tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC August 16, 2016 12:00am-1:01am PDT
>> thy republican nominee announces his new plan to combat terror as his campaign rewrites history. >> before obama came along, we didn't have any successful radical islamic terrorist attack in the united states. plus, inside the stunning new projection in the nbc background map. >> this man is totally thoroughly unqualified to be president of the united states of america. >> biden time in pennsylvania, as trump's call for poll watchers sparks a legal outcry. >> the only way we can lose, in my opinion, i really mean this, pennsylvania, is if cheating goes on. >> all that and why trump's attack on the media may be different than any other candidate when "all in" starts now. >> i'm not running against "crooked" hillary, i'm running against the crooked media.
>> good evening from new york. i'm in for chris hayes. putting at the center of his campaign slamming immigrants and calling for a border and back at it today on vague ways to keep america safe, a screening test based on what people believe. >> we should only admit into this country those who share our values and respect our people. in the cold war, we had an ideological screening test. the time is overdue to develop a new screening test for the threats we face today. i call it extreme vetting. i call it extreme extreme vetting. >> trump did not define how this would work but the speech made it sound like a broad net loyalty test to stop immigrants who don't fit in with american
values as defined by a future trump administration. >> in addition to screening out all members of the sympathizers of terrorist groups, we must also screen out any who have hostile attitudes toward our country or its principles or believe sharia law should supplant american law. only those we expect to flourish in our country and embrace a tolerant american society should be issued visas. >> would that tolerant american society still be open to all religions? trump didn't say, leaving open the prospect he would still enforce the muslim ban he enforced last year and still up on his website today. he did call limited immigration from certain dangerous countries but refused to name any of them. >> to put these new procedures
in place we have to temporarily suspend immigration from some of the most volitive regions of the world that have a history of terrorism. >> as soon as i take office i will ask the department of homeland security to identify the regions where it cannot take place. we will do it until such time it is safe to resume based on new circumstances or new procedures. >> as matter of policy the state department already has a list of state sponsor offers terrorism, like syria, sudan and iran and the u.s. does use tighter vetting for many areas deemed higher threats. part of what trump called for isn't happening and what he called loyalty tests isn't happening for a reason. i'm joined by steve cortes, surrogate for the trump campaign.
where would this ideological test be done? at the border. >> ideological test heading is the wrong name. i think mr. trump is incredible in this regard. americhas never been a nation, a race or religion or a creed, we're an ide if you don't buy the idea, you don't belong here. thankfully almost all immigrants and my father is an immigrant and son and husband of an immigrant. >> where would it be? i want to start with how it works. we heard him, i just played him. where would it be done? screened at the border? >> no. beyond the border, the application process. do you believe in the american constitution? do you believe in the bill of rights? do you believe intolerance. >> in your view it would be done in advance at state department con su lar level all throughout the world? >> yes. >> where would it be done?
all enties to the united states? >> i think it would be done -- >> to be clear you think it should be done on all entries in the united states. >> look, if you don't believe in the american idea you don't need to come here. i am the son of an immigrant. we love it. it is not -- we have a right as people to decide who immigrates here and do you believe in our constitution. if you don't, if you believe in sharia law -- >> that's why we played donald trump explaining the concept. we're looking at the policy. do you know how many total entrants there were in the u.s. last year? >> i don't. in the millions, certainly? >> it is in the millions. you have any idea you're calling
on all of them, 10 million, 20 million, 50 million? you have any idea? >> i don't know if you're trying to quiz me. 20 million, i would guess? >> according to u.s. customs last year it was 189 total entries in the united states. >> i mean immigrants, not entries in terms of visas an visitors. don't be unfair and ask me a question. i'm talking about actual people here to stay. >> this is important. you're talking only long-term immigrants? >> yes. people who want to become americans. this is the beauty of america. if you believe in the american idea, you're an american. you can be a muslim, black, yellow, female, gay, be anything and believe in our bill of rights and believe in the constitution and become an american. what you cannot do and what you should not do. >> do you believe what you're saying and donald trump alluded to today talking about terror attacks, long-term immigration
is the smallest piece of people coming out of country and san bernardino or 9/11, those people were here on temporary visas. that program has already been overhauled. is this a security plan if it will not touch people here temporarily most likely to pose a temporary threat? >> i'm glad you asked that. the boston bombers were not here temporary, granted permanent asylum. >> americans can't go to a christmas party in san bernardino or dance in orlando or watch a marathon in boston and be slaughtered simply because we have careless policies who we want to let in and because political correctness, it's not just dumb, it can be deadly. in the case of our immigration policies it is deadly. does it make sense to say if you're coming from syria or afghanistan that we're going to vet you in a different way than canada. that's a sensible policy.
>> the united states already does that. you mentioned you didn't know the total numbers, fine. the united states has a very tight vetting process for areas deemed a threat. part of what donald trump does seems to operate in a vacuum and not acknowledge the way the other side works and what americans believe also seems odd. let me put it to you like this. if this is for security, what kind of country we want, what other example is there quizzing people on their beliefs on an honor system would catch criminals. don't criminals habitually lie to authorities. what other thing has increased security in american history. >> sure. you make a fair point. if we were to ask a terrorist if they believe in the constitution, of course they do, but i'm still coming to cause trouble.
i would concede you that point. the bigger point, if you're coming from parts of the globe beset with terrorism. if you're coming from syria and afghanistan, we are going to vet you in a far stronger way than if you're coming from england. i think that's sensible. i love immigration and immigrants, what it does for this country and donald trump does as well. security has to come first. no immigrant is due, no constitutional right for any immigrant to come to the united states. we have a right to choose whom we want to admit and don't want to admit and we need to be sensible about it. also, even a bigger point than that i would stipulate, not just necessarily, you make a good point, where do we start? is it at the border? the point is the world is spinning out of control largely because of our filed policy in the middle east. we have destabilized the middle east and because of that, we're seeing terrible ramifications in europe and america and we need to change course.
what we're doing is not working. donald trump offers a very different vision. >> businessman and trump surrogate, steve cortes, thank you for your time. we turn to former rnc analyst, michael steele and the chief of staff, a supporter of hillary clinton. good evening to both of you. your thoughts on what we jus heard. is it problematic some of donald trump and his speech today and some advisors don't have a handle on the fact there is tighter vetting at various regions. >> it's important the trump's spokesperson said someone like that in the orlando region would stop him. he was born in 1986 in hyde park, new york, it has nothing to do with immigration. the trump policy on immigration is reallily a thinly guides anti-muslim ban, in which trump
proposes giing a loyalty or regulation test to those wanting to come in the united states. you have to go back to world war ii in rounding up interment of japanese americans and italian americans to see a policy so racist and so un-american flatly against the constitution affords all americans protection and due process of law. >> strong words, jeremy, and i know you have a lot of experience in this area. talk about how donald trump views the profiing of this and he views very broadly the immigrants and children of immigrants. >> the common thread linking the major islamic terrorist attacks on our soil, fort hood shooting. san bernardino attack, the
orlando attack, is that they have involved immigrants or the children of immigrants. >> that's true. but we can put up on the screen the fact whether that is meaningful statistic. 1 out of 4 americans fit that category first or second generation immigrants and pugh projects by 2015, over 1 out of 3. as we all know, a nation of immigrants, michael, is part of the country, is it in your view a good place to start today, profiling or vetting. >> i don't know if it's a good place to begin for the campaign. so much not complex about what donald trump says. it's barebones. it appeals to a certain mindset and set of fears that exist out there. i think going back to what mr. cortes was saying, that a lot of the emphasis on this part of trump's foreign policy, if you will, using air quotes around that, is focused on the attitude a lot of americans seem to have
or been protecting us from, in other words, they're not shaing what they feel about a lot of these issues. trump somehow thinks that's the wedge, the point of the conversation, the point of the spear he wants to focus on. this whole idea of immigrants and who they are and how they got here, as was just mentioned, is a murky one. when you start pointing those fingers, you really don't know the back story, you're talking about someone born here. their parents may have immigrated but they were born here, their predilictions are not necessarily imitated by the fact their parents are immigrants. you have to be careful that you don't have this policy you don't get caught up in this net of american citizens and immigrants who come it and do it the right way.
>> jeremy, i know there's plenty under your time at the cia you can't talk about, but what you can talk about, does the cia do threat assessments like that? are you the son of an immigrant and stop there or is it actually about security? >> in the intelligence community and this is led by the national counter-terrorism center in northern virginia, they do significant screening of terrorist suspects. that's why we have a no fly list and variety of watchlists and the idea the list would stop at are you an immigrant or kid of an immigrant, that's not only inconsistent with our constitution, it's very bad counter-terrorism strategy and would not answer any specific question. the 9/11 hijackers were here on visas and extended and overstayed their visa, the idea do you love america, that would not have stopped 9/11.
donald trump's policy is not a counter-terrorism policy, a racist anti-immigrant policy that will not make us safer and actually could make the fight against terrorist organizations much more complicated. >> at some point does trump have to withdraw the muslim ban because he's trying to have it both ways? >> he's dialed that back considerably where it was. he doesn't talk about it directly the way he has in the past. i think he understands the blowback on that not just by jeremy and others and his own supporters is a lot greater than he thought it would be. >> i appreciate it. coming up, joe biden gave hillary clinton a tour of his boyhood home in scranton, pennsylvania today and his speech laying into trump.
♪keep on the sunny side ♪always on the sunny side ♪keep on the sunny side of life♪ nbc news is out with a brand now background map with good news for hillary clinton. if the election were held today, it takes 270 electoral votes to win. clinton on pace to win 288 electoral votes based on those precise new state polls, the ones that matter. you see her path to victory in the dark blue states likely to back her and light blue lean democratic. trump, we'll show you currently looking at only 174 electoral votes between the likely republican states in the dark red, top and deep south as well as the light red.
here is the key, this, you can remember for every political argument you get between now and november no matter who you support, if they hold up, that means even if donald trump were to win all the toss-ups, big ones like ohio and florida, if he wins those yellow toss-ups, he would still lose to clinton onunder these projections. we don't know what happens next. this is not the usual lead for a democrat in august. look back to 2012, before the convention, mitt romney was much closer to president obama, down about 46 electoral votes compared to trump today who is losing by 141 electoral votes. with the toss-up states to turn to. turning to the campaign for president bush, you guys were not as close last time. >> what's interesting, the new floor for secretary clinton is certainly much higher than we
had four years ago. the new floor for republicans is much lower than it was four years ago primaily because of georgia and what we call the 2008 obama-ha, the second congressional district in nebraska, which goes by proportionality opposed to winner take all. what you're seeing here is a trend that's really really dangerous for republicans not only at the presidential level but for the u.s. senate. a number of those background states now where secretary clinton has a double digit lead, there is a hotly contested senate race below that and that drag will hurt republicans and senators and candidates. >> we have the map up and you can see in the multi-colored map there are blue and light blue states that will be problems for republicans if it continues. this cuts against what donald trump's message has been.
when you look at these states, you're basically saying, even if he wins florida and ohio under these projections he still loses. contrast that to what you guys were doing. those were key states you felt you needed to win at one point. >> the advantage trump may have had early on was the advantage with white working class voters. the needle he needed to thread was increase support levels without damaing his standing with suburban and urban voters. if he would have done that you would have seen states like michigan and ohio and pennsylvania be closer than they are now. the three states for democrats or secretary clinton are michigan and pennsylvania and virginia, all have double digit leads for her. michigan and pennsylvania set the table for place him we have this 40-50 electoral lead over republicans and state like
virginia and colorado historically have been very close right now, massive leads for clinton, almost insurmountable for trump to make up. >> one of the things obama did well people said wouldn't necessaily translate to other democrats was build a big coalition of young voters and minority voters, college educated voters, working into latinos and white women, particularly single young women. look at the young voters out new for clinton versus trump, a walloping lead of voters under 35. does she have the ability to turn them out particularly, as you know, we're reporting the map and the facts, not taking a side. it does sometimes make people less likely to turn out if the message they here is trump is losing by 10 points. how does hillary clinton potentially get young people out. >> not only that the fact that trump is talking about this quote unquote a rigged election, is malarky, if i can quote the
vice president, but that depresses turnout. the thing we have going for us is two-fold, three fold. secretary clinton with the message working for younger voters and donald trump message disqualifying him with literally a whole generation of americans and, thirdly, you have a whole bunch of surrogates out there wildly popular not only with the american people and millennials, president obama, elizabeth warren, bernie sanders, a host of rosters that can go out and articulate hillary clinton's message in a way nobody is doing for donald trump. >> mitch stewart, i know they used to call you "the map," no, i made that up. all about primary polls that showed donald trump in the lead and why he might win the primary election and as mitch was
it will change their lives. >> little improv there in his hometown of scram, pennsylvania. vice president joe biden, his first appearance with hillary clinton on the campaign trail and he drew a sharp contrast between her and her opponent. >> no major party nominee in the history of the united states of america has -- don't cheer, be quiet, just listen, has known less or been less prepared to deal with our national security than donald trump. what absolutely amazes me, what amazes me he doesn't seem to want to learn it. my son, bo, served for a year and came back and came back a highly decorated soldier. i must tell yo, had donald trump been president, i would have thrown my body in front of him. no, i really mean it, to keep him from going if the judgment was based on trump's decision.
>> that rally in pennsylvania. no republican candidate has won a presidential campaign there since 1988. clinton ahead by 11 points. that isn't stopping donald trump from making a play. he's alleing the only way he would lose is if he is cheated out of it. now, he says he wants law enforcement to help him. much more on that straight ahead.
the only way we can lose, in my opinion, i really mean that, pennsylvania, if cheating goes on. we have to call up law enforcement and the sheriff's and the police chiefs and everybody watching. >> donald trump there making a few baseless claims about voter fraud on friday night predicting if he loses pennsylvania it would only be because of cheating and then he called on supporters to get involved. >> i hope you people can sort of not just vote on the 8th, go around and look and watch other polling places and make sure it's 100% fine. >> that isn't just ad-libbing. the website encouraged people to be a volunteer election server in order to help me stop "crook ed hilly" from winning the election. citizens can do volunteer work to support a nonpartisan process.
there is something wrong with campaigns trying to interfere with the nonpartisan peace administration of our elections. this is not a new issue. the republican national committee got into hot water in the 1980s trying to use ballot security measures to advance partisan agendas and is a no-no. the court ordered the rnc to cut it out and is active today barring rncs or agents to poll watch to deter qualified voters from exerciing their rights. join me now is rick hasen, a law professor at the university of irvine and recently wrote about it saying trump could potentially be close to violating a long standing court order that deals with that issue whether observers are too partisan. explain what you mean about what would be barred here.
>> i think it's even okay in some states, to be partisan, that is there's the ability to be a representative from the republican party or democratic party. it depends what your purpose is in the polling place. if your purpose is to make sure there are no malfunctions with the voing machines, no long lines or problems how things are conducted, that's fine. if your purpose is to intimidate voters and question vote others to try to ferret out voter fraud, this consent decree says the rnc or its agent can't do that. what trump is suggesting sounds very much like it falls on the long side of the line. >> when you say consent decree, you're referring to a judge struck a concluing solution here and said, don't do that kind of a thing. >> the party settled the case but it's enforceable by the judge through contempt. if the rnc violated this order
the judge can punish the committee and its agents. they have been going back to court saying this activity or that activity, trying to collect the names of minority voters and trying to kick them off the rolls, when the rnc does that, that violates this agreement and potentially subjects the rnc to the penalties of the court. >> not to be too lawyerly, donald trump, does he work for the rnc ors a he looks at it, as we all know, does the rnc work for him. and your core point is that it's not a new thing to have this debate over otherwise legitimate activities. they have refrain from taking ballot activities where raing composition is a factor in a decision to conduct it and where the purpose is to deter qualified voters from voting.
the take away, we heard about voter fraud, right, especially on the voter id issue. under the law, voter fraud is bad and that is something the law cares about but it is not a defense, right, to tampering, to say, we're dpoog ballot security or we want to make sure there is no cheat, trump is certainly right to say there shouldn't be cheating. if you use that as a shield to go in and be the one tampering or intimidaing deterring voing that in itself could be a violation of the order, is that right? >> that's right. one of the things the republican party did in louisiana, get off-duty law enforcement out with their guns near the polling places and that can intimidate voters. even if trump doesn't violate this particular order, in every state there are rules against voter intimidation, it's possible even without this the voing rights people could go to court and try to get some kind of order to stop intimidation at the polling place.
not just trump, he sent a message to his supporters by telling them to go to the polling places and make sure there's no rigging of the elections. that sounds very dangerous especially places people are allowed to bring firearms into the polling places. >> as a renowned expert on voting rights, i know this is a busy period for you, maybe a bad thing but maybe good helping get the information out. i appreciate you shaing your expertise with us. >> my pleasure. >> coming up, the khan family once again the focus of the trump campaign.
i don't care if he's a gold star parent. he certainly doesn't deserve that title if he's as anti-american as he illustrated in his speeches and discussionses. if he's a member of the muslim brotherhood and supporting the isis type of attitude against america, there's no reason for donald trump to have to honor this man. >> tonight, carl is expounding on those remarks, what he is saying now, that is thing two in 60 seconds.
i don't care if he's a gold star parent, he certainly doesn't deserve that title if hes a as anti-american as he demonstrated. >> two days after accuing him of being anti-american even though his son died in the attack, he explained what he meant by those comments and send and e-mail to buzzfeed and repeatedly misspelled mr. khan's last name an accused mr. khan of having
terrorist ties and being paid big money by hillary clinton to take the stage and getting the pocket constitution he held up at the dnc he used as some kind of prop but probably never read and returned to it the staff after the speech. >> we know he's read it because he's a lawyer. we've seen that a lot in the remarks in the days following that original speech. >> that constitution you keep with you in your pocket, you have it with you right now? >> i always -- >> why do you have it with you? >> i always have it because it embodies, it enshrines the existence of this nation. >> i carry this in my pocket out of affection for this document. at home we have a stack of it sitting, any time a guest comes
a 10:00 p.m. curfew will be implemented for teenagers in wisconsin started by the 23-year-old police shooting of smith and he had a loaded handgun and fled a traffic stop on foot saturday afternoon and police allege body camera footage yet to be released or confirmed shows him turn toward the officer with a gun before that shooting. residents were in the streets for two straight nights and before the protest last night, someone injured by gunfire and joining me now, outside the police department in milwaukee
is kerry sanders. what has unfolded today and the early evening? >> reporter: in the early evening, complete calm and people gathered outside the sherman park neighborhood having barbecues. it looks like a regular day. the new reality is they have what they call troublemakers who seem to want to get rowdy and for two nights we have had basic riots in milwaukee in this neighborhood. you talked about that one person who was shot. this doesn't sound like what you hear happening in the united states. imagine this, a young man shot
in the street, goes down, and the police have to get an armored personnel carrier to drive through there, retrieve him from the street in an armored personnel carrier, they call it a bear cat and drive him out to safety to get him to the hospital. it sounds like the sort of squirm issue hear in another part of the world but it's happening in milwaukee. to get to the end of this to stop this, one of the things they instituted is now a curfew that will be enforced across the city for teenagers. the mayor made a point addressing the community saying this is not something they will take lightly, the curfew will be enforced. >> nbc, kerry sanders, thank you. >> every parent and guardian to know there is a curfew that will be more strictly enforced tonight for teenagers. the curfew is a curfew of 10:00 on weekdays. parents, after 10:00, your teenagers better be home or in a place they're off the streets. there is a curfew that is in existence right now for teenagers.
>> reporter: all right. there is no question that the community is aware of this. whether the teenagers have the parental supervision to follow this request is a whole other story. the national guard has been activated. last night, not deployed, the police were able to handle it and the police are on the ready if there are problems again tonight. >> nbc's kerry sanders, thank you, appreciate it. up next, donald trump threatening to ban another major news outlet from his events. we will speak with another conservative radio host who said he and his fellow travelers created this monster, straight ahead.
these people are the lowest form of life, i'm telling you. the lowest. they are the lowest form of humanity. >> really, that hurts my feelings, donald trump repeatedly going after the press, members of the press and any working in the media during his campaign. it does delight some of his supporters and often he does it in intensely personal ways. this weekend he is ratcheting up attacks, suggesting his real opponent isn't hillary clinton but the press and threatened to revoke their credentials after the "new york times" characterized him as sullen and er erratic. >> i'm not running against "crooked hillary" clinton, i'm running against the "crooked media."
i put down failing at "new york times." the newspaper's going to hell. so i think maybe what we'll do, maybe we'll start thinking about taking their press credentials away from them. maybe we'll do that. i think so. >> then trump went on to tweet on sunday, quote, it's not freedom of the press when newspapers and others are allowed to say and write whatever they want even if it's completely false. he said if the disgusting and corrupt media covered me honestly and didn't put false meaning into the words i said, i would be beating hillary by 20%. joining me now, conservative talk radio host and msnbc contributor charlie pysy sykes, of the never trump. and the correspondent for "the nation." i will start with you, charlie. what did you mean you fed us up to this moment?
>> in part i have a long analysis of this. over the years, conservative talk show hosts, i'm one of them, we have done a remarkable job attacking the mainstream media but destroy any sense of a standard. who are the referees? where do you go to say the truth. donald trump comes along and the man says things demonstrably untrue on a regular basis. we live in a world every drunk at the end of the bar has a twitter account and blog. when you try to point out this is not true and a lie and you cite the "washington post" or "new york times," their response is, that's the mainstream media. we've done such a good job discrediting them, there's no place to go to be able to fact check.
having said that, the mainstream media has some responsibility here. for years and years and years crying wolf, accuing every single republican of being a racist. now, you have the real thing come along and we're kind of at a loss. >> i really appreciate what charlie has had to say about this. i think it's really honest and brave. i think there's an old republican tendency to criticize the media and blame the media when the civil rights movement and anti-media were taking the side of the protesters. with the civil rights movement there was a reason to be on the side of the protestprotesters. i'm a hillary clinton supporter and we have complaints about the newspaper i love and fox news contributed to this more than conservative talk radio although it played a role. we are in this very tough place where people do come to these debate was their own facts.
it's going to make it very hard for us to come together post trump and fishing out how to talk about this. >> you're both talking about the key role of facts, a place for the press, not just place for talk. and charlie, i wonder if the well-founded concern articulated by several conservatives, part of the media seems rooted in living in a liberal lifestyle on the coast with certain ideas about tolerance and social issues rooted, whether strongly ld or not, rooted as a premise or automatic, that seems different than saying the facts put out by these institutions can't be trusted. >> a lot of conservatives were alienated by that. you would not have seen a conservative media if they were
treated with contempt. there was a certain amount of respect and dismissal of ideas. i grew up and was very proud of that and assuing we were informing people and telling them factual information and telling them the other side of the story. unfortunately it has morphed into this alternative reality we live in these different silos. having discredited the mainstream media, now, what do we have? info wars, breitbarts and drudges, information is passed that bear no resemblance to reality whatsoever. i'm in a position of having on a regular basis to say, that information is not valid or true or accurate. we have so effectively conditioned our listeners not to pay attention to anything outside that bubble or silo and
now we have this donald trump phenomena. what you're seeing is donald trump understanding he needs to delegitimize the press itself, not just bias, needs to delegitimize any media stories that will come out about him because there's a lot still to come. >> that's the difference, nothing new about republicans running against the press or any candidate. there is a difference in someone seeking to control the federal government saying i will use my power to seek retribution on coverage i don't like. >> right. i will exclude reporters and work on the libel laws to make them tougher. >> open them up. >> so more people like him can sue. it's a belligerent intimidaing kind of thing. let's talk about our own katy tur so threatened at a trump rally the secret service walked her to her car and ginning up and antagonism we haven't seen. >> it's a feature, i have been to trump rallies, to get people excited about the press and protesters before anything happens with the notion this is a private event controlled by mr. trump and he will boot people as he sees fit.
that's true he has that right as a private individual. it would be different, he wouldn't have that rite convening a public space. that's it for me now. to rachel maddow. >> thanks for joining us this hour. glad to be back. in 1962 we came close to having a nuclear war with the soviet union on the cuban missile crisis, when john f. kennedy was president. even though we got right to the brink, nuclear war didn't happen and the crisis was avoided by high wire negotiations and diplomacy including directly by the president of the united states himself, we did get
really really really close. after that global near death experience, because of that global near death experience, one very important thing and interesting and kind of creepy thing changed about the american presidency. because of the cuban missile crisis, we got the nuclear football. president john f. kennedy found once global nuclear war between the u.s. and russia wasn't some distant hypothetical insane possibility, president kennedy in 1962 realized even though he was president and had incredible power and responsibility in that situation, logistically, he didn't exactly know how one would go about doing this? how is a president supposed to start a global nuclear war if he decides that's what he wants to do?