tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC August 6, 2015 12:00am-1:01am PDT
>> good evening from cleveland. site of the first republican presidential debate of the 2016 campaign taking place tomorrow night. i'm steve kornacki in for chris hayes. these are the ten candidates invited into the prime time debate tomorrow night. under the rules set forth by fox news. the candidate with the highest poll number, donald trump right now, will be center stage tomorrow night with the other candidates positioned around him based on their standing in the polls. these seven candidates polled outside the top ten in the average of the national polls chosen by fox. because of that, they missed the cut. they will not be allowed the take cut in the main debate. instead, they are being relegated to an earlier debate at 5:00 p.m. tomorrow. a debate expected to attract far fewer eyeballs than that prime time showdown. and donald trump yesterday taking credit for the fact that
two of his primary an tag miss theist in, rick perry being forced into the earlier debate. graham and perry were really hitting me hard and they went down in the polls. i am greatly honored by that. trump says his plan for tomorrow night is simply to be the donald. >> i don't know how you can rehearse for a debate. i watched mitt romney. he let us down last time. he rehearsed. that third debate, it was really catastrophic. i don't know what happened to him. i think you have to be yourself. you have to be who you are. >> fox news debate moderators say they have a plan for dealing with trump though they are not sharing it right now. one of the moderators bret that baier said he gets cold sweats not at the thought of handling donald trump.
>> the guy first and foremost tomorrow night, we have seen he has attacked john mccain. he gave out lindsey graham's phone number and it didn't hurt him. he just blows off a policy question and it doesn't seem to hurt him. is there anything that can go wrong for donald trump tomorrow? >> i think if he is caught without an answer. if he is caught fumbling around. and you know, we've not seen him in this role. he is not used to being cut off, although you do get sense that trump is trying harder. sort of in shortening his answers a little bit. softening his tone a little bit which i think is a weird risk for him. i think some people that are gravitating toward him, one of the reasons is the idea that he is unfiltered. the idea that he is unscripted. so i think that on one hand, i get why he is trying to show that he'll tone it down.
he wants to surprise people that are skeptical of him. that is only way to grow if he is serious about this. he also needs to provide his sort of base here which is, i think this base is sort of sticking it to the elites. he has to give them something. my guess is he will hit bush and hit bush hard on the shared donor issue with the clintons. like that was just ready made for him. he has to find something. i think he can't be too mellow. >> that's interesting. the idea that he is maybe not blunt enough for all the bluster we've seen the last few weeks. what about from the other side? he has been, to the extent he's been telegraphing anything, that he doesn't plan to go in there to attack these guys full on. he will wait to see if they attack him. how do these other candidates hourgs does jeb bush, how should he be handling him? there's almost a physical intimidation with the way jeb bush attacks people. there is a risk for somebody like jeb bush looking weak if he
doesn't handle at this time right way. >> i think jeb is in the toughest box of them all. especially coming off what wasn't a very strong performance in new hampshire. he got criticized, a very powerful byron york piece in the washington examiner over the weekend quoting a lot of conservatives who were concerned that jeb didn't respond to hillary clinton's broad side at the urban league where she mocked right to rise. basically pounding him throughout most of the speech. then he gets on there and pre tends it never happens. so i think there is a potential narrative that is about to take off if he is not careful among some conservatives who think, is jeb tough enough? is he tough enough to take on the clintons? if he is not tough enough to take on trump, does that make him tough enough to take on the clintons? i think he has a lot on the lightning. i think he might have more on the line handle the anybody. the idea that we're debating he will go after anybody.
he is the front-runner. normally they have on sit and wait for the incoming. it will be amazing to me if he doesn't get attacked. conventional debate rules state when you're in a debate, you go after the guy in first place. >> i guess that's the thing we've seen with donald trump. all the conventional rules and the conventional assumptions, seem to be out the window. whenever i see a reporter talking or writing about there race, it seems they felt the need to immediately attach a disclaimer. not that i think donald trump will be president, that i think he will beat the republican nominee but are we starting to reassess that? if he even jumps out in the polls more. do we have to start saying this could happen? >> you're right. i was thinking about the way you were doing. that i was thinking of the passover line. you're right. i've noticed that in a lot of people writing it up. they want to make sure they let
the readers know. nobody thinks he can get the nomination. i think he is attempted into something. at first immigration is a wedge in the republican party. that's not news. we know that it is but it is usually not a long lasting thing. the other part of his message that is more powerful, that you hear resonating when you talk to trump voters, people who say they're for trump and you ask them. why the issue that he is not a member of the political class or in their minds he's not. even though he is rich and a billionaire, he is not part of the elite. that's an amazing thing for him to pull off. here's a billionaire pooh who have does nothing but invites elites to his weddings. because of the way the elites talk about him, the more they criticize and the more the working class folks that have been gravitating think, he's not one of them and he'll stick it to them. i think that's the part of his message that is more powerful here that could resonate across party lines.
that all the candidates should be nervous about. >> that debate just over 24 hours from now. what will trump say? chuck todd, thank you for your time tonight. >> all right. thank you. for the second time in less than a week, donald trump's campaign has cut ties with someone over racially charged posts on social media. first they fired sam nunberg over racist facebook posts and now, a person who identified himself as the arizona there director. that's just the part of the story that includes secret recordings that seem to contradict claims made by trump's campaign manager. here to explain is buzz feed news white house reporter. so the basics there. tell us what you guys learned today? >> first go it's great to see you at a reasonable hour
although i miss the doughnuts in front of me. this is a great story reported by my colleagues. this is a story with political sophistication by donald trump and also the level of support and where donald trump still is when it come to the rest of the republican party. as you mentioned, this former be the republican party official, he was vice chair, i believe, of the party. form he politician himself. he tried run for state house and didn't make it. he has claimed and says that he is the arizona state director for donald trump and was paid by donald trump. to write up a plan for the primary there. and then our reporting by the reporters that i mentioned, our team dug in and found these incendiary facebook posts were
on the one hand, somewhat common to some segments of the far right but very, very extreme in terms of racially tinged language, about president obama specifically. we asked him about it. and he said, okay, i'm this guy. i'm this guy's director. we asked the campaign about it and they said we don't know this person at all. he is an overzealous volunteer. now generally, when that happens, there is a campaign that is having a crisis moment trying to protect itself of you don't get, what we got. phone recordings that border made of the phone call he had between trump campaign and himself, talking about the fact that they were going to claim that he was an overzealous campaign volunteer. now the story is the insides of what the trump campaign is like. that they're very nervous about these staffer stories. they want to shut these staffer stories down.
you mentioned the sam nunberg story. they fired him. they distanced themselves from him. they're on the phone with him saying we don't, we can't have you around anymore. we don't wasn't around. we're going to say we never knew anything about you when the phone call that we got have them saying that which flies in the face of not knowing anything about him. >> one of the questions about this, long term for the trump campaign. this is something. they've attempted into this grassroots energy out there on the far right. certainly on this issue of immigration. and there is a campaign that is being put together organizationally. >> that's right. this is why this campaign connects with a certain sophistication you may not have expected. he has a campaign manager that is aware of things that can be bad for them, that understands staff stories, storiesn't just
about donald trump are bad and they distance themselves very quickly. a modern day of doing. they with call them, we mentioned in the facebook posts, he is out of the tent in moments just like that sam nunberg guy days after being caught. on the other hand, he has tapped into some of the things that the tea party candidates from 2012 also got trapped with. that some of these tougher, more incendiary comments. that's a problem going forward. interesting how these will balance. the incendiary comments, plus keeping a good campaign going. >> all right. from buzz feed. thank you for taking a few minutes. thank you. still ahead in our preview of the big debate tomorrow, how president obama anticipated and countered. plus, how topics like the black lives matter movement will play out on stage and the other tv
event also taking place tomorrow night. as jon stewart makes his final appearance behind the daily show desk. take zzzquil and sleep like... the kids went to nana's house... for the whole weekend. zzzquil. the non-habit forming sleep aid that helps you sleep easily, and wake refreshed. because sleep is a beautiful thing. you know the best thing about summer? summer pizza. and you know the best thing about summer pizza? it tastes light. it tastes fresh. and it's pizza. this summer, try our new grilled chicken margherita pizza. with roma tomatoes basil pesto sauce mozzarella and grilled, all-white meat chicken. all on our thin crust. get a large for only $12.00. and save room for dessert with our chocolate chip cookie for only $5.00 more. better ingredients. better pizza. papajohns.com.
♪ some neighbors are energy saving superstars. how do you become a superstar? with pg&e's free online home energy checkup. in just under 5 minutes you can see how you use energy and get quick and easy tips on how to keep your monthly bill down and your energy savings up. don't let your neighbor enjoy all the savings. take the free home energy checkup. honey, we need a new refrigerator. visit pge.com/checkup and get started today.
for nearly an hour this afternoon, president obama pre butted the debate by taking on his iran critics point by point. >> let me address a few of the arguments that have been made so far in opposition to this deal. first there are those who say the inspections are not strong enough because inspectors can't go anywhere in iran at any time with no notice. >> we don't have the right to inspect immediately. >> we're giving them 24 days. >> military sites can go uninspected. >> here's the truth. inspectors will be allowed daily access to iran's key nuclear sites. by the way, nuclear material isn't something you hide in the closet. the bottom line is if iran cleats, we can catch them and we will. second.
there are those who argue the deal isn't strong enough because some of the limitations on the civilian nuclear program expire in 15 years. >> a 10 to 15 years. >> over the next 10 to 15 years. >> in about 10 to 15 years. >> without there deal, the scenarios the critics warn about happening in 15 years could happen six months from now. by killing this deal, congress would not merely pave iran's pathway to a bomb. it would accelerate it. third, the number of critics say the deal isn't worth it. randle will get billions of dollars in sanctions relief. >> over $100 billion will flow into iran. >> iran will deep more than billions of dollars. >> hundreds of billions of dollars. >> an argument is effectively sanctions against any resolution. whatever benefit they may claim from sanction relief pales in comparison to the danger it could pose with a nuclear
weapon. the final criticism, this is sort of a catch all that you may hear. the notion that there's a better deal to be had. we should get a better deal. >> this is a terrible deal. >> why do we have a bad iran deal in. >> this is a bad deal. >> at the end of the deal there is a better deal. >> that's repeated over and over again. a bad deal. need a better deal. those who say we can walk away from this deal and maintain sanctions are selling a fantasy. >> much more on the president's preemptive, pre debate attack next. e to take a pill? and why stop what you're doing to find a bathroom? with cialis for daily use, you don't have to plan around either. it's the only daily tablet approved to treat erectile dysfunction so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. plus cialis treats the frustrating urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night.
tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision or any symptoms of an allergic reaction stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. why pause the moment? ask your doctor about cialis for daily use. for a free 30-tablet trial go to cialis.com
between now and the congressional vote in september, you are going to hear a lot of arguments against this deal. if the rhetoric in these ads and the accompanying commentary sounds familiar, it should. for many of the same people who argued for the war in iraq now making the case against the iran nuclear deal. it was a mindset characterized by a preference for military action over diplomacy. a mindset that put a premium on unilateral u.s. action over the painstaking work of building international consensus. >> president obama making the case for his nuclear deal with iran at a speech today at american university, connecting the current opposition to the deal to the push for the iraq war more than a decade ago. coming on the eve of the first republican presidential debate
as a pre buttal. now trying to evoke john f. kennedy who spoke at the same campus in 1963 to present a nuclear test ban treaty the soviet union, [ today urged the lawmaker who will decide the fate of the deal to consider the stakes. >> president kennedy warned americans not to see conflict as inevitable. a combination as impossible and communication as nothing more than the exchange of threats. as members of congress reflect on their pending decision, i urge them to set aside political concerns. shut out the noise. consider the stakes involved with the vote that you will cast. if congress kills this deal, we will lose more than just
constraints on iran's nuclear program or the sanctions we have painstakingly built. wefl lost something more america's credit bill as a leader of diplomacy. >> joining me now, former chief of staff to colin powell when he was secretary of state. come, thank you for joining me. he said the choice he is facing with a choice between diplomacy and some kind of war soon. i'm curious what you make of that. he seems to be saying, if congress rejects this iran deal, we're looking at war. do you agree with that? >> i think the president gave a very powerful speech, steve. i'm not a fan of his rhetoric anymore because i don't think his actions live up to the rhetoric. that said, i think this was a very powerful speech and it covered all the points he needed to. the mindset that identifies the people from the iraq days with
the people now is that they lie, they disassemble, they give ambiguous answers and have no alternative answers. there is only one alternative here. if we say and we have said, two presidents have said iran with a nuclear weapon is unacceptable. we have two choices. we proceed down the path with this negotiated deal and home it works and do everything we can to make it work or we go to war. there are no other choices. >> when you talk about war. one thing that some critics of this deal argue is that the notion of a massive commitment and occupation, ground troops, that that notion of war maybe doesn't apply to what it would take to disable iran's nuclear program. this is what senator cotton said. >> the united states military has amazing capabilities. the israeli military has pretty amazing capabilities as well. the president has said the military option remains on the table. i don't think he would say that
if it didn't work. the only conclusion that air and naval bombing would in fact work. >> so the history that someone like tom cotton would say, in 1981 israel targeted iraq's nuclear reactor. they took it out with target air strikes. in 2007 israel target syria, a nuclear reactor in syria. they took that out. no ground troops, no long material commitment. why wouldn't that be done? >> we have a totally different situation with iran. and i would hasten to advise mr. cotton that he needs to look back on ten years and over a trillion dollars spent in iraq and no real positive solution there. then look at iran with three time population, four time the territory. much more difficult territory. and think about what it would mean to really have to do something militarily. what you get with bombing, and
i'm participated in studies that more or less demonstrate this with great clarity. you get a five to seven-year delay in the program. it goes then deep underground like the north koreans and they make a decision which our intelligence community says they have not made to this point and they build it. and they were confronted with one or two possibilities again. we either invade and end it for all time or we let it go on and they develop it. that's what we did with north korea. we let it go on and they're now a nuclear power. >> another thing president said, he talked about the knee jerk partisanship. i take his point, that has been an aspect of american politics the last few years. but there are also a number of democrats. a number from new york. i saw the other day. beyond knee jerk partisanship, do you see some valid critiques of this deal?
>> there is a valid critique of the deal, of course. i won't go into it. it is complex and i don't think it really mattered. i think we have to give as the president did, a nod to those listening to benjamin netanyahu and others around benjamin netanyahu and they believe the potential for a nuclear weapon and this will lead toirkts they think, is existential for israel. i think the exact opposite. i think the chaos in the region leashed by america's invasion of iraq, isis, all that that produced, the civil war in syria has put israel's security in jeopardy unlike any time since 1948. i think further military action in the region against iran, further embroiling the military in southwest asia and for who knows how long and how much money will jeopardize israel even further. so i think they have a genuine
likely to come under, her campaign probably wasn't too happy to see yet another line of bad headlines set off by the "washington post" school this morning that the fbi is now looking into the security of clinton's private e-mail system. i'm joined now by the political correspondent for vox and co-author of hrc. so jonathan, we had a story last week, or two weeks ago by the new york time by clinton and maybe a justice department investigation. a lot of the details of that were subsequently walk back by the numb. now we have this report from the "washington post" about the filibuster. do we know the nature of what they're looking at and where this could lead? >> i think this is really part of the same thing. it is a question of whether classified information was being forwarded to, sent to, received by hillary clinton and then how the state department handled any information that might have been classified once they got possession of this document.
this is actually a related thing. and congressman elijah cummings wrote something for the "huffington post" a few days ago and said, the chairman had written to the fbi asking them to look into this. so a very related matter to that earlier story. still, we're not talking about a criminal investigation and still we're not talking about secretary clinton being the subject of the investigation. but it is not good news for her. >> yeah. there is some new polling numbers. i want to put this up on the screen. the first primary state in the country, new hampshire, look at this. this came out just yesterday. bernie sanders, of course, a next door neighbor. he is from vermont. a lot of people there are extra familiar with him. he is within 6 points of this poll of hillary clinton in new hampshire. if you step back and look at the national numbers, a little lop-sided. showing hillary clinton still a little more than 2-1 nationally but again, there is growth there for bernie sanders. so with these stories that we keep seeing about the e-mail server.
now we have the story of the fbi. i guess every month between now and the election there will be releases of new batches of e-mails. are you concerned that this is the kind of issue that could drag things down? >> absolutely. they don't want to say it too loudly because there's concern they could stoke the fire. i do hear from democrats, mostly from people who are not big hillary fans. i do hear from them that they could nominate her and and then have her implode because of the e-mail issue. there are two separate issues. one is the legal issue. the question of whether she did anything wrong legally and she may be fine in that regard. we haven't seen any charges against her or any evidence of illegality. and the other is who is that it we might be electing president? she decided too this e-mail in a way that subverted open records rules. and i think that makes americans
uncomfortable is that certainly something that ties into that narrative of her not being trustworthy. >> all right. are thank you for your time tonight. appreciate it. >> take care. and coming up, how the republican candidates will respond to something that's getting harder and harder to ignore. the black lives matter movement.
in an earlier interview this week, asked about the black lives matter movement and you called it silly. why did you call it silly? >> i don't recall calling it silly. what i called silly is political correctness going amok. that's what is silly. when, you know, i guess it was martin o'malley who said black lives matter, white lives matter, he got in trouble for that and will to apologize. that's what i'm talking about is silly. >> on sunday's "meet the press," dr. ben carson, the only
african-american candidate from either party appeared to walk back comments he made last week to the left leaning news outlet think progress about the black lives matter movement. in the 360 days since mike brown was killed by darren wilson, the spraenlt essentially gave rice to the movement, a growing number say it needs to change. a new "washington post" poll finding 60% of americans believe that to be the case. that marks a shift from the pew research poll. back then more than 50% said it needed to change. the question is whether the black lives matter movement, perhaps the most intense civil rights movement will play a role in the first republican presidential debate tomorrow. joining me, the host of nerding out on msnbc's shift. also a senior fellow at the roosevelt institute.
we heard ben carson there talking about political correctness at work here. he mentioned martin o'malley getting booed at net roots nation. jeb bush basically made the same point about that martin o'malley comment. he said we're so upsight that you apologize for saying lives matter in i know in the political context, it is a slogan, i guess. so it is really striking to me when you ask a republican presidential candidate or a democrat presidential candidate, you're getting two different answers. >> one is through agenda settings. at the national urban league conference last week, all three of the major candidates on the democratic side, former secretary of state hillary clinton, martin o'malley and bernie sanders all gave speeches addressing the demands of the black lives matter movement,
around police accountability, around incarceration, disinvestment and black communities and communities of color. it is as if the movement could have written the speech that's those three democratic candidates gave. now on the republican side, you're right. they think this is silly to use ben carson's phrase. but let me tell you. you pointed to polling data. this is the second way in which movements have power. they influence public opinion and the public opinion among americans and particularly among white americans and independence has shifted dramatically in the last year cynic mike brown's killing. so you have now a majority of white americans who agree that we need to do more around racial justice in this country. we have over 60% of independents who agree. and even on the republican side, something hike 20 some odd percentage of republicans agreed last year. now it is over a third. so even within the republican party, there is movement in agreement in terms of public
demand of the movement. >> here's another poll stat that jumped out at me. talking about police violence, police brutality. a new a.p. poll showing 18% of republicans say police are more likely to use deadly force against a black person. 50% of democrats say that's the case. a big chasm there. i want to play for you how donald trump is talking about. this he was asked by chuck todd about black lives matter. this is what he said. >> i want to ask you about black lives matter. the latest shooting of a white police officer shooting an unarmed black man. do you see this as a crisis in america? >> it is a massive crisis. it is a double crisis. what's happening and people, i look at things and i see it on television and some horrible mistakes are made. at the same time, we have to give power back to the police. crime is rampant. i'm a big person who believes in very big, you know, we need police and we need protection.
>> that dorian, the story of donald trump's rise in the polls. i'm curious with what you think of who he is talking to. who he is connecting to. the claim that crime is rampant. the story is that crime has fallen to record low levels and there is a constituency listening to that and nodding their head. >> half of that is just not factual. the first half is more important where he acknowledges there is a problem. if he says that on the stage tomorrow night, that there is a problem of police killing of innocent black people. how will his other comrades in the republican party respond to that? in that sense, he is again responding to the black lives matter movement. he has to acknowledge there is a problem even though he sneaks in and basically a lie, right? that crime is somehow rampant which is just not true. in his first half of the comment he acknowledged the movement's demands. >> all right.
thank you for your time tonight. appreciate that. >> thank you. still to come, donald trump's immigration comments looked like they might sink him. instead, why it left the other gop candidates scrambling to catch up with him. that's ahead. ♪ ♪ (ee-e-e-oh-mum-oh-weh) (hush my darling...) (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.) (hush my darling...) man snoring (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.) woman snoring take the roar out of snore. yet another innovation only at a sleep number store.
for the second time in two weeks, police responded to reports of an active shooter at a movie theater today. this time it was at a theater outside nashville, tennessee. joining me live from the scene with the latest is nbc's mark potter. i understand new details now emerging about this incident. what is the latest we know about what happened in nashville today? >> this is an ever fluid situation. it is minute by minute. we're waiting for an official news conference to happen again soon. what we are hearing now from police is that despite the thing that they said earlier about the suspect being in his 50s, they are now saying he was a 29-year-old white male. a local man. they had not identified him officially yet so we're waiting for that.
there have been some reports giving out a name but we're not going with that yet until we get officially confirmed. they've also, they were revising the account of what happened in the room, in the theater when an officer walked in here and confronted the man. at first they said the suspect fired at the officer. the officer fired back. the man went out the back door and was shot dead by s.w.a.t. officers. later this police chief here for the metro police department said that the officer went in. the man raised his hand. appeared to pull a trigger finger. the officer backed up. they didn't know if he actually fired the shot. he went out the back door. he was shot dead. now the officer said that they had, the chief said they had not found that handgun. now there's been a tweet going out i know laing that they found an air soft pistol like a pellet gun that shoots soft pellets. that's what the man was carrying. and they showed a picture of that. so we're waiting for all this to be pulled together, to have a clearer picture of what the man
had. what we do hear consistently is that he was inside, threatening patrons. he had pepper spray with red dye in it and he went after at least three patrons. one man was also slightly cut apparently with a hatchet this man was carrying. nobody was seriously hurt. no one was taken away in the ambulance. but this could have been much worse. a patron in the theater next door. he was told by police of a white man with red hair comes in here, run, get out of here. and that was a warning he was given. so we're getting new details and we expect more shortly. >> all right. mark potter in antioch, tennessee. appreciate the time. we'll be right back.
immigration is under control. they want to see it completed. >> those that have overstayed their visas, you can sebl them back. >> the accusation that some are rapists and murderers could have hurried donald trump in the polls. it didn't. instead it helped to put him in first place status. finaling that 65% of republican primary voters are confident in trump's ability to make decisions. the candidates are playing catch up. many of them targeting so-called sanctuary cities along the way. sanctuary cities are places that shield undocumented immigrants by refusing to comply with federal immigration officials. yesterday rand paul introduced an amendment in the senate that would restrict aid for these cities. john kasich, ted cruz, rick perry, carly fiorina to name a
few have all loudly called for the federal government to do the same. this week bobby jinldal went a step further saying a sanctuary city should be arrested. joining me, one of those mayors. a mayor of a sanctuary city. summerville, a so-called sanctuary city. thank you for joining us. let me put it to you this way. if federal law says certain people should not be in this country, if they are illegally living in this country, illegally living in the city, why shouldn't you be trying to turn them in? >> thank you for having me on. i think the issue which is typical of the rhetoric, the reckless rhetoric you're hearing from the gop side, really just confuses people and didn't give justice and truthfulness to sanctuary cities. they evolved almost 30 years ago. actually, 1979, starting in los angeles. and summerville, massachusetts,
1987. and it was not an attempt to not cooperate but to not have us have to begin to profile and distinguish between so much documented andundocumented status. now, i am, i continue to be blown away by comments of bobby jindal and the actions of the other candidates. there's nothing bold about these comments. there's nothing that espouses leadership with their statements. in fact, these are cowardly comments meant to incite the mob. we are a community in summer field where one-third is foreign born. we speak 52 languages. since we declared ourselves sanctuary city. our crime has been down 41%. it is absurd and people know it is more complex than this. to make statements such as, the declaration or calling yourself a sanctuary city in and of
itself cultivates an environment for rapists, for murderers, for felons. that's not the case. >> you say you don't want to be in a situation where you have to check the paperwork of everybody between documented andundocumented. are there circumstances? are there, is there any condition where would you inquire or look into somebody's immigration status? >> absolutely. summerville has not only been a sanctuary city since 1987. a little over a year ago i signed an order. federal courts have found the program to be unconstitutional. it was unconstitutional for municipalities to hold people on a blind warrant detainer. summer feel's policy is if you have a felonious record, you've been charged with a violent crime. we'll not only hold you on the immigration, we will follow up with those federal agencies. you don't get a free pass.
just because a community, almost they hunt communities and counties that have declared themselves over the decades, that doesn't mean you get a free pass. that's not the case. everything bobby jindal belies the data. the wave since then, all the studies show that undocumented males are less likely to commit crimes than their counter part here in the u.s. it is just not true. and what i find offensive is that i'm the mayor of a small city trying to create an exceptional place to live, work for all. i need to earn the trust of everyone in the community to solve issues of public health, public safety. i find myself out there by myself as one small city, when i home others will join me side by side taking on the ridiculous reckless rhetoric of bobby jindal and the cast of cowardly characters.
marked by the way. >> tomorrow night is a big night for television. fox news will host the first official republican presidential debate and jon stewart will host his final else of the daily show after a 16-year run. going after the fox news machine and its personalities has become a staple over the years so it is really something that he'll say goodbye just minutes after what may end up being the highest traded broadcast in history. joining me now, matthew, the executive editor of the hollywood reporter. so matthew, i'm wondering, tomorrow night. fox has this debate for two hours. 9:00 to 11:00. jonl stewart has just watched this with everybody else. you know what? i'm going on keep going. this is too good to hang it up now. he is going to miss this. >> absolutely. no doubt that fox news and jon stewart have both benefit from
each other over the past, especially the past five to ten years. roger ales the head of fox news said he doesn't think jon stewart dislikes him and there's no reason to. fox news has been a fountain of material for jon stewart over the years. >> it is hard to remember when he took over the show back in 1999, wasn't nearly as political. didn't have the edge that it has right now. here's one of those key moments in the evolution of jon stewart's daily show. a lot of people remember this. 2004. he went on cross fire, the old show on cnn. this happen. >> it's not so much that it is bad as it is hurting america. so i wanted -- >> wait, wait. >> here's what i wanted to tell you guys. >> stop. stop, stop, stop hurting america. and come work for us. we as the people --
>> how do you pay? >> not well. >> but you can sleep at night. >> and you know, matthew, after that appearance, cross fire was kansas he told. jon stewart was celebrated. baltimore where he found his identity? >> i think so. that's where he kromd the couch from his set and turned it into a news programesque set. the head of cnn said later, when jon stewart did that it contributed to their decision to end cross fire. which for a media critics, essentially what jon stewart has become, that's the ultimate compliment. he really effected change. >> i wonder why you think he decided to hang it up. did he get tired of it? i used to always hear him say when he was questioned about the political content of his show. he would fall back on, i'm just a comedian. what are you hassling me for? he was really so much more than a comedian in what he was saying. >> absolutely.
he has become one of the fiercest, funniest, most insightful. as to the question why he is leaving, he said plain and simple, he was getting restless. he took time off last summer to direct a movie and it got him thinking, there is more to life than. this he is only in his mid 50s. there is probably another act for him. and he was heading into an election cycle where he said he didn't have the same fire and he was ready to hand it off. >> all right. from the hollywood reporter. thank you for joining us. appreciate that. >> that's "all in" for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" starts now. >> i have to believe that jon stewart decided to end his program on the night of the first debate, essentially to give like a booster rocket to trevor noah coming in after him. it is going to be very sad that he's not there. >> maybe he should extend it one
more night. >> let's start a petition. thank you. thanks to you at home for staying with us for the next hour. i have an important video to show you right off the top. i need on warn you. it is a little bit graphic. it is not like war graphic. it is more like nature graphic. a little bit weird. where it comes from, this is, you know the videos that start playing now whenever you go to a political campaign's website? this is the thing they all have now. this frinls is what you get when you go to the website for chris christie's super pac. you get the normal stuff in the foreground. in the back ground you get the video of chris christie telling it like it is. meeting with potential voter, kissing babies. here's the website for carly fiorina, the same tell plate. a patriotic video that shows the american flag in the back ground. and you get carly fiorina and