tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC August 8, 2019 12:00am-1:00am PDT
tonight on "all in" -- >> victims still in the hospital as they grab my arm and tell me tell him not to come here. >> protests in dayton and el paso as the president comes to town. >> i think it was a good decision for him not to stop in the oregon district. >> tonight the political world comes to terms with what we're dealing with. >> it's both clear language and in code. this president had fanned the flames of white supremacy in this nation. >> and the president and his apologists pretend there is no problem. >> white supremacy, that's the problem. this is a hoax. then congressman al green on his push to impeach the president for racism. plus, what we know about the online breeding grounds for white supremacist terror and why
the solution to mass shootings always is surrendering civil liabilities. >> having one armed guard on every floor of every school. >> when "all in" starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. president trump spent the day shuttling between the sites of the two latest gun massacres in america and hurling juvenile insults at his political opponents while in transit from one to the other. after a stop in dayton, trump then visited el paso, texas, where the shooter expressed his explicit intent to target and kill hispanics to stop what he called an invasion, echoing the exact same word the president himself has used repeatedly. this afternoon democratic presidential front-runner vice president joe biden gave a speech in which he pointed out the insidious double game the president likes to play. >> is both clear language and in code. this president has fanned the flames of white supremacy in this nation.
his low energy, vacant-eyed mouths of the words written for him condemning white supremacists this week i don't believe fooled anyone. >> it's not just the president who spews hate and racist fearmongering without dealing with the consequences, it's trump tv as well, specifically tucker carlson doing the exact same thing, though admittedly with a defter touch night after
white supremacist is a ziomedia conspiracy theory. diversity is a threat, immigrants are invading and turns to say with a straight face, white supremacy, what white supremacy? >> if you were to assemble a list, a hierarchy of concerns of problems this country face, where would white supremacy be on the list? right up there with russia, probably. it's actually not a real problem in america. the combined membership of every white supremacist organization in this country would be able to fit inside a football stadium. >> carlson, like the president that he apologizes for, knows what he's doing. in this case it's a clumsy little bait and switch in which he argues the only problem are
the relatively small numbers of people who are members of a white supremacist organization. but as far as we know the killer in el paso was wasn't a member of an organization and the killer at the synagogue at pittsburgh wasn't a member on an organization. scream at this to go back to their country, who berate people in gas stations because they're speaking spanish, those people aren't members of organizations. the problem isn't white supremacists as some distinct category that only includes david duke. it is the ideology to which the president and tucker carlson himself subscribe, which is that those people don't belong in this country, that it's not theirs, that diversity is a threat, that white people are being replaced. now, i should say in carlson's defense, it's not an act. he really believes these things. if you want a textbook definition of what overt white supremacy looks like, it's this. >> how could you salvage iraq at this point? >> i don't -- you know, it's beyond our control. if somehow the iraqis decided to behave like human beings or something. iraq is a crappy place filled with a bunch of, you know, semi
literal primitive monkeys. but i have zero sympathy for them or their culture, a culture where people don't use toilet paper or works. >> subliteral primitive monkeys. it's not people with swastika tattoos or white hoods that are the problem, it's the belief system that this is a country for white people and white people are better than nonwhite people. an act of violence of mass murder in support of that ideology like the massacre in el paso creates real waves of fear throughout the country, far surpassing the one who did it. in the wake of this, people are coming forward with their stories of harassment and intimidation and fear that is flowing from this racist ideology. one latina immigrant telling the "new york times" it feels like being hunted. it's the ideology that is being pumped into the minds of the viewers of that show on trump tv every night. joining me now are anna maria archuleta working for racial justice. michelle goldberg and an msnbc
political analyst. jelani cobb, staff writer at "the new yorker" and professor of journalism at columbia university school of journalism. i guess i start with the ripple effects of what happened in el paso. i just have been really struck reading accounts in newspapers and on twitter and talking to people through other means that it's not just the 22 people who were killed or the dozens more who are injured, it's that it does send a message which was intended by the violence. >> absolutely. i'll tell you a story. i have a colleague. her name is sylvia. she is from chicago. her family is mexican-american several generations. her mother has to get her medication at walmart, and she told sylvia this morning that she was afraid to go to walmart. that is exactly what the person who shot 22 people in the walmart in el paso intended. that is exactly the kind of fear that president trump wants to send to our communities when he
says this is an invasion. we will round them up. we will send them home. we will separate their families. we will put them in cages. it is exactly -- that message is being receive beside i the people who have the guns and are going to shoot regular folks who are doing their daily business inside a walmart and by the communities who are being terrorized. president trump made a point of making anti-immigrant xenophobic rhetoric the centerpiece and the centerpiece of his political program which is a white nationalist program. it's a program that's intended to terrorize and exclude from power, from economic and democratic power communities of color. not just immigrants, not just latinos. he went on to do the muslim ban. >> yes. every african american. >> every step. >> every african american in every city is living in rat infested hell hole. >> african american communities in particular. he has a very deliberate political program that is
centered on keeping white men like him in power. not to the benefit of all white men in this country, but to the benefit of a very small slice of our population, the richest, the wealthiest, the corporate elite. that is his program. terrorize people so we keep our hands in our pockets and their hold on the power and democracy. >> i was just going to say i wrote -- it just so happened that monday was the sentencing of cesarsayoc, who is the terrorist who sent out bombs. it's so interesting when you read the defense memo that they submitted for sentencing for why the judge should go easy on him. and it was all about how look, he just believed the president, right? he just watched fox news and he believed the president and he wasn't savvy enough to pick up when they meant it and when they didn't, you know. he thought that democrats were
going to hurt trump supporters, were threatening. words dangerous as they are painted every day in trump's speeches and on tucker carlson. and he took it seriously. and you can't imagine a sentence. you can't imagine that being an affirmative defense in any other kind of political context. >> right. >> nobody could say if there was a -- somebody shot a policeman. you couldn't imagine a comp tnt lawyer saying, well, he was just listening to barack obama, right? because those messages aren't there. they're not being transmitted. >> right. yes. and that is also not the only one. the men that planned the mosque attack in kansas as far as i can tell also had similar sentencing filings look, they listened to the president, listened to fox news. there is policy behind this. there is a piece from cnn today about the white house rebuffing attempts to make combatting domestic terrorism a higher priority. dhs saying there are these warning bells going off, that director wray saying it the
other day, christopher wray in front of a hearing, and then rebuffing it. there is more than just words here. >> sure. the house homeland security committee has those hearings i guess was about two months ago now. and one of the things they pointed out again and again and again was when democrats were in the minority, they had consistently requested that there be hearings on the rise of they called it domestic terror, which was their way of avoiding the racial designation of white nationalism. so whatever category you want to put it in, but domestic terror had been something they had been trying to get on the agenda, and the republicans that refused to touch it. and so it wasn't until democrats actually became a majority that they actually were able to have these hearings take place. but going back for a second to the thing about tucker carlson's point about the stadium. it is a very curious kind of absolution. there were nine hijackers. it mobilized the entire
infrastructure of massive political economic military power that the united states has. all of the people in the caravan that they were raising so much alarm about, you could have fit those people in a football stadium. but now this group of people who are tied to the most recent spate of violence against americans, people losing their lives, innocent people being shot down and being haunted by the image of that woman covering her 2-month-old baby with her own body. so we're now expecting citizens to display battlefield levels of valor to protect their children, all of this gets washed away under the banner of well, there are only a handful of these people. we could fit them all in a stadium. >> as we're going to form a brigade and go marching to the streets. i don't think you could fit all of the existing members of isis into a stadium. i don't think you could fit all of the members of al qaeda into a stadium.
it would have been preposterous if anybody had ever made that argument as a reason to discount the threat. another thing that christopher wray said is not only domestic terrorism up or domestic terrorist arrests up in 2019 as opposed to 2018, but the vast majority of them are right wing right nationalists domestic terrorist. it's not just democrats are out here saying that this is a threat. it is the head of the fbi saying that. and then there is other people in the fbi daying that they have been stymied in making some of these arrests or doing some of these investigations because there is a political problem with targeting people that the president of the united states is likely to regard as part of his base. >> well, here is michael savidge, who is a friend of the president and right-wing radio said. he was very disappointed in the president attacking white supremacy. it will cost him tens of thousands of votes. there is this real gas lighty thing. i was reminding myself in charlottesville where he came
out and did this half-hearted thing and said both sides and read another statement and then game out again and erased and that said there is fine people on both sides. he is sending the message he wouldn't condemn david duke for a long time. he pretended he didn't know him. because it's and the to send a message to those folks. >> he built his entire political career on the idea that there are people who are superior to others, that there are people not human, that can be treated as inferior beings, and it worked. and so they're saying we must double down on this message. well must double down on we are -- we are sending the messages and people are receiving them and they are turning out to vote. so president trump is very -- he is a grown man, but he is a very intelligent man. i know, it's a terrible thing to say about trump, but he is a very astute politician who has been able to subvert the kind of
status quo of the republican party and create a kind of political discourse that we had not seen in this country. and if -- and i think it is important to talk about the organizations that are growing that the fbi needs to take seriously. it is important to label these acts of terrorism, but we cannot just stop there because the reality is that under the underbelly of this country is one of entire denial about the fact that this country was built on a hierarchy of human life. and if we are not able to name that and recognize that and actually have the conversations that incredibly difficult to have, we are going to continue to see not only these forms of violence, but democracy that becomes a ghost of what it was or what it can be, and we will never have the promise of this country. the promise of this country is one of constant struggle or the history of this country is constant struggle of inclusion, for more of us to be included in
the promise of freedom and democracy. and trump represents a resistance to that idea, that people of color can actually be part of the center of this country, that we can share power together, that women can control our bodies and decide our destinies. that gay and lesbian and transgendered people are equal. they are resisting each and every single one of these things. >> and the history there, that you noted, the department of justice exists first as a kind of functional bureaucratic move. but the first thing the department of justice does is attempt to bring the klan to heel in the south. the department of justice, the first thing tasked. >> the first, the first anti-terrorism law in american history, the klan control act. so when we talk about this, especially going back to the 9/11 thing, this is the first incidence of terrorism in the united states, a lot of people said that after 9/11, people were no, no, no, no, no. the first incident of terrorism in this country that was designated as terrorism was these ad hoc organizations in the south that had set out to reverse emancipation. that's where we start this
conversation. there have always been white men like tucker carlson in this country, and they've always occupied a particular niche, to serve as denial for people to be allowed to think they are the kind of great shimmering republic without any blemish whatsoever. and to say this is how we have slavery protected in the constitution that never mentions the words negro or slavery, to euphemismize it. so we began gas lighting the u.s. constitution. and we extend that, extrapolate that out to what tucker carlson is doing right now. we know what that is. and deep down the people he's talking to know what that is too. >> everyone knows. >> but this is rather implausible deniability. and that's what he is selling. >> implausible denight. ana radaria are chill la, jelani could be, thank you.
next, what can be done about the breeding ground for white supremacist terror in one of the most nefarious communities, in two minutes. these folks don't have time to go to the post office they use stamps.com all the services of the post office only cheaper get a 4-week trial plus postage and a digital scale go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again.
in just the past five months, there have been throw different mass shootings in which the killers believed to posted a screed to 8 chan. 8chan encourages people to embrace infamy. conceived as the ultimate free speech zone, it grew in stature when it was adopted by people kicked off 4chan for being too toxic for that site which many considered toxic itself. it drew a seething hive of pedophiles and white supremacists, some who pushed for violence, encouraging shooters to try to get the high score by killing a larger number of people than previous mass murderers. now the vast majority of people on these boards are just there for an elicit thrill. but it can have a real radicalizing effect.
the rise of white terrorism and the rise of the islamic state. it be hard to get rid of a site like 8chan. after the massacre, cloud fare severed ties but may return. writing while removing 8chan from our network takes heat off of us, it does nothing to address why hateful sites fest erion line. it does nothing to address why mass shooting occur, why portions of the population feel so disenchant they'd turn to hate. joining me jessica gonzalez calling on big tech to prohibit white supremacists, and kevin ruse for "the new york times." kevin, let me start with you on the broad point made by the cloudfare which is it's kind of whac-a-mole. taking away web hosting services or deplatforming really vile elements of the internet white
supremacist areas pushes it to some other site. what do you think about that contention? >> i don't think it's a perfect formula, chris, but i actually think it's incredibly effective to deplatform these vile, racist dehumanizing sites that are allowing white supremacists to recruit, fund, and normalize bigotry. >> 8chan is a really weird place. you wrote a profile of the founder of it who now says it should be shut down. where did it come from and why is it like this?litter off of 4chan which is another kind of famously lawless message board. in 2013, its founder frederick brennan, who was the founder of the board adult virgins decided -- it was too restrictive on 4chan, so he was going to start a free speech utopian alternative to 4chan where any number of people could post anything they wanted to with basically no rules or moderation at all.
and it kind of struggled for a little while, and then it got a gift in 2014 when a group of people affiliated with the gamer movement got kicked off 4chan for harassing mostly women. they got kicked off 4chan and they set up shop on the only place that would have them. >> the worst actors on that message board get kicked out and go congregate at 8chan. >> it's not easy to get kicked off 4 of chan. you have to be a pretty bad actor. >> what do you think the contours of the conversation should be, jessica, in terms of how corporate entities who are doing things like web hosting or hosting pages what the kind of lines they should be drawing are and who should be enforcing that. >> well, we think the responsibility really is on the companies. they're making money off our engagement, and they are a responsibility to the public to not allow hateful actits and by hateful activities, i
mean these really violent, insightful insightful, threatening, initem dating content by a very organized and sophisticated and internationally connected white supremacist movement. >> that characterization, does that sort of jibe with what you've reported and observed? >> yeah, i think it contains multitudes. there are various people who were on 8chan for various reasons. the place where most of the attention has been focused is on this politics board, paul, where all these mass shooters were going to post their manifestos. and the interesting thing there is that these manifestos were not directed at the president or the general public or the media. >> other people on the board. >> they were directed at other 8chan users. >> but that osays to me 8chan is radicalizing people into violence. they are performing for community that they there to be look what i'm doing and all the
stupid disgusting in jokes and all that stuff is because they want to impress the other members of the community. >> exactly. they're just flexing for each other in this pathetic and derivative way. i think that is part of the reason why shutting it down could be effective. there has been research done on what happened after reddit a few years ago banned some of its most toxic communities. a lot of those people didn't come back. they didn't go raid other parts of reddit and spread hate to those parts. some of them just kind of went away. and it did actually improve the site. so i think there is evidence. >> that it's not whac-a-mole really. taking that stuff away can have a really positive effect. >> there is a core, there is a hardened core of people who will probably follow 8chan wherever it goes. but the sort of casual person exploring 8chan, stumbling on to one of these message boards and deciding to read some more and getting sucked in, there is an on-ramp effect that i think you do get rid of. >> nbc news reporting that its options rapidly dwindling
notification it will disappear for good. so we don't know what its fate. jessica, i want you to respond to an argument i keep seeing more and more from republicans and conservatives, which basically the tech compaies are now going to be the arbiter in terms of what is fair and foul in terms of speed. one day it's white supremacist, and the next thing you know it's going to be all conservatives. >> yeah, chris, this is a red herring. look, it's not hard to know who is a white supremacist. we look on twitter, david duke, former grand wizard of the klu klux klan is on twitter. get that guy out of here. >> right. >> it's not that hard. there is a difference between white people and white supremacist. the line is very clear. folks who are adversarying or inciing violence against historically oppressed groups don't deserve a platform. they don't deserve amplification. they have a right to free speech but they don't deserve for the companies to be amplifying them.
the companies ought not to be prospering from hate. >> where do you thee see this discussion going? the politics as jessica is alluding to are really complex. >> i think this is likely to stay where it is right now which is that private companies are going to be the ones making decisions about where to draw the line. so in this case, it was cloudflair, but it could have been face book or twitter. it could have been a web host. in the absence of any meaningful federal standard on where to draw the line on this, which i don't think is a bad thing necessarily, i think these private companies are going to sort of remain the police of what's allowed and what's not allowed. >> all right, kevin roose and jessica gonzalez, thank you both for joining me. >> thank you. coming up, al green makes case that the president's racism is grounds enough for impeachment. he joins me next. ♪
xfinity mobile is a different kind of wireless network designed to save you money. click, call or visit a store today. as of right now, 118 house democrats, that's more than half of the 235-member caucus either supports impeachment or supports starting an impeachment inquiry against the president. today, the house judiciary committee filed a lawsuit to enforce a subpoena to get former white house counsel don mcgahn to testify about his time in the trump administration. democrats on the committee view mcgahn as a key figure in the obstruction of justice cases that are outlined in the mueller report. the trump administration is preventing mcgahn from testifying. there is a lot of calls for opening an impeachment inquiry that revolve around that obstruction of justice case as well as the president's corruption, reports of him profiting off the presidency and more. but there is a school of thought that the president's racist
language itself is enough to trigger impeachment. that's the theory put forth by texas congressman al green, who in an impeachment resolution voted down last month specifically cited trump's comments attacking for democratic congresswomen of color as invaders, as a high misdemeanor warranting impeachment, trial and removal from office. >> in all of this, the aforementioned donald john trump has by his statements brought the high office of the president of the united states in contempt, ridicule, disgrace, and disrepute and has committed a high misdemeanor in office. >> joining me now is that congressman, al green, democrat from texas. congressman, do you see precedent in the u.s. and history for bringing articles of
impeachment, article of impeachment against the president for the kinds of things he says routinely, like you noted in your previous resolution? >> well, thank you for having me. if i may just share these thoughts about the incident. >> please. >> that has caused a lot of harm. i just want to let the people know in both cities that they have my deepest sympathies and my prayers, but i intend to do more than give prayers and sympathies. i want to move to impeach the president. to answer your question, i happen to have in my hand the actual articles of impeachment against andrew johnson. so i will read to you what it says. and it's very brief because it's not a theory, it is fact. andrew johnson was impeached for doing very much the same thing that this president has done. here's what it reads. this is in article 10 of the articles of impeachment. it says that said andrew johnson has brought the high office of the president of the united states into contempt, ridicule,
and disgrace to the great scandal of all good citizens whereby said andrew johnson, president of the united states did commit and was then and there guilty of a high misdemeanor in office. so the language that i've used is language that the framers would have had me use and it's language that was used when andrew johnson was impeached by the radical republicans. we need some radical republicans and democrats who are willing to take on this president to the same extent that the persons in 1868 took on andrew johnson. he was impeached for his bigotry. that was the underlying reason. and i read to you the language in article 10, which went before the congress. it was voted on, and he was impeached. not convicted, but impeached. but that left an indelible stain on him. he could not get re-elected as a result thereof. we need to do this with this president, mr. hayes, because if he we don't do so, we will deny
history what it richly deserves, and that is to say that in this country, we will not allow the level of bigotry that he has perpetrated and that is causing harm to society. we know that bigotry kills now. we won't stand for it. therefore we will impeach him. >> that's interesting. part of what i hear you saying is that the president's behavior and his language -- we're talking a lot about obstruction of justice. we're just now focusing on this. and i should note that andrew johnson, there were 11 articles of impeachment. this one you're mentioning, the 10th article is about what he said and the kind of language he used and the feelings he incited. what you're saying is basically the president's bigotry and the way he talks has to essentially be marked at this moment in history for all to see throughout history as being aberrant, as being outside the bounds of proper discourse by the president of the united states. >> absolutely correct. but i would also add this. not only does he simply speak in
terms of racism and homophobe yarks islamophobia, citizen phobia, all the various invidious phobias, he also infuses it into policy. the islamic ban, that was policy that he tweeted. kicking persons who are trans out of the military, that was policy. when he said that comment or made the comment about the s-hole countries, he was at that time producing immigration policy, and then went on to try to create a policy that would have made it more difficult for persons to come from african countries to the united states. >> but let me just respond to that, because there are many legal theorists and constitutional theorists say it's important impeachment and the bar for impeachment be abuse of office. for instance, the president's decision to say, rescind tps for haitians, which i think is one of the things you're making mention to, the ban on transgender individuals serving in the military, those are policy differences. the bar has to be higher, clears
some threshold other than a policy disagreement. >> well, first of all, it doesn't have to be a high crime and misdemeanor, as i have evidenced with this article 10. >> right. >> it can be a high misdemeanor. and secondly, it does not have to be a crime. federalist 65, i hate to get into the weeds. >> sure. >> in federalist 65 we find the words of hamilton, the words of madison and jon jay. and they call to our attention that it's the harm the president causes to society. the president is comparable to the ceo of a major corporation. you can fire the ceo of a major corporation if he does harm to the corporation. the framers gave us the ability to fire a president in midterm. >> right. >> immediately upon taking office if he causes harm to society. that's what this is all about. that's what was done at article 10. and that's what we need to do with this president. >> congressman, i always appreciate the incredible thought that you have put into this process every time you're on the show. i really appreciate you taking time tonight. >> well, thank you.
thank you. you're very kind. thank you. >> still ahead, how to think seriously about the threat of mass shootings and domestic terrorism, without, without succumbing to the fear they seek to impose. termites, feasting on homes 24/7. we're on the move. roger. hey rick, all good? oh yeah, we're good. we're good. termites never stop trying to get in, we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home.
(announcer) important message for women and men ages 50 to 85. right now, in areas like yours, people have already called about life insurance through the colonial penn program and received their free beneficiary planner. have you received your free planner? if not, i encourage you to pick up the phone and take advantage of this free offer. in addition to your free beneficiary planner, you'll also receive free information on affordable whole life insurance that has a lifetime rate lock that guarantees your rate can never increase for any reason. if you did not receive your free beneficiary planner, call this number now. please stand by to learn more. i'm alex trebek, here to tell you about a popular life insurance plan with a rate lock that locks in your rate for life so it can never increase. did you get your free information kit? if not, please call this number now.
this affordable plan through the colonial penn program has coverage options for just $9.95 a month. your rate is locked in and can never go up, and your acceptance is guaranteed with no health questions. see how much coverage you can get for just $9.95 a month. call now for your free information kit. thing 1 tonight. democracy has never been pretty, but more and more lately it's seemed downright ugly, which may be why the video from tucson, arizona, has captured all of our imagination this week.
the city council had just formally approved putting a citizen initiative on the ballot to declare tucson a sanctuary city. not everyone was happy with that decision, but the right to protest is a fundamental part of democracy. >> the city does not change or defy immigration laws and it's congress' job -- >> shut up. >> -- to change immigration laws. >> shut up! [ booing ] >> american citizen, american citizen! respect our laws! respect our laws. you're a direct violation to the united states constitution, mayor. >> illegal aliens sanctuary city. >> you're in direct violation of being a jackass. >> quiet, quiet, quiet, quiet, quiet. >> the face of that
anti-immigration protest, the infectious sayer cal laughter of the man in the green shirt warmed the hearts of millions across the internet which is why green shirt guy was trending all day. green shirt guy is alex kak. he is a 28-year-old field worker who worked on that sanctuary cities measure. and maybe he is laughing because he just won, or maybe he knows if you want to be heard at a tucson city council meeting, you got to bring something more to the show. you stand today, you stand today, so that the children of this world may live and grow and laugh and play >> banjo guy is thing 2 in 60 seconds.
i come, i sat at every, no one can hear my silent trek i knock and yet remain unseen for i am dead, for i am dead >> it's better than about 90% of congressional hearings. now this whole situation may seem odd, but local nbc reporter nick vanzandt, who captured all this amazing video said to be honest, none of this particularly unusual for a tucson city council meeting. if i had the power, we'd be a sanctuary, completely safe city for immigrants too there would be no leaving, there would be no pleading, come to arizona too
can someone turn on the ac?! no? oh right... ...'cause there isn't any. here- (vo) automatically sort your expenses and save over 40 hours a month. without you, we wouldn't have electricity. our hobby would be going to bed early. (vo) you earned it, we're here to make sure you get it. (danny) it's time to get yours! (vo) quickbooks. backing you.
that was the scene last night just before 10:00 p.m. in times square, new york city. mass panic in a crowded public space when people thought they heard gunshots and started running. it turned out it was just a motor bike backfiring. this is now a feature of american life. the haunting thought in the back of one's head while in a public space. the kind of mass shootings we've seen in el paso and dayton are now grim, ritualized parts of american society. same goes for mass shootings like the one this brownsville, brooklyn, where one person was killed and 11 injured on july
27th. those don't get as much attention, but they terrify people just as much. they leave just as much trauma and grief and mayhem. and here is what is so perverse. the very fear created by gruesome public displays of gun violence often serve to advance the interests of gun manufactures. there is evidence that gun sales rise after mass shootings. i saw this firsthand in the wake of the mass shooting in san bernardino in 2015 when we went the talk to a gun shop owner the day after the shooting. >> how has business been? >> normally the business increases after things of this nature. >> really? >> people, you know, my phone has been ringing off the hook this morning about handgun purchases and things of that nature. >> what's more, the public fear these mass shootings precipitate can be clay in the hands of demagogues as president trump himself demonstrated after san bernardino. >> donald j. trump himself is
calling for a complete and total shutdown of muslims entering the united states until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on. >> and when the nra and politicians called for arming teachers after parkland and when sean hannity called for a dystopic military con to be erected around every school in the country after this week's massacre. >> i would like i would like to perimeter of every school in america to be surrounded bip retired police, retired secret service, have one armed guard on every floor of every school, all over every mall, the perimeter and inside every hall of every mall. >> schools across the country now routinely subject children as young as 4 to lockdown drills, where we collectively traumatize an entire generation. it's sheer madness. if our society continues to commit itself so strenuously to the sacred principle of easy access to guns, but the climate
of fear that mass shootings create will be channeled to ever-more draconian impingements on other liberties. the guns stay, but we want the state to guard every school like a garrison, monitor every chat board, involuntarily commit those with mental health problems and on and on and on. i've watched what collectiveized fear has done to law and policy in the post-9/11 era, when again, people had good reason to be scared. there's much in that record that serves as a cautionary tale. so the challenge for us as a culture and citizens and political leaders and those in the media, as we choose how and when to cover these incidents is how to be clear-eyed to the threat posed by gun violence and white supremacist extremist violence and the dark nihilistic spree shooters without succumbing to the very sense of fear and paranoia and panic they seek to impose.
succumbing to the paranoia that will produce bad policy. here to talk about that is mark fullman, vince warren, the executive director of the center for constitutional rights. is that a thing that you think about from your perch? having litigated in the wake of the war on terror, when you think about how our society deals with what we have now? >> we think about it all the time. and there are times of panic where all of a sudden, everybody needs a solution to a problem. now, here's the reality. if you have a problem of mass shooting, the solution is restricting gun use. if you have a problem of white supremacist, the solution is to keep the president from inciting it, right? but the solution is not and really can never be to give law enforcement more tools around -- >> but that's what they want! i've seen them all over the tv saying, we need more tools, we need more tools. >> but there's never been a time in american history when law enforcement hasn't wanted more tools, but there have been plenty of times in american history when we actually regret
giving them more tools, 9/11 being one of them. >> mark, what do you think about the way to think about the phenomenon of spree shooting that we have seen, that is clearly now such a macabre, grotesque part of just like american society and consciousness. >> yeah, well, i think, look, this is a complex problem, chris. and it requires a lot of different policy ideas towards a solution. and i think the good news here is that there are policy ideas and tools that can be used effectively to try to prevent these attacks. there's a field called behavioral threat assessment that's growing and getting more attention now that combines mental health and law enforcement expertise to, you know, deal with the warning signs that often proceed these cases. but i think for these tools to work, we have to look at them seriously and understand the nuance of them, dispense with the false stigmatization of mental illness, that's just wrong for president trump to say, mental illness pulls the trigger.
there's research documenting this, the vast majority of these cases do not involve people with clinically diagnosable mental illness. they have serious mental health issues, behavioral problems, but these cases are coming from people with personal grievances and anger and rage who are acting on that rage. and they know what they're doing. and there are ways to deal with this, i think, in terms of legal policy, that can be looked at much more seriously now. and fortunately, people are starting to look at that more seriously. >> i want to get your sense of what those are in just a second. but i want to ask you first, vince. one thing that's perverse, it seems to me, if you hold constant the guns, we have 4% of the world's population, 40% of the guns, more guns than people and you try to approach the problem, you're going to have to have like bigger and bigger incursions on civil liberties to try to work your way around the gun issue, rather than just dealing with the gun issue. >> well, you know, i'm not actually -- yes, i think that the incursions around civil liberties become really, really key. you know, when we talk about
white supremacy and law enforcement, we have to understand that who things. one is that you can't actually have white supremacy without the military, without law enforcement. two, you can't have white supremacy without laws that enforce these types of things. so what we don't want to conflate is we don't want to conflate the nomenclature of domestic terrorism and say, wow, we actually need to create a whole new paradigm for the law enforcement tools that we have. the law enforcement tool really isn't the question. the question is around the political will and our values. >> so i want that make sure i understand. the tool kit is there. the legal authority is there. the things that are needed to address this, to perhaps make sure that you can find folks that may be on the verge of this or planning this, you're saying that they're there legally and in the hands of law enforcement, what's lacking is the will to do so? >> that's exactly right. >> what do you think are the policies that you have sort of come to believe can make a difference here, mark? >> well, so there's been a lot of talk many recent days about these so-called red flag laws, which we have seen started to see spread across various states.
and understanding what that is is important. this is not at about mental illness, per se. there's a case from last year in pennsylvania, we can look at, that illustrates how this should or could work. there was a guy who went to a court building in pennsylvania and shot four people. he was in the middle of a very bitter, angry divorce proceeding with his wife. there was a restraining order against him placed on him by the judge. he violently attacked his wife already. and the judge at the same time refused to take away his firearms. that's the kind of case where a red flag law could potentially be very effective. and i think people need to understand what that is. done right, with rigorous oversight and judicial review, could be an effective tool in my view. >> so the red flag law, there was one passed in new york, as well, that there's some sort of adjudicative process, some sort of official determination, in which it's said, your guns are taken away or you can't proactively buy one? >> it varies by state, but the gist of it is that either family members or in some cases law enforcement can go to judge and
have a judge decide in court whether or not a person can have their guns removed because they're dangerous. and that's got to be set on a number of factors like dangerous behavior. there is a process to do that. >> thank you very much for that. that does it for us here on "all in" here this evening. tonight a white house aid says the president was a rock star during the hospital visits today perhaps forgetting for a moment he was there for the wounded and loved ones of the dead. the white house puts out a video showing off the president as the president attacks democrats as the politics around these mass shootings have become even more toxic. also tonight, the pressure increases on congress to do something, democrats say they want the republicans to come to the table and the attacks have lit up the campaign trail with joe biden out in front today with a full on attack of his own against donald trump, all of it as "the