are seeing bernie sanders is a real threat to hillary clinton and capture the nomination. if the political establishment is going to try to stop us, we are going to have to deal with them. i expected this would come later in the process after we demonstrated we could succeed with voters that there would be action against bernie from many leaders in the party. i think we have to deal with the earlier, but we will be prepared to. john: we have had you talk about your unhappiness with the d.n.c.

i want to go back to the initial thing that set this off. are you sorry for what your staff or did, your former staffer did? tad: absolutely. he made a mistake. that is why he was fired. sure, i am sorry for it. it is regrettable. based on what you know happened, was any harm done to the clinton campaign? tad: i don't think so. we don't know all the facts. what we do know is someone did something wrong. the d.n.c.lso said is being disingenuous when they say not all the facts are known. you have already said not all the facts are known. isn't it legitimate for them to say the investigation is not completed, therefore they cannot open you up to access? the what i said was with d.n.c. is doing to us is like giving somebody 20 years in jail for jaywalking. the sanctions they are imposing on us are completely out of line with the circumstances.

mark: i understand. is from their point of view, that on the one hand the d.n.c. was not being honest when they said, as the chairwoman said, not all the facts were known, the investigation continuing. you just said we don't know all the facts. tad: it is true. what is happening is they have imposed a remedy which is so drastic, the radical -- so radical, it does not fit the circumstances at all. we may not know the specifics of every detail. here is what we know. for 20 minutes, people did something they should not have done. mark: what facts are not known? knownhat facts are not are exactly what the other individuals did. we do know this. very little was acquired during that short amount of time when the safeguards came down that should have been in place. i think it is clear to everybody who has looked at it. mark: who is interviewing the three other individuals and when? tad: jeff weaver is in charge of that.

he will make a determination in the next couple of days. the person in charge was fired immediately. it was clear and up yet he may mistake, and we took responsibility. what the d.n.c. is doing preventing us from campaigning in iowa and new hampshire is a much bigger mistake, and they should stop it. that is why we filed in federal court. john: you keep referring to this as a mistake as if it was an inadvertent thing your stafford did you -- staffer did. it does not seem like a mistake. it seems like a transgression. it seems you are trying to soft-pedal it were an air that somehow occurred inadvertently. that is not the case, right? tad: the person was hired. it is evident he did something wrong. we stipulate to that. what we do not stupidly to is what the d.n.c. is doing to us, trying to shut down a grassroots campaign -- what we do not stipulate to is what the d.n.c. is doing to us, trying to shut down a grassroots campaign.

john: they have not giving you access to voter files for less than 24 hours. it seems like you are making a dramatic claim that they are trying to throttle your campaign when they have frozen your access to the data files for less than 24 hours. tad: we don't know how long they are going to continue to do this. now we are into the second day. we had people in offices around the country who wanted to contact voters last night. they cannot do it last night. i cannot do it now. they are setting down our campaign. we are six weeks away from iowa. this is a drastic action taken by the d.n.c. it is unfair, unjust, wrong. we can figure out the facts later. but give us back our voter file. we paid $430,000 for it. we deserve to have it. john: do you think chairwoman wasserman schultz, do you believe she is covertly, personally trying to advance hillary clinton? tad: i'm not going to make those

charges. i will tell you this decision is wrong. it is a wrong decision. they should reverse it immediately. mark: tad devine, thank you very much. we will see tomorrow night in manchester. next, we will shift to the republican side for the president to race. rick tyler, the spokesman for ted cruz, will join us after this word from our sponsor. ♪

john: there are new republican numbers from the new hampshire poll we talked about earlier. that poll shows donald trump

leading by double digits in the granite state. ted cruz is showing signs of momentum. he is tied for second marco rubio at 12%. he is up seven points since october. joining us now is ted cruz's national spokesperson, rick tyler, coming on the show from houston. welcome. ever since the debate, you guys have been engaged in a tussle with marco rubio mainly around the topic of immigration. can you tell us why you think it is marco rubio and his campaign have chosen this issue on which to engage your boss? >> i think it is quite remarkable. the one thing you would not want the rubio campaign to talk about what to be the center of his campaign is immigration. the reason is marco rubio is the chief proponent of the amnesty gang of eight bill. now that is all we are talking about. i don't know why they think they would benefit from that. i'm happy to talk about

immigration all day long. their guy has a fatal flaw to be running for the republican nomination. mark: the new york times, jonathan martin has a story about advice senator cruz gave when he was a bush campaign staffer about how candidate bush should talk about immigration. this is one of many comments that have been put out there. i'm wondering if you can explain why ted cruz, before he was senator cruz, was giving advice to george bush about immigration much more moderate than the position he has now. >> ted cruz worked on george w. bush's campaign. i read the memo and thought cruz captured bush's position perfectly. says "the new york times" ask if ted cruz disagreed with the position. you are saying he was as a staffer giving voice to an research to what george bush thought but even then ted cruz did not disagree with what he

was telling george bush to say? >> i think when you work on a campaign and get the best advice you can and put together documents in the campaign, that was done. but these are george bush's positions. if you want to know what ted cruz's positions are, all you have to do is listen to him today. he has been anti-amnesty. always has been. marco rubio is trying to muddy the waters. i don't know why he is doing it. it does not work. the poll show he is not advancing and cruz is. mark: did ted cruz agree with what he was advising of the time? >> i have not had a conversation with him about it. but he was paid by the bush campaign. i thought he reflected his boss's position on immigration by well -- quite well. most of it was focused on legal immigration. wasrest was focused --

nothing in their positive about illegal immigration. john: your boss is a feisty guy, a good debater. he has gotten into several scraps. one person he has gotten no fight and scraps with is the front runner by most measures in the republican nomination. that is donald trump. there has been tons of speculation about why it is. senator cruz seems to in private acknowledge it is part of a long game strategy. can you explain to us why ted cruz is not doing what any other candidate would do normally, to go after the guy who stands in his way to get the nomination for the party? >> let me unravel the mystery right here. ted cruz will advance and defend his own positions when he is attacked as he was with marco rubio. that might lead to a feisty fight. to my knowledge, i don't know that donald trump has attacked us on any of our positions some have not counterattacked. he said ted cruz did not

have the judgment to be president and called him kind of a maniac on the sunday shows. that seems like a straightforward attack to me. >> in the debate, he had an opportunity to advance that or clarify it. he decided to clarify it. mark: i want to talk about something inside baseball but i think will be increasingly important for you as we go forward. opposition research. with all due respect to jonathan martin, my guess is he did not under this by going to an archive. were you aware of this memo before it showed up in the "new york times"? are you well researched on your own candidate's history? >> share. nothing has come up we have not been well aware of. mark: including this memo? >> including this memo. we have every memo i know of that ted cruz ever wrote. there is hardly anything there. if this is the best they have got, and it is, there is nothing. mark: can we come down to houston and look for those memos? >> probably not, mark. mark: you said there's nothing in them, so presumably that

means you would be happy if we looked at them. >> you would be amazed what people of find that is not there. people make a living at it. mark: play forward the next few weeks. who is capable of winning the iowa caucuses at this point? >> i think far and away, we are ahead. it is not just that. we have the money to win the iowa caucuses and we have the organization. we have nearly 4000 volunteers just unleashed now. we have a dormitory we have a dormitory we have least that holds about 50 people. over 500 people have gotten reservations to go up to camp cruz and work for the cruz campaign. mark: i did not mean to interrupt. you got in some big endorsements this week. are you sitting on more? are you sitting on more conservative leader endorsements you will roll out in the coming weeks that you know about? >> we expect them to keep rolling out because the conservative movement are united behind ted cruz. that is going to make everybody nervous.

they keep coming. mark: you have some in your back pocket, right? >> i'm not going to announce that here, mark. lisa: i think -- mark: i think the laughter and smell tell us you're sitting on some. >> confident the conservative movement -- i am confident the conservative movement is uniting behind us. marco rubio attacked us, rush limbaugh came to our defense. i think that is why marco did not mention our name. he is hurting himself by attacking us with false accusations on immigration. the conservative movement, including those on talk radio, have come to our defense and rally behind us -- rallied behind us. millions of people did not call congress to stop the gang of eight bill because they did not understand what was going on. they understood it was an amnesty bill. it was ted cruz that exposed it as an amnesty bill. that is why millions called the house members. that is why speaker boehner would not raise it. does member sickly -- said please don't do this to me.

john: thank you for taking the time to bash marco rubio on our air. next, we will contemplate the donald trump conundrum with eliana johnson when we come back in city seconds -- 60 seconds. ♪

werk: eliana johnson says -- are about to find out. the washington editor of the national review joins us from our d.c. bureau. who do you think is currently winning and may be more

important, on trajectory to win this big overarching rubio-cruz fight? >> it is difficult to say. hasi do think marco rubio tapped into an interesting aspect of ted cruz's psychology, which is that he absolutely has to have the last word on things. toon't think his response the immigration kerfuffle was very good in the debate. i think what speaks to it is everybody is now talking about ted cruz's record on immigration as opposed to marco rubio's record on immigration. it would have been easy enough for cruz to say everybody knows when you get down to it, marco rubio supported the gang of eight bill and i opposed it. instead, he allowed the argument to descend into the details about whether he supported a path to legalization or not. i think that is going to be tremendously damaging to him in the long run. john: we talked about this earlier on the show. i find it a little confusing

that both sides seem to be scoring points against the other. i find it confusing the rubio campaign has decided to call attention to the way in which it is going after cruz on this issue when their guy does have vulnerabilities on this issue. what is the thinking behind how the rubio campaign is talking about prosecuting the issue in the press? >> i think their ultimate goal is to try to expose cruz as a phony, somebody who claims to carry the mantle of the only true conservative in the race but is not fundamentally different from any of the other people running and who takes one stand at one time and another at another depending on where the political winds are blowing. i think that is what is behind it. mark: based on fundraising, message, the calendar, demographics, who has a better chance of beating donald trump one-on-one over the long-term? cruz or rubio? >> i wish i could tell you the answer to that. [laughter] >> what i find so interesting

about those guys is both have overreached in the senate careers in a fundamental way. rubio did it on immigration. cruz did it with the government shutdown. i think it is tough to say who's mistake will cost him more in the long run. john: which one has a better positive message for republican voters right now? >> i think it is undoubtedly rubio who has the more positive message. i think the open question is there is a hunger among republican voters for an optimistic, positive message. there's also a hunger for somebody who will blow up washington. i think the question is which do they want more. i think that is what you are seeing play out between cruz and rubio who are perhaps two of the most ambitious politicians and talented politicians we have seen since bill clinton. it could be the only thing standing in the way of the and theon is each other presidency is another clinton. have, michelle

anytime the past six months, i would ask you the likeliest establishment candidate to become the consensus choice of the mainstream wing of the republican party. is there anybody on the establishment wing who will be the consensus choice? will there not be a consensus establishment candidate? i think rubio is the most likely to be that person. the fact that somebody who came out of the tea party movement, with an antiestablishment candidate in 2010, and they'll likely to be the establishment choice really speaks to how much the republican party has transformed in the obama era. it has moved far right. i think that is something conservatives can point to as a victory and also a reason cruz may have more difficulty than he may have thought coalescing,

having all the conservatives coalesce around him, because rubio to can claim the mantle of an antiestablishment conservative. mark: lost in the back and forth between cruz and rubio and maybe bush and trump in the debate is rubio owned up to the notion he is still -- still intellectually favors a path to legal citizenship for people here legally now. how do you think that plays out? presumably, they will be advertising against him on it. presumably, he will be asked to talk more about it. how do you think that plays out for him? >> i think it is his biggest weakness as he moves forward. it is obviously an issue on the trump has called a tremendous amount of attention to. it is one ted cruz will call attention to. his support for the gang of eight bill, while it may have made him a more electable candidate in the general election, his general approach to things as a policy-oriented

speaker, it may cost him the primary. it will be interesting to see how that plays out. while the shutdown and his approach to things may ultimately cost him the general election, it may help them advance and perhaps when the primary --may help him advance and perhaps win the primary. ahn: your colleague read column that says they have not figured out how to deal with donald trump. who has the best chance of figuring that out? who seems to be closest to having a real anti-trump, taking down trump strategy? >> that is definitely cruz. while people see it as a nauseating spectacle watching up to dong trump, ted cruz is the only one who surpassed to him in the polls. staying out of his line of fire has been successful for him. mark: major any haskell life lessons -- any haskell life

lessons. enjoy your weekend. we will be]. -- we will be right back. ♪

mark: here is some exciting news. you can hear this show everyday life on bloomberg 99.1 fm. check it out every day at 5:00 eastern. tomorrow, we had to new hampshire. more on that monday. john: thanks for watching. for mark and i both, sayonara. ♪

emily: i am emily chang and you are watching "bloomberg west." let's start with a check on the first word news. steps tohas taken ensure fiscal checks through most of next year. the house and senate have passed a 1.1 trillion dollar spending

measure avoiding a government shutdown. it also lists the 40-year ban on cruel exports and brings that dozens of expired tax breaks. the bill goes to president obama. the democratic national committee is cutting off the sanders camp from a crucial voter database. it came after the campaign was accused of taking advantage of a software error. the d.n.c. claims the bernie campaign accessed confidential voter data collected by hillary clinton steam. sanders campaign manager says they will fight back. republican candidates are preparing for their final debate of the year tomorrow in new hampshire. clinton leaves sanders 59-48%. city 4% say hillary clinton would do a better job of handling -- 64% sailor clinton would do a better job of handling the terror threat. the white chicagoic