here's a headline -- we actually agree on something. >> true story. being worried about snooping around. this asp 9 white house released an independent report, and it calls for tighter restraint. so that's good. you can't just burn the constitution, let the government create a secret court and program to collect massive information and then believe -- our freedom will not be secure. >> i don't have a counterpoint. ditto. >> history has been made. >> in the "crossfire", ruth marcus, and big crystal, editor of "the weekly standard." bill, i am as big a hawk as it go ahead. warheads on warheads, but a judge ruled this week that at least some of the nsa's spying programs are unconstitutional. the administration's claims that the numbers of terrorist attacks

thwarted has been seriously questioned and diminished by the nsa. today we get a record that the nsa has overreached and needs to be reined in. what's your defense of the programs? >> i have such a high regard for you, s.e. >> oh, no. >> seeing you say that sentence -- >> you know, when you're right, you're right. >> when you said i agree, van. my heart sunk. i don't know if i can make it through the program. >> bill, keep it together. i'll help you along. >> no defense, in other words, you agree with us? >> there's zero evidence of abuse. >> edward snowden isn't evidence? >> that's evidence of a guy who illegally stole a huge amount of documentses, and nsa didn't have good enough security protocols. we know what the i.r.s. did, but more importantly we know what the fbi did under kennedy with

martin luther king, johnson and nixon. who's had their privacy compromised? >> everyone has. >> there's no evidence that any single person at the nsa knows about anything. >> i think ear all right and all wrong. let me explain why. bill's right, there's not evidence that something has inappropriately at the nsa gone and worked at your cell phone records and figured out who you are calling and who they are calling. at the same time it's also true that there is this massive amount of data that they have collected. they are the ones internal to the nsa who decide they have reason suspicion to look at that data, and there aren't external controls. what they have done is basically created their own problem. we want, and at least i want, we want people to be able to connect the dots. that's what we're all tearing our hair out about after 9/11,

but we wanted them to do it with some degree of control and supervision. >> wait a second. they have to go through court to look at the content of the communications. why does a police department have cruisers going around and noticing that gee there's an awful lot of -- that's different from pulling someone over and searching them. >> the privacy of the cell phone, and didn't look at the content of the e-mails, but just -- >> do you put the number together with the byrne? >> i looked at the cell phone, the numbers you called and texted, the e-mail addresses of the people you e-mailed? wouldn't el get a lot of information? >> but you have to do a lot of work -- it's metadata. >> that's not correct. in order to -- the president assured us, and he was correct, that no one is listening in on americans' phone calls. >> he also denied this program existed before evidence of it

came out and proved he was -- >> -- >> the administration. >> there's three different levels. no one is listening in on the content of phone calls. this massive information is being collected. it can't be queried without a reasonable suspicion, but the people who determined right now whether that's a reasonable suspicion are 22 people at the nsa. what this report says -- >> and a secret court. >> no, an nsa court. this report says in order to query that database, to figure out who your web is, that that like other things should go to -- you're i'm going to call it a responsible outside body, which is better than having the government spies deciding for themes what the rule is. >> you're saying i don't have a strong view. clearing querying the data base is querying a number and seeing the pattern of connections that

they're worried about. you think 22 people will sit around, senior intelligence officials, military officials, people who work in places like the nsa, and elsewhere, 22 of them together are going to say let's inappropriately going after this person? >> it's not a question of inappropriate. >> what are you worried about? >> just as i like to have the magistrate approve a search warrant, not that -- >> this isn't the equivalent. >> it is the equivalent. that's what this group says it is. just as i like a magistrate approving a search warrant, i would like an outside body, a court or subset of the court, look at these questions to query the metadata and figure it out. there's another question about who should hold this data, whether it should be held by the telephone companies or the government. i don't see how the president doesn't leap on this piece of the report and say, excellent, good idea. less's -- whether the phone companies can have it, but even more, let's have some judicial

supervision. >> what i'm uncomfortable with, to hear liberals now -- i'm a lay historian. i can go all the way back to the bush administration in my own mind, that's a long time in twitter-land, and i remember we were absolutely -- this is wrong what the administration is doing, what bush is doing, lying and spying. i see now people like yourself it will be a little bit unconstitutional, but we'll have a secret court to overlook it, and it's all fine. why is it not the case that once again liberals are flushing our principles down the toilet just doble in lockstep with this administration? >> i had the same principles during the bush administration. i've always been a believer that you need aggressive intelligence-gathering, and you need -- >> on every citizen of the country? >> aggressive

intelligence-gathering to put the dots together that weren't put together before 9/11, and you need to make sure there's outside supervision. these are article 3 judges doing this. if we hadn't lied about this programs, hadn't failed to explain -- >> yeah, we would never know. >> hadn't failed to explain to people what it is that they're doing, that they're just looking at the numbers -- and outside groups -- the public wouldn't be in this uproar. >> that's an awful lot of if's. >> to your point the public is not in an uproar. >> they are. >> that's the way the public is -- van will -- [ laughter ] >> they have a bunch of people in d.c. that if the judge doesn't approve all this -- >> you are no fan of big government. you've spent a big chunk of your careers, including recently, the

way the government gets things wrong. why is this the one exception where the think the government will get it all right, not concerned at all about the fourth amendment of our constitution? >> i actually am concerned about the intelligence community, they get a lot of things wrong, and they are all like all bureaucracies, they justify spending ever more money. i'm worried as a matter of intelligence that we are focusing and depending too much probably on this metadata collection. so i'm perfectly happy to criticize the nsa. when i was in government 20 years ago i had my criticism. i'm not, other than the -- i'm not saying they couldn't tweak certain things, bull i'm not terrified that a bunch of people are conspiring to abuse people's privacy here in the united states. >> let's hope it's not filled with a lot of edward snowdens. we have an example. we only know about this because we have an example because of someone in the nsa sharing all

of this information. why is the not a likely possibility in the future? >> there's two levels of kiran. one is whether people are using it inappropriately, doing the things you talked about that the fbi did and cia did in years past. the other is whether they're using it without adequate supervise. the fourth amendment says warrants shall not issue. it's up to both us as individuals, and to the cords to decide what is reasonable and what's not? it's always a balance. the judge said it was partly -- >> we'll see where that gets in higher courts. containing the nsa, though, is not the only challenge facing president obama in his quest to save his second term. next i'll ask our guests why the president is bringing in a guy who's crippling the chances for bipartisanship before he even starts his job. you won't believe what he's

calling republicans. pretty tasteless. we're aig. and we're here. to help secure retirements and protect financial futures. to help communities recover and rebuild. for companies going from garage to global. on the ground, in the air, even into space. we repaid every dollar america lent us. and gave america back a profit. we're here to keep our promises. to help you realize a better tomorrow. from the families of aig, happy holidays. where does the united states get most of its energy? is it africa? the middle east? canada? or the u.s.? the answer is... the u.s.

♪ most of america's energy comes from right here at home. take the energy quiz. energy lives here. ♪ [ male announcer ] the parking lot helps by letting us know who's coming. the carts keep everyone on the right track. the power tools introduce themselves. all the bits and bulbs keep themselves stocked. and the doors even handle the checkout so we can work on that thing that's stuck in the thing. [ female announcer ] today, cisco is connecting the internet of everything. so everyone goes home happy.

welcome back into "crossfire." rules marcus and bill kristol. an hour and a half ago the senate approved the budget deal, but before president obama celebrates bipartisanship, apparently his cleanup operation needs a cleanup operation. john podesta today apologized for a truly horrific comment he made where he compared house republicans to, quote, a cult worthy of jonestown. so much for bipartisanship. ruth, lbj, let's go back in tame, he famously lost warter cronkite over. apparently president obama has

lost barbara walters over obamacare. >> i shouldn't say this at christmas time, but we thought he was the next messiah, and the whole obamacare or whatever you want to call the affordable care act, hasn't worked for him, he stumbled around and people feel disappointed, because they expected more. >> do people feel very disappointed? >> i'm disappointed. the polls suggests that other people are disappointed. look, they have every reason to be. the president says they have reason to be. the roll-out of obamacare was botched. and there's a lot of fixing left to do. that doesn't mean that the law isn't going to ultimately worked. it's a good idea. it will help make health care available and affordable to a lot of people who wouldn't have had it earlier, and that's a good thing. >> but that's not just the website. >> when you lose the confidence of the american people because

you made obviously untrue on their face promises to them, like if you like your health care, you can keep it, you can't fix the health care system without disrupting the health care system, you're going to lose some credibility. he should have done two things better. he should have planned the roll-out better and made sure it wasn't a debacle, and he should have figured out how to sell it without making people feel like they were sold a bill of goods. >> fair enough, but mr. kristol, he's now rebounding, above water on the character question, above water on the honesty question, and more important, somebody mentioned the economy. 57% of americans actually are with the president, saying they want government action to deal with income and equality, they want government action to raise the minimum wage. aren't you concerned that republicans are still doing this victory dance about obamacare while the president is coming back, and the issue -- >> this reminds me of

conversations i had from the bush white house in late 2005 -- we're coming back. that katrina thing, the war in iraq, the nomination of what's her name? we're bouncing back. i don't think anyone should do any victory lapse. i think republicans need to keep explaining what's wrong. it doesn't take much explaining. proposing both escapes in the short term and their own reform proposal in january, but you know, john podesta, i have never him for years, coming back in the white house, it makes me feel a little sad. he was chief of staff to bill clinton, a serious guy. he was a very able chief of staff and now coming back as deputy assistant -- >> of something. >> it's unfortunate. i feel bad for john. >> i don't think you need to feel bad for him, no. >> you go first. you're the host. >> first of all, that offhand

comment got published now, but he said it months ago. >> well, that makes it better. no, it doesn't. >> a bit of context, and the other thing is, you know, when you have somebody with your stature coming in, he was there for bill clinton under real fire, i think having somebody come in with a steady hand is a good thing. >> if it pops the bubble around the president, it will be a good thing. >> because we're stuck with this president for three more years. i don't want him to totally ruin the health care system, and more importantly adjust some foreign policy. i don't think that's -- but maybe john bring in some people to our clinton administration. i have to give van a little, you know. >> they're planning the president's library. i know what the first term room is going to look like, osama bin laden here, and obamacare here.

what do you think the second term room looks like? >> it's very sad and quiet, and jeff zeintz still writing code. what is the second term room of every presidential library look like? they are not traditionally successful moments. i haven't been to either the clinton reich braer or bush library, but there's a moment from the second term that he doesn't want to remember. >> the nixon library has a good second term. think nostalgically about the old man. i think obama can aspire to a nixonian level of the second term. >> the serious answer to the question is -- get obamacare better launched. number two, work really, really hard on the one thing that might be legislatively possible other than not continuing to shoot ourselves in the head, which is

immigration reform. john boehner has just hired somebody who has -- that's a good sign, let's move forward on that. and the thing that john podesta brings is understanding how to make the levers of government, particularly the executive branch work. the things that he controls. that's what did he fantastically in the clinton white house. that's how he can help the president here. >> i agree with that. and i think it is very interesting. you look at what he has left to do on immigration. i think sometimes we miss the fact this republican party has some real problems. and i want to hear from you on this. with the sequester, we thought we would be in the situation, the defense cuts were so catastrophic. the right wing would rush to the table. it turns out you got a big chunk of the right that agrees with me that we're spending too much on

defense. bankrupt to lose the defense hold of your coalition? you're about defense hawk. >> where the two-thirds of republicans voted for this deal which proves they are not totally obsessed with sequester. a lot of them voted for silly reasons. they knew it would pass. if anything i think defense is being cut too much but that will be a debate republicans will have. they're not in perfect shape as a party. i would say if you think where they were a year ago, totally reeling after the romney defeat. in total disarray on the issues. the kinds of candidates that republicans have in 2014 in these races. they're better off than i expected. >> this last budget deal in part referencing got done largely without obama. should he maybe just step aside and let folks form coalitions on their own? >> well -- >> you wish. >> he wishes.

>> he has said when he gets involved, if he endorses something that makes every republican in congress scurry away. >> how is he leading? where is he leading? >> well, he can lead in the ways that i said before. and he can lead in making the argument i thought he made a pretty good, not perfect but pretty good speech on income inequality and he can lead. >> he can defend the hard work pr professionals in the security industry. >> i'll tell you an area where he is leading and should continue to lead is on the question of social policy, inclusion and everybody could you being. the president took a stand. a tough stand yesterday when he announced the u.s. delegation to the olympics and it includes in a slap to putin some prominent openly gay athletes.

we'll have final questions about that when we get back. we want you to weigh in on today's fireback question. in light of the terrible stuff, do you think the u.s. should boycott the olympics in russia? tweet yes or no. avo: the volkswagen "sign then drive sales event is back. which means it's never been easier to get a new passat, awarded j.d. power's most appealing midsize car, two years in a row. and right now you can drive one home for practically just your signature. get zero due at signing, zero down, zero deposit, and zero first month's payment on any new 2014 volkswagen. hurry, this offer ends january 2nd. for details, visit vwdealer.com today

. we're back with ruth marcus and bill kristol. >> the president announced the

delegation to the russia olympics in sochi and said it will include openly gay athletes. this is in defiance of russia's recent crackdown on homosexuality. i support same sex marriage. i am a gay rights advocate from the right. and clearly the president is delivering a strong message to russia in this. but aren't there stronger messages we need to deliver to russia on say, syria and iran? >> yes. but the olympics -- maybe the olympics is a place to deliver a message to brush the invasion of afghanistan but i love this message. i think this is a great in your face message. he is with holding presidential excellence, vice presidential excellence, first lady excellence, what is he doing? he is sending them gays and the lesbians. i thought it was brilliant. >> i'm super excited about it and i think it is interesting that you can now have a president of the united states slap down putin on the issue of gay rights. that wouldn't have been possible ten years ago and now it is. it seems to me republicans are

nowhere to be seen on this fight. does it worry that you the gop is -- >> hey, i'm right here. >> i like that. wow, that was really bold. he is really showing putin who is boss. i'm sure putin is thinking boirg, i've been humiliated. meanwhile we're capitulating on everything important this is typical of obama. don't confront the serious issues. then you feel good about yourself, hey, i really showed him with billy jean king. send whoever he wants. i don't know if billy jean king and boitano has his delegation. i just thought, pretenning this is a great moment for obama or gay rights. >> isn't it better to have them than some other group? >> a lot of other people have been treated badly in russia. maybe send a journalist. >> all good points. thanks to ruth marcus and bill kristol for joining us.

do you think the u.s. should boycott the olympics in russia? right now, 20% of you say yes. 80% say no. >> the debate will continue online at cnn.com/crossfire. >> join us tomorrow for another edition of "crossfire." erin burnett "outfront" starts erin burnett "outfront" starts right now. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com was it really necessary to arrest and strip search an indian diplomat? plus, will president obama scale back the nsa spying program? and duck dynasty under fire. was the show's star being offensive or just true to his religious beliefs? good evening. i'm jake tapper in for erin wernett.