All In with Chris Hayes, Transcript 06/03/15

Guests:
Tammy Baldwin, Paul S. Ryan, Lincoln Chafee, Vince Warren, Peter Moskos
Transcript:


(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST (voice-over): Tonight on ALL IN –

TODD AKIN, FORMER U.S. CONGRESMAN: If it`s a legitimate rape, the
female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.

HAYES: The 2016 Republican field has its first Todd Akin moment.
Tonight, why Democrats are pouncing on Scott Walker.

Then, the call for a special prosecutor to investigate Jeb Bush`s not-
quite-a-campaign campaign.

A new Democrat joins the field and we have the first interview.

New details on an alleged terror attack thwarted in Boston.

And a conservative hype over a new national crime wave.

MEGYN KELLY, FOX NEWS HOST: Horrifying numbers out this week from
some of America`s biggest cities.

HAYES: Debunking the so called Baltimore effect when ALL IN starts
right now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HAYES: Good morning from New York. I`m Chris Hayes.

The Republican Party just had its first Todd Akin moment of the 2016
campaign. Wisconsin governor and likely presidential candidate Scott
Walker announced he intends to sign a 20-week abortion ban now moving
through the state legislature even if that bill makes no exceptions for
pregnancies resulting from rape or incest.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. SCOTT WALKER (R), WISCONSIN: I mean, I think for most people who
are concerned about that, it`s in the initial months when they`re most
concerned about it. In this case, again, it`s an unborn life, it`s an
unborn child, and that`s why we feel strongly about it. I`m prepared to
sign it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Walker did not say how he knows, most women become pregnant
due to a rape or incest are mostly only concerned about what to do for the
initial months of that pregnancy. But he seems to know and he`ll sign that
bill.

Those comments come less than a week after Walker defended Wisconsin
law that requires women seeking an abortion to undergo a mandatory
ultrasound, that`s not when they consent to. It`s required by law by
saying oh no, ultrasounds are cool.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

WALKER: The media tried to make that sound like that was a crazy
idea. Most people I talk to, whether pro-life or not, I find people all
the time get out their iPhone and show me a picture of their grandkid`s
ultrasound and how excited they are. That`s a lovely thing. I think about
my sons are 19 and 20, and we still their first ultrasound picture, it`s
just a cool thing out there.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

HAYES: Heading into the 2016, the Republican Party already has an
uphill battle to win over women voters. The gender gap in 2012 was the
largest in the history of the Gallup poll, with President Obama winning
among female voters by 12 points. And after catastrophic gaffes, like
Akin`s famous legitimate rape comment, the GOP has spent the past few years
trying to repair the damage. For example, launching a program to recruit
female candidates and tutoring Republican congressmen in how to run against
women without being offensive.

This time around, the Democrats are likely to end up with a nominee
who performs pretty well among female voters. And while Republicans have a
deep bench of over a dozen presidential candidates, only one of them is a
woman, Carly Fiorina, currently polling at 1.4 percent in the Real Clear
Politics average.

Last night, we showed you this chart with the percentage of women
serving in the House and Senate since 1917 divided by party. It`s pretty
much even until 1990, at which point the number of Democratic women shoots
up and Republicans fall way, way behind.

When I talked yesterday with Senator Barbara Boxer, one of 14
Democratic women in the Senate, I asked her what she made of that chart.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D), CALIFORNIA: I think what we`ve seen happen in
the Republican Party over time is they`ve changed dramatically, they used
to be for the equal rights amendment. They used to be for equal pay for
equal work. They used to be pro-choice.

I remember when I was involved early on in my career, probably before
you were born in Planned Parenthood and these other groups, Republicans
were leading the way, and they changed dramatically. Now, we have a party
that does not reflect the dreams, hopes, aspirations of our daughters.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: As senator points out, this is more than just a rhetorical
shift. It`s borne out in the policies embraced by Republican politicians,
like the 20-week abortion ban, Scott Walker says he`ll sign, which not only
prohibits exceptions for rape and incest, it would also allow the father to
sue for emotional distress if he disagrees with the woman`s decision to
terminate her pregnancy regardless of whether the man in question is in a
relationship with the woman.

Joining me now, Senator Tammy Baldwin, Democrat from Wisconsin.

Senator, your reaction to the governor of your state`s comments today
about how a woman feels about her pregnancy that results from rape?

SEN. TAMMY BALDWIN (D), WISCONSIN: Well, this is Scott Walker`s Todd
Akin moment. I could not believe that our governor in a few short words
showed how deeply out of touch he is with the women of Wisconsin and the
women of this country. And, frankly, his policies with regard to women`s
reproductive health are actually dangerous.

HAYES: If I were to play devil`s advocate on behalf of the governor,
the two comments that he`s gotten some heat for today, his comment and the
earlier one about ultrasounds, you could say, well, he was taken out of
context, or he was talking about issues that are emotionally loaded and
fraught and, you know, it wasn`t a full speech on them.

I mean, what`s your response to the – these are just words you`re
attacking defense.

BALDWIN: You know, Governor Walker even when I served with him in the
state legislature did not believe that there should be any exception for
rape, for incest, for health or life of the mother with regard to abortion.
And he hasn`t changed over these years.

I think that he really is out of touch with the reality of women
across Wisconsin, especially those who have suffered the horror of rape or
incest. And I think he is part of what seems to be a larger strategy to
try to pass laws that curtail women`s reproductive freedom and rights that
try to peel back the Roe versus Wade decision which is the law of the land.

HAYES: Why – if it is the case that he`s out of step in Wisconsin,
how is it someone who knowing full well what it is to manage elections in
your state three times in four years?

BALDWIN: You know, the issues that voters focus most on in these last
few years has been jobs and the economy, and the discussion has been pretty
much focused off of – the issues that we`re talking about today.

It`s unfortunate, because I think the more and more people who know
what Scott Walker believes, that his policies – my belief that his
policies are really dangerous in this arena, I think that that would have
an impact. But unfortunately, they haven`t gotten as much attention I
think in his gubernatorial elections as they really needed to be.

And we`re paying for that. He has signed into law a number of
restrictions just like we`re seeing in other states across the country law
after law that have had nothing to do with a woman`s health and safety, but
are simply trying to reduce access to safe and legal abortion.

HAYES: And it should be noted, my understanding of the legislation,
he says he`ll sign, basically in the mainstream center where the Republican
Party is on this issue – 20-week ban, no exception for rape or incest. I
mean, that is not something that`s anomalous among modern Republican
politicians.

BALDWIN: Yes, but if you look at the history of those who have been
elected president, Scott Walkers views are clearly more extreme than any
Republican president in recent times. Much more extreme than President
George W. Bush with regard to the issues of having exceptions that deal
with the health and the life of the mother. And the issues of exceptions
for rape victims and incest.

HAYES: Yes. Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin – great pleasure,
thank you.

BALDWIN: Thank you.

HAYES: Well, wedge issues like gay marriage or ones that are a fairly
reliable vote getter for Republican politicians. The latest polls bring
bad news to the GOP. According to a recent Gallup survey, Americans have
continually shifted to the left since the early 2000s on various moral
issues, including same sex relationships, stem cell research and abortion.

Another poll found more Americans now consider themselves pro-choice
than pro-life for the first time in seven years.

Now, for some establishment, the writing is on the wall this week.
Mary Cheney, the openly gay daughter of the former vice president, wrote an
op-ed for FOX News arguing, quote, “It`s time the Republican Party leaders
to embrace marriage equality.”

But no matter how much a consultant class or donor class warns about
social issues that make Republican candidate look out of step with the
times, some of them just can`t seem to help themselves. The latest example
comes from presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee whose statement about
transpeople from a few months ago resurfaced after Caitlyn Jenner`s “Vanity
Fair” cover was released this week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FORMER GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE (R), ARKANSAS: For those who do not think
we are under threat, simply recognize that the fact that we are now in city
after city watching ordinances that say that your 7-year-old daughter if
she goes into the restroom, cannot be offended and you can`t be offended if
she`s greeted there by a 42-year-old man who feels more like a woman than
he does a man.

Now, I wish someone had told me when I was in high school, I could
have felt like a woman when it came time to take showers in PE. I think I
would have found my feminine side and said, coach, I think I`d rather
shower with the girls today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Joining me now, MSNBC national correspondent Joy Reid.

So, that`s a dumb and offensive joke.

JOY REID, MSNBC NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: And creepy.

HAYES: It`s creepy and dumb and offensive.

OK. But here`s the thing that I think was so fascinating, that even
Huckabee himself who you would think is someone who could pursue this sort
of social issue agenda, he recognizes it`s bad. He recognizes a loser.
This is him today talking to “BuzzFeed”, or a reporter in “BuzzFeed”, “You
know, nobody ever asked me about it, except the media, the only people that
are stirred up about it. What people talk to me about is not a speech I
made four months ago. It`s not some cultural issue. People talk to me
that lost their job.”

He wants to pivot – even Mike Huckabee thinks social issues are a
loser.

REID: Yes, I agree. But the thing is Mike Huckabee I think
physically represents a core problem for the Republican Party. Let`s say
there are 10 million hardcore evangelicals in the country that really vote
on that issue, 9.9 million of them are Republicans. The Republican Party
can`t just kick that base to the curb and hope to win an election.

If they completely ignore them and ignore that part of the three-
legged stool that is the Republican Party and only focus on Tea Party
Republicans that care more about getting rid of social programs and very
wealthy Republicans who just want tax cuts, they`re going to lose because
they need every vote they can get, because they already do so poorly with
women, they already do so poorly with minority women, and with nonwhite
voters, they need every vote they can get.

So, they can`t just say nothing. I think there is a hunger out there
among part of the religious right who do feel abandoned. Look, the culture
wars were lost decades ago, this is just the insurgency. There are still
some people who want to fight. They want someone to fight for them. So,
Huckabee can`t just not be that person.

HAYES: The wanting to fight is so on the money, and it relates to the
Walker comment, right?

REID: Yes.

HAYES: Certainly, I think I saw the Walker comment and yes it was in
a parenthetical. It`s like, hey, just shut up about that. But honestly,
don`t talk about what a woman who has survived rape and is carrying her
rapist`s child inside her or fetus inside her feels about that. Just don`t
talk about it.

But he has to. And the reason he has to is because he is going to
sign legislation that will force a woman to do that, because that same base
you`re talking about wants them to do that.

REID: And, by the way, Scott Walker is already being criticized by
people in the anti-abortion community because that bill does not include a
non-exemption for life of the mother. Remember, there`s a part of the
anti-abortion movement that says a woman should be willing to die to give
birth. That it shouldn`t just be here –

HAYES: Not even being willing, compelled, right? I mean, there`s a
difference.

REID: Yes, made to die. I mean, there are hospitals that will not
perform an abortion if a woman is on death`s door, that literally the life
of the fetus is more important than the life of the mother.

And I think when someone like Scott Walker is speaking to these issues
of signing a bill like that, they`re not thinking about the victim of rape
or insist, because that is secondary to the prime directive of womanhood,
which is to procreate a man`s progeny, to give birth to a man`s progeny no
matter what. No matter how it happens, that`s the only real purpose of a
woman.

And I think that kind of thoughtlessness to the people in that
movement is not thoughtlessness at all.

HAYES: And one of the things that I think about is, it`s going to
play out in interesting ways, particularly how Hillary Clinton has handled
this, because I think she and her campaign recognize the advantage to these
issues. They want to press that advantage, right?

Republicans are in a defensive crouch about them. But Jeb Bush, who
is the person who is the great moderate, right? And I put that in
quotation marks. I mean, he was – Terry Schiavo was under Jeb Bush and
was a kind of – for a lot of people, a lot of people who aren`t
particularly political was a kind of low moment in the life of American
culture wars.

REID: Yes.

HAYES: That he was on the wrong side of prosecuting in the opinion of
the majority of Americans if you listen to polling on it.

REID: And it was a light bulb moment for people who had been watching
Jeb Bush all this time and presuming for some reason that he`s a moderate.
You know, having live in Florida for a long time, I promise you he`s not.
And I think the Schiavo moment made a light bulk go off in a lot of heads
of media people and others who`d covered Jeb Bush as essentially a
moderate, but on issues like that, Jeb Bush is going to track right with
that far right.

HAYES: I think – you know, let`s give him – I think this is true of
Scott Walker, I will say give them the credit of being in good faith here.
They believe this.

REID: It`s there belief.

HAYES: This is – Scott Walker believes that. And I think –

REID: And he`s an evangelical that I think people focus on his anti-
union politics. They forget that Scott Walker has always been an
evangelical politician, and he will continue to be.

HAYES: Joy Reid, thanks so much.

REID: Thank you.

HAYES: All right. Still ahead, accusations of illegality as Jeb Bush
runs for president without actually officially running for president.

Plus, the latest Democrat to run for president joins me live hours
after announcing his candidacy.

But, first, amid rampant speculation where the Obama family may live
post-presidency comes a great suggestion I can`t wait to you next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: All right. I`ve got a pitch for the president of the United
States. For months, rumors the first family may move to New York after the
White House have run rampant. And today came my favorite suggestion ever.

A piece of on the New York news Web site “DNA Info” laying out the
reasons why the Obama`s should move to the borough in which I was born and
raised, the Bronx, after they leave the White House.

I heartily endorse this idea, the Bronx, the perfect home for any
presidential family. Plenty of neighborhoods offering just the kind of
space and seclusion they would need, like for example the leafy confines of
the neighborhood in Riverdale, where my parents live to this day and which
would provide the Obama`s with nice parks, easy access to Manhattan, and
opportunities for privacy.

And just think of the optics of moving to a long suffering, much
maligned borough like the Bronx, borough of working class toughness where
the vast majority of residents are black or Latino, a borough President
Obama himself visited to launch the next phase of his My Brother`s Keepers
Initiative just last month, my mom`s alma mater Lehman College, and a
borough that puts you in close proximity to my mom`s cooking, which, of
course, is the true winner here. It`s the perfect home for the Obama`s in
2017.

I`m going to head up there with some old Bronx friends over the next
few weeks to prove it. So, stay tuned for that.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)]

JEB BUSH (R), FORMER FLORIDA GOVERNOR: If I run, if I`m a candidate,
and that decision is going to be decided real soon. My intention is to run
on my record and my ideas, and run to try to win the presidency. Not to
make a point.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Former governor of Florida, Jeb Bush, just yesterday in an
economic summit in Florida, asserted his usual caveat, if I run. Now, to
all of us in the media, and probably to anyone paying attention, he very
much looks and acts like an actual presidential candidate, even Jeb Bush
himself slipped up and accidentally called himself a candidate briefly when
speaking to reporters in Nevada on May 13th.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: I`m running for president in 2016, and the focus is going to be
about how we – if I`ve run – how do you create high sustain economic
growth where more people have a chance of earned success.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: You see that, as he was talking and in the wheels were
turning, and he realized he screwed up, he put back in the “if I run”, just
to make clear.

I mean, look, maybe he`s just a guy who likes raising money and eating
pie and talk to people at town halls. Indeed the law does allow to a
certain extent for an exploratory testing the waters posture before
officially declaring candidacy. And here`s why that is important. Because
until a person declares his or her actual candidacy, they are not limited
by the number of legal restrictions, like the $2,700 limit on individual
contributions, but much more significantly, the potential candidate, may
coordinate with his super PAC prior to actually becoming a candidate.

Bush has two political action committees, both called Right to Rise.
According to “The New York Times”, quote, “Groups supporting Bush could
raise $100 million by the time they file their first fund-raising figures
in July”, which is perhaps again why, quoting “The Times”, “Karl Sandstrom,
a campaign finance lawyer who served on the Federal Election Commission,
said that for a candidate to avoid restrictions by simply not declaring his
candidacy makes a mockery of the law.”

And that`s why watchdog groups have called the Justice Department to
appoint a special counsel to file complaints at the FEC to adjudicate
whether Bush can still legally claim he`s not yet a candidate for
president.

Joining me now, Paul S. Ryan, senior counsel of the Campaign Legal
Center, a campaign finance watchdog group which has filed a number of
complaints to the FEC, charging a few candidates, including Jeb Bush, with
violations of federal election law.

All right. Paul, let`s start off with the significance here, what
real benefit accrues to someone who can basically set up a camping
infrastructure and everything but named, and go around as everything but a
candidate and not declare.

Why is that advantageous rather than actually declaring?

PAUL S. RYAN, CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER: The biggest advantage is that
Jeb Bush and some others acting like Jeb Bush are evading the $2,700
candidate contribution limit. One correction to what you stated in the
lead in, which is that the $2,700 candidate contribution kicks in as soon
as someone starts exploring a run, as soon as they start engaging in what
the Federal Election Commission calls testing the waters activity.

But the contribution limit is at stake here, as well as the disclosure
requirements that kick in as soon as someone files their paperwork to
become an actual candidate.

HAYES: So, if I get this, let me see if I understand this properly –
in the old days, prior to the super PAC era, right, the reason you would
form an exploratory committee and then declare, is that you would have a
legal vehicle that could accept checks, but now, you don`t need the legal
vehicle of an either exploratory committee or an actual campaign to accept
checks because you could just set up these super PACs, which can accept
unlimited amounts of money, right? That`s what`s changed.

RYAN: Well, Jeb Bush seems to think that he can set up a super PAC.
The Campaign Legal Center`s view, it`s sounded rooted in existing laws,
that it`s illegal for a candidate to set up a super PAC, it`s illegal for
someone to bankroll to the tune of $100 million in unlimited contributions
a super PAC if and because that money is going to be spent directly in
support of that individual`s eventual candidacy. We think that violates
current law, that`s why we filed a complaint with the DOJ.

HAYES: You think it violates current law if you haven`t declared yet
or you think it violates current law even for a candidate?

RYAN: I`ll make one thing perfectly clear – whether or not you`re a
candidate for legal purposes doesn`t depend on whether or not you`ve
declared. One of the things, for example –

HAYES: Right.

RYAN: – that makes you a candidate under the law, is if you amass
funds in excess of what`s reasonably necessary to explore a candidacy,
funds that will be used in support of your actual candidacy, that makes you
a candidate under the law, regardless of whether you`re willing to admit
it, regardless of whether or not you actually show up at the FEC and file
paperwork.

HAYES: That`s – so, wait, that`s fascinating. So, you don`t
actually – under the law, the law has thought of this in some ways, right?
I mean, the point is that, obviously, it would be very easy to game the
system, you get to say, well, I`m just exploring. But the law says, if
you`re amassing funds in excess of what you`re going to use to do that
exploring, you have made yourself a candidate, and clearly that`s going to
be the case with Jeb Bush.

RYAN: That`s exactly correct and that`s why we`re urging the
Department of Justice, as well as the Federal Election Commission to launch
an investigation.

HAYES: So, then, what will the consequences be of breaking the law?

RYAN: Well, the Federal Election Commission is mired in partisan
deadlock and they haven`t been doing their job, they haven`t been enforcing
the law. We`re hoping DOJ will get involved, but DOJ hasn`t done much
enforcement of this area of law in recent decades either.

HAYES: This is the craziest thing about this campaign. Not only is
it happening under this completely unchartered territory in terms of what
campaign finance law actually is, both in terms of the constitutional
jurisprudence, from the Supreme Court, et cetera, it is happening where the
deadlocked FEC means that no one is enforcing the law. You can as of now
run riot through the streets, metaphorically speaking, and no one`s going
to come and put the handcuffs on you.

RYAN: That`s right, and I think that lack of enforcement is precisely
why individuals like Jeb Bush and others think they can get away with this.

HAYES: Paul S. Ryan, thank you very much.

RYAN: Thank you.

HAYES: We`re joking all day, we`re going to tease our interview
tonight with Paul Ryan and then have him on.

Up next, there`s a brand new Democratic candidate for president, and
he`ll join me live, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LINCOLN CHAFEE (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I enjoy challenges, and
certainly we have many facing America. Today, I`m formally entering the
race for the Democratic nomination for president. Thank you.

(APPLAUSE)

We must deliberately and carefully extricate ourselves from expensive
wars. Just think, of how better this money could be spent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: And the there were four, four people running for Democratic
nomination of the United States. Former Governor Lincoln Chafee today
joining former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Governor Martin
O`Malley and Senator Bernie Sanders. Now, as senator and a member of the
Republican Party, Lincoln Chafee was the only Republican senator to vote
against the Iraq war, certainly a high point of political and moral
courage.

Chafee was elected governor of Rhode Island in 2010 as an independent,
became a Democrat while in office. He chose not to run for reelection.

Today, Chafee stressed a rethinking of our country`s approach to
foreign conflicts and use of drone strikes, and a reimagining of our
domestic priorities.

Joining me now, the former governor Rhode Island, former senator from
Rhode Island, now presidential candidate, Lincoln Chafee.

Mr. Chafee, let`s start –

CHAFEE: Good evening.

HAYES: – with the foreign policy vision you laid out. It really did
seem to be a kind of robust let`s call it a peace agenda – essentially
extricating from war – increasing or improving diplomatic relationships
with some
countries with have poor ones with, you mentioned Bolivia and Venezuela
here in our hemisphere. What do you think specifically we should be doing
in the Middle East? What do you want to say for instance see done with
regard to ISIS in Iraq? Should we be withdrawing the troops we have there
as advisers and stop the bombing for instance?

CHAFEE: Well, you said, I`m proposing a new, different approach
internationally and I like to say a new American century, and it`s
different from the approach that was conducted under the Bush/Cheney
administration, and that was a muscular unilateral our way or the highway
approach, the neocon approach.

And I said let`s take that approach, rip it up and go completely
different, we`re going to tell you the truth, we`re going to respect
international agreements and work together to solve some of these big
problems that we have around the world, these crises we have around the
world.

So, specifically, again, talking to the neighbors in the region and
then others, whether it`s Russia and the Europeans, how best we can deal
with some of these problems in the Middle East and North Africa.

HAYES: But I mean, specifically, should we be – I mean, we are
currently bombing ISIS, that is a policy of the United States government.
If you were president, would you stop doing that?

CHAFEE: I`d learn what`s happening, and what the neighbors and others
around the world international partners want us to be doing. And
personally, I don`t think bombing has ever helped in so many ways around
the world. And so what Europeans want us to do, what the Russians want us
to do, what those neighbors in the region, whether it`s the Saudis, the
Israelis, the Jordanians, the Kuwaitis, how we can best conduct ourselves
in the neighborhood, that`s what I would do.

HAYES: It seems to me the rub of it is, that they want us to do very
different things. Some of them want us to bomb ISIS, and some of them want
us
to stop bombing ISIS.

CHAFEE: That`s right. Who does and who doesn`t?

HAYES: What`s that?

CHAFEE: That`s right.

We`re getting so many different points of view, because so many
different interest groups in that area as a result of the mistake of going
in there to begin with. And that`s really one of the motivators for why
I`m running. We made that mistake and obviously the front-runner in the
Democratic nomination supported the war in Iraq, and has continued as
secretary of state to have that same unilateral muscular approach to the
world which I think is a mistake, and the reason we`re talking about some
of these challenges, because we made those mistakes in the past.

HAYES: I think I agree with you in the abstract and sort of principle
but it does strike me that if this is kind of a centerpiece of the reason
you`re running, there are a bunch of specific policies on the table right
now about how we`re going to interface with that region, that people are
going to expect a candidate to have an opinion on.

I mean, let`s talk about the Iran deal. Are you in favor of the Iran
deal, as far as you know, the details that came out in the framework?

CHAFEE: Yes. I am in favor of the dialogue taking place. And that`s
how the Soviet Union broke up and the Cold War ended – dialogue and
interaction, and that`s always a good thing. And that`s how it started in
China talking and exchanging ping-pong teams and what happened with China.
And then eventually we come to agreements, and we conduct business
together, and then the weapons are put down. That`s what we want in the
Middle East also.

HAYES: I couldn`t help but notice today your announcement was not in
your home state of Rhode Island, a state that has elected you numerous
times to various positions. You chose not to run for re-election in Rhode
Island. There was – your approval ratings were fairly low. There was
some frustration with your term there obviously by some of your critics.

Why not do it in your home state today, with a home state crowd?

CHAFEE: First of all, I`m very proud of my record as governor. I led
Rhode Island out of the recession. And when I came in, we had one of the
highest unemployment rates in the country, it`s down to 6.1 percent now,
and that`s the biggest drop in the unemployment rate of all but three
states. So, that`s a great record to run on out of Rhode Island.

I wanted to do something different, that`s why I came here. And I got
the
invitation to speak about foreign relations and obviously that`s a passion
of mine and especially important as I conduct this presidential run: what
we`re going to do in the world, how America goes forward internationally.
So, the combination of doing something a little different, the timing of
being here in early June and talking about foreign international issues all
came together to choose this venue.

HAYES: All right, Governor Lincoln Chafee, now presidential
candidate, thank you very much.

Up next, a plot uncovered in Boston to attack police officers with
knives. And news the suspects also discuss targeting anti-Islam agitator
Pamela Geller. Details next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: Breaking news out of Boston tonight where a man named David
Wright appeared on court today on charges of conspiring to destroy evidence
of what officials say was an imminent plot to attack and potentially behead
police officers. The man alleged to have plotted those murders, Usama
Rahim, was killed by police yesterday after a confrontation in the parking
lot of a CVS pharmacy. Officials say officers opened fire after Rahim, who
terrorism investigators had had under phone surveillance, confronted them
with a large knife.

Law enforcement officials tonight tell NBC news that Rahim had also
discussed plans to behead the anti-Islamic activist, Pamela Geller, though
it is important to note officials said the discussion was not a serious
plot, it amounted to a little
more than, quote, a fantasy.

Joining me now with the latest is Hillary Sergeant, senior writer at
Boston.com.

Hillary, what do we know about this alleged accomplice who`s been
picked up?

HILLARY SERGEANT, BOSTON.COM: We know that he`s 25 years old. We
know that he is from the boston area. We don`t know much more than that.
We know that he had several family members in court and that he paid for
his own counsel, and aside from that, we really don`t know much.

HAYES: Now, do we – how did investigators happen upon these two, or
at least Usama Rahim, who was under surveillance? Do we know what led them
to this
man?

SERGEANT: No, we don`t. We know that the Amazon purchase – the
Amazon.com purchase of the eight inch or so military style knife was
something that was picked up on, but we don`t know if that`s what prompted
it. My guess is that it wasn`t. I mean, I think we know at this point
that the joint terrorism task force has a fair amount of surveillance
capabilities, but we don`t know what led them to these people.

HAYES: And in terms of the details of the plot against police
officers, I mean, I guess my question is how fully realized was this as a
plot from the scale of idle sociopathic fantasy to imminent? Do we have a
good sense from investigator where`s it was in that scale?

HAYES: Well, I mean, look, you think of idle sociopathic fantasy is
something that generally takes place in one idle sociopathic mind. I
mean, there were three individuals – Eavid Wright, Usamma Rahim and one
third unnamed individual who met on a Rhode Island beach in inclement
weather to discuss a plot.

So, I think it is a little bit beyond just idle chatter.

HAYES: Do we know if that third individual was an informant?

SERGEANT: We don`t. We do know – well, we don`t really anything
more about that third individual. We do have some inclination to believe
that there is a third location in Rhode Island that is being searched but
as of – as far as I know, there`s no third individual who has been
arrested at this point.

HAYES: Are there family members of Usama Rahim who have come forward
to discuss in any way whether their experience of him was the experience we
heard after the Boston marathon bombings of watching someone radicalize, et
cetera?

SERGEAT: There was a brother who came forward on Facebook yesterday
who spoke out very much to say that this was unexpected. I think to some
extent you have to sort of imagine that as a close family member, you may
come out to say something like that regardless.

But, you know, I don`t think we have the depth of knowledge to know
whether his family thought this was expected or not at this point.

HAYES: All right, Hillary Sergeant, thanks so much.

SERGEANT: Thank you.

HAYES: Still ahead, after the unrest in Baltimore, conservatives
declare a new nationwide crime wave. Are they right?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: Last week The Washington Post put out a graphic that went
viral around the world and appeared on this show, a striking illustration
of how many people had died building World Cup stadiums in Qatar, compared
to deaths from past World Cups and Olympics. It was a great, powerful
graphic, which is why we showed it to you.

But it was wrong, crucially. The Post has corrected the graphic to
reflect that. It shows total migrant worker deaths in Qatar since December
2010, not deaths specifically related to building the World Cup facilities,
which are difficult to pin down. And there`s a big difference, although
that correction does
not change the fact that the migrant workers in Qatar are being treated
like slave labor, as we`ve covered extensively on this show, or the fact
that many of them have died building World Cup infrastructure, but it`s
important to correct the
record.

Now, there are developments today in the ongoing FIFA saga. And they
could have big implications for the Qatar World Cup scheduled for 2022 as
well as the 2018 World Cup in Russia.

Testimony was unsealed today from Chuck Blazer, former top FIFA
official who plead guilty to corruption in 2013 and turned cooperating
witness, and who infamously kept a $6,000 a month Trump Tower apartment for
his cats.

A court document showed that Blazer swore under oath that he and
others accepted and facilitated bribes in exchange for awarding the 1998
and 2010 World Cups as well as other tournaments.

Meanwhile, Reuters reports the FBI is scrutinizing how FIFA awarded
those 2018 and 2022 World Cups in Russia and Qatar, something Swiss
prosecutors are
looking into as well.

As officials continue to investigate long-time FIFA President Sepp
Blatter, who announced yesterday his plans to resign, and six indicted FIFA
officials and executives have now been added to INTERPOL`s most wanted
list, among them Jack Warner who once infamously responded to bribery
allegations by saying, “if you are pious, go to a church, friends, but the
fact is our business is our business.

Well, it`s the world`s business now, Jack.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDE CLIP)

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS: Welcome back to Hannity. Crime is
skyrocketing in major cities all across the country.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Crime spiking in major cities across the country.

MEGYN KELLY, FOX NEWS: There are horrifying numbers out this week
from some of America`s biggest cities.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: If you are consuming conservative media as of late, you are
likely hearing that America`s decades long decline in crime is over. You
may be seeing headlines about the new nationwide crime wave.

And here`s the thing, that headline is not completely baseless, last
month was Baltimore`s deadliest in over 40 years. Homicides are up in
Milwaukee, Chicago and Atlanta as well. But the story being told in the
conservative media, particularly by Fox News, is not just about numbers or
lives lost, it`s about increased crime happening as a direct result of
protests and unrest linked to the use of force by police particularly in
Ferguson, Missouri and most recently in Baltimore.

To hear Fox News tell it, we`re in the midst of a war on police.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Murders and violent crimes are soaring in major
cities all across the country. Is the war on cops to blame?

KELLY: Bloodshed in Baltimore continues to soar. We are taking a
closer look at how the fallout from a series of incidents across this
country is leaving America`s finest under fire.

BILL O`REILLY, FOX NEWS: Now some here are saying all of the police
bashing and reversals of crime prevention policies are putting our lives
and our economies at risk.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: The argument seems to be that police have been forced into a
defense crouch, which means lower arrest rates and more crime for everyone.
In a statement, the head of the Baltimore police union said, quote,
“criminals feel empowered now. There is no respect. Police are under
siege in every quarter. They are more afraid of going to jail for doing
their jobs properly than they are of getting shot on duty.”

Baltimore police commissioner Anthony Batts told MSNBC`s Joy Reid that
some of his officers are angry.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOY REID, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: Is there a morale problem in the
Baltimore police department?

ANTHONY BATTS, BALTIMORE POLICE COMMISSIONERS: I think there`s
officers who are angry. I think there`s officers who are frustrated. I
think there`s officers who also are confused of issues, because in the
arresting of the six officers, there were some underlining messages that
the officers are seeing that they`re concerned about.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: And it`s not just Commissioner Batts who is on the defensive,
critics of New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio blame his opposition to stop
and frisk for an increase in shootings in New York City.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: New Yorkers are pleading with the Mayor Bill de
Blasio to bring back the stop and frisk policy, allowing police to randomly
stop people and then search them for guns.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: The New York Post asked this week, how many New Yorkers must
die before the mayor brings back stop and frisk?

Now, for 50 years our policies on crime and incarceration have grown
out of the political debate focused on the fear of widespread lawlessness
and chaos. Richard Nixon ran for president and won in 1968 on the law and
order platform that made a very explicit argument, that there was a
relationship between the protests in the streets, riots in cities like
Watts and elsewhere, and a rise in crime across the country.

That premise has been absolutely fundamental to the conservative
argument about social order for more than 40 years.

And just as it seems like we are on the verge of a new politics, a new
of thinking about crime, that old way of thinking is rearing its head once
again. We`ll debate if there`s something to it next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: Joining me now, Peter Moskos, former Baltimore police officer,
associate professor at John J. College of Criminal Justice, and Vince
Warren, executive director at the Center for Constitutional Rights.

OK, so I`m somewhat obsessed with this topic. I`ve been thinking
about it a lot, particularly going back to `68 and looking at the huge
spike in crime and the sort of argument that was made in `68 that, you
know, unrest, protest and crime were sort of related and that got turned
into the broken windows theory years later that basically, if you allow
small infractions, small bits of disorder, broken windows, that
communicates to people there`s no order, there`s no law here, and
so people feel more permissive and you get more crime.

OK. Do you think that`s what`s going on? In Baltimore.

PETER MOSKOS, FRM. BALTIMORE POLICE OFFICER: In Baltimore, I think
right now you have police that are stretched too thin. They simply can`t
respond to calls for service, except en masse, because they`re getting
crowded by people who come out – before one cop could handle a routine
call, and now there are four or five.

So, you just don`t have proactive policing anymore in Baltimore. You
don`t
have drug corners – you have cops who aren`t willing to go hands on and
frisk suspects, and you have fewer arrests.

But that is just – it`s a lack of resources right now.

HAYES: OK. Let`s talk about the few arrests for a second. The few
arrests is understating things. I mean, a dramatic dropoff in arrests.
Can we pull up the chart of over – look at that, that`s arrests in
Baltimore by year. You see what happens after the – now, another
interpretation of that, I have to say, having been in New York, after the
murder of those two cops in Brooklyn, we saw a very similar plunge in
arrests which was pretty clearly coordinated work slowdown by a
police force that was furious. Does that look like that to you, Vince?

VINCE WARREN, CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS: Well, it does look
like that to me. And there are actually two steps to that.

So, number one, after my organization won the stop and frisk case, the
city
said if we stop stop and frisk, then crime is going to rise and it didn`t
as they reduced stop and frisk.

Secondly, they had a coordinated work slowdown on the premise that if
they did that the fear that crime would rise, and it didn`t do that either.

And so we have a scenario where the number of arrests really look to
me like it`s either a coordinated work stoppage or it`s a – something by
the police department to say, we`re actually going to stop doing this for
some strange reason.

HAYES: Yeah, I mean, because let`s just be clear, coordinated work
stoppage is illegal under Maryland law. It`s basically illegal in all
places.

MOSKOS: What`s happened in New York is not what`s happening in
Maryland.

HAYES: Why not?

MOSKOS: Because it was a work slowdown in New York. But it was –
but it was a rebellion against the quota-based system. It was cops not
wanting to meet
numbers for no reason. It was an insult to their professional pride.

But they were still doing the real police work they could in New York,
they just weren`t writing tickets and..

HAYES: Right. In fact, there was – I mean what was funny about the
– not funny, but weird, it was this experiment, it was sort of this like
screw you action being taken that the reformers, people against stop and
frisk were like yes, bring it on, this is the kind of – this is what we
want.

MOSKOS: But in Baltimore, it is not a coordinated strategy, because I
have a lot of friends who are there working right now in the eastern and
western districts and they say it`s just a lot tougher to do their job.
They`re still trying to.

But also morale is horrible. And they don`t want to get in trouble or
charged when they are doing their job and make well intentioned mistakes.

WARREN: But, no, there`s something that just doesn`t make sense to
me. If you roll it back. Number one, you have six police officers that
have been charged for a criminal act. And you can`t explain to me and
convince me that the vast majority of people in Baltimore have decided now
that they`re going to shoot people up, because police officers had been
arrested.

In fact, I think that the opposite would be true.

Secondly, you`re also not going to convince me that the bad Baltimore
police department is now afraid to go out and do routine traffic, do
routine patrols, just because six police officers were arrested and they
think people are mad about it. It doesn`t make sense to me at all.

HAYES: What you`re saying, though, is that when they`re – here`s
what
I`m hearing, and the Commissioner Batts said something similar is. We go
to do something, a bit of policing, where apprehending someone who is
running from the
cops or responding to a call, and a crowd gathers, and because the crowd
gathers, we have to send more officers, and because we have a finite
amount, that means that those officers are being pulled from somewhere
else, and so what one cop could do, six cops are now doing, right. I mean,
that`s the theory.

MOSKOS: But the issue is not all the people of Baltimore are suddenly
shooting each other, the issue is that a certain people in certain
neighborhoods are shooting each other. And those are people that might be
deterred from carrying guns by more aggressive, proactive policing.

HAYES: But here`s the thing that – here`s the thing that I find sort
of troubling, and this comes from the Batts thing, which is that let`s
imagine a situation in which people are coming to the street when there`s
police activity, right, in the wake of Freddie Gray. And they are
nonviolently constitutionally observing the police officers, I mean, is the
message here from you or the Baltimore people that if people come out and
constitutionally observe our officers doing their job we can`t do our job,
because if that`s the message something is deeply wrong.

WARREN; We can`t have a scenario in which the police department says
the only way we`ll be able to do our job is if somebody`s watching us,
because that`s how we got into this mess to begin with.

And we have cop watch programs around the country, and they haven`t
sprung up for no reason whatsoever, because there needs to be some measure
of civilian oversight to make sure that the police officers are acting
constitutionally and legally.

And the reason why we know about some of these incidents is because we
have people who have been watching and filming. And I know that can be a
threatening
situation for the police department, but that`s the problem we have to work
out.

HAYES: That`s the question.

MOSKOS: What`s happening now in Baltimore is not just a cop watch
program. It is people that can turn into a mob scene if you try to make a
discretionary arrest on someone. So cops aren`t, because they don`t want
to start a bad situation, and they certainly feel they don`t have the
support of the leadership from the police commissioner or the mayor. And
this matters.

What`s an alternative theory? How did shootings double overnight?
I`m…

HAYES: I don`t know – right, yes.

I mean, there is some – there`s I think the remote possibility –
increasingly remote as the numbers continue that this is a statistical
hiccup, but it`s so large, and arrests have plummeted so much.

It is very hard not to put two and two together in the strict case of
Baltimore.

WARREN: What, but you put two and two together, in that case, you get
22, right, you don`t get four.

And I agree with you that there has to be some reason for the spike.
But what we`re arguing is that the reason why the spike has happened is
two-fold. One, because people are emboldened like the police union are
saying it. And number two, because any people that are watching the police
department can turn into a mob at any minute, that doesn`t make sense to
me. And there`s a policy way to get out of it.

HAYES: Peter Moskos and Vince Warren, I want to keep talking about
this. This is going to continue to play out. Thank you very much.

That is All In for this evening. The Rachel Maddow Show starts right
now.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
BE UPDATED.
END

Copyright 2015 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>