The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, Transcript 11/02/15

Jonathan Chait, Katie Packer, Marc Caputo, Lawrence Lessig, Josh Barro, Molly O`Toole, Laith Alkhouri

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: NBC – oh, look, right now, so, you should
watch. And now it is time for THE LAST WORD, Alex Wagner sitting in for
Lawrence tonight, good evening Alex.

ALEX WAGNER, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Rachel. Big night tonight including
your tonight show interview, we are excited about that.

MADDOW: Thank you very much too, thanks.

WAGNER: And as Rachel said tonight, Lawrence Lessig will join me for an
exclusive interview after ending his presidential campaign.

And Jeb Bush says he can fix the country if he can fix his presidential
campaign as one conservative voice says he hopes Bush stays in as long as
possible to create more havoc for the Republican establishment.




BUSH: I`ve gotten a lot of advice lately, more than enough, thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He`s down in the polls –

BUSH: I can fix it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They need to clamp it down and fix it!


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ended up taking one little shot at Marco Rubio.

BUSH: The challenges we face are too great to roll the dice on another
presidential experiment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This reboot also coincided with the release of his new
e-book “Reply All”.

BUSH: An elderly woman in south Florida sent me an e-mail saying,
governor, I`ve got a raccoon in my attic.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So, you`ve heard all along that he was the smart Bush.


I don`t think there really is such a thing as a smart Bush. I don`t.

LESTER HOLT, NBC HOST, “NIGHTLY NEWS”: Carson seems to be solidifying his
place as frontrunner.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Carson greeted his fired-up fans.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don`t listen to a word they say –

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He jumped out in our poll to a six-point lead over
Donald Trump.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It does seem as though that no matter what Mr. Trump
and Dr. Carson says, they`re almost bullet proof.

BUSH: You can`t just tell Congress you`re fired and go to commercial



BUSH: I can fix it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We`re not waiting until tomorrow morning, it better be



WAGNER: Good evening, I`m Alex Wagner in for Lawrence O`Donnell. As the
old saying goes, if it ain`t broke, don`t fix it. And if it is broke, then
by all means, fix it.

That seemed to be the message from the Bush campaign today as its candidate
tried to pressure supporters and donors and really anybody who was
listening, that, yes, Jeb can fix it.


BUSH: I can fix it. I can fix it. I can fix it.



WAGNER: This week, Bush will tour Florida, South Carolina and New
Hampshire to make his case. As part of the new fix it strategy, Bush is
releasing an e-book titled “Reply All”.

It`s filled with old e-mails from his time as Florida governor, extensively
to draw contrast between himself and potential Democratic nominee Hillary

So far, Bush`s sales pitch needs some fixing.


BUSH: Here`s my shameless plug. The book is called “Reply All”, it`s out
today, you can get it on, it`s pretty cheap –


BUSH: I hope you enjoy it.


WAGNER: Clinton wasn`t the only adversary on Bush`s mind today. He also
took on opponents Marco Rubio, Donald Trump and Ben Carson without exactly
mentioning their names.


BUSH: This won`t be solved with more talk. The answer isn`t sending
someone from one side of the capital city to the other.

The solution won`t be found in someone who has never demonstrated the
capacity to implement conservative ideas.

And you can`t just tell Congress you`re fired and go to commercial break.
The challenges we face as a nation are too great to roll the dice on
another presidential experiment.

To trust a rhetoric of reform over a record of reform.


WAGNER: And Bush took on the fixing of his debate fail from last week.


BUSH: As you may have heard, last week, I was in Colorado for the third
Republican debate.


If you watched the debate, you probably came away thinking that the
election is about sound bites –



BUSH: Or fantasy football –



BUSH: Or which candidate can interrupt the loudest.


BUSH: I`m here to tell you it is not. This election is not about a set of
personalities. It`s about a set of principles.



WAGNER: But the one thing Jeb Bush cannot seem to fix is the polls.
Including a new “Nbc”-“Wall Street Journal” poll that puts him in fifth

Ben Carson tops the national poll with 29 percent, Donald Trump is in
second with 23 percent, Marco Rubio is in third with 11 percent.

Ted Cruz gets 10 percent and he is followed by Jeb Bush at 8 percent. Over
in New Hampshire, the state in which the Bush campaign is spending the most
money, Jeb Bush is in sixth place according to a new Monmouth University

Bush`s Florida rival Marco Rubio has tripled his support in the state since
last week`s debate. Trump still leads the pack in New Hampshire with 26

Carson follows with 16 percent, Rubio is at 13 percent and Kasich is at 11
percent, Cruz at 9 percent and Jeb Bush is at 7 percent.

Which is exactly the same amount of support he received the last time this
poll was taken September 10th through the 13th.

Joining us now is Katie Packer, a political consultant and former deputy
campaign manager of Romney 2012.

Jonathan Chait, a columnist for “New York Magazine” and Marc Caputo, senior
writer for “POLITICO” who covers Florida politics.

OK, Jonathan, I want to start with you. There`s a choice quote in “New
York Magazine” in an interview that Frank Rich did, where in Alex Carp is
quoted as saying, “Jeb Bush`s campaign has been a study in incompetence
that has mainly dramatized the candidate`s sense of entitlement.”

Jonathan, your thoughts, can Jeb Bush fix this?

this. If this is his campaign, I don`t think he offers anything to anyone
in the party that they really can`t get from somebody else at a – you
know, in a more attractive package.

Marco Rubio is also from Florida, also can help their – help their chances
of stopping the bleeding with Latino voters.

And conservatives have just as many problems with Jeb Bush as they have
with any of the other mainstream establishment Republican candidates.

So, who wants to vote for Jeb Bush except for people who are intensely
personally loyal to the Bush family. And that`s a small group of people.

WAGNER: I believe smaller than a polling margin of error. Katie –

CHAIT: Absolutely –

WAGNER: Let me – let me get your thoughts on the utility that some
conservatives think Jeb Bush plays in this race. This is conservative talk
show host Steve Deace on Msnbc earlier today. Let`s take a listen to what
he said.


favor by staying in and stopping the establishment from coalescing behind
Marco Rubio sooner. So, I hope he hangs in there a little bit longer.


WAGNER: Katie, do you think that`s right?

ROMNEY 2012: Well, you know, I certainly don`t think that that`s the
motive that the Bush campaign is pursuing. He`s a tremendously
accomplished governor.

I think the challenge that they`ve got is that this electorate is really a
changed electorate and it`s maybe something that they can`t really fix.

Is the mood of the electorate is for something new, something different,
and we`re seeing that in the kind of support that Ben Carson and Donald
Trump are getting.

I do think that ultimately, it will be a nominee that doesn`t come from
those ranks in particular, but it will be somebody that represents a change
and something new for the Republican Party.

And I don`t think a lot of Republicans look at somebody with the last name
Bush that way.

WAGNER: So, Mark, let me – let me ask you. In terms of the establishment
candidates who remain in the race, Bush and Rubio seem like they have been
warring overtures thus far.

Bush was asked again about Rubio, I believe yesterday and this is what he
had to say.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you frustrated with Marco Rubio?

BUSH: No –


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The rift if you will –


A few Floridians going –

BUSH: No –


BUSH: No, I`m not – I`m not frustrated at all.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, and that will –

BUSH: I mean, he`s a good – he`s a great guy, he`s a good friend, he`s a
gifted politician. I just had the leadership skills to solve these
problems. We have a little disagreement on that.


WAGNER: Marc, two Floridians going at it. That was Bush earlier today,
actually in fact. Is this the – are we going to see more fighting between
these two as the campaign goes on?

MARC CAPUTO, SENIOR WRITER, POLITICO: Well, Jeb`s campaign is certainly
telegraphed that.

There`s a reason that Jeb stood on stage and decided to kind of challenge
Marco Rubio and then made the mistake of not realizing – oh, no, Marco
Rubio can respond and hit me back.

And that`s why Jeb is currently in this situation which kind of looks like
a tailspin. You know, what Katie said earlier about this being a change
electorate or a change election, one of the big problems with Jeb is just
as broad messaging.

You know, he is coming across and saying, I`m the disrupter. I am an
outsider from Washington. You know, the grandson of a senator, son of a
president, brother of a former president, doesn`t really sound like an
outside Washington character who is a disrupter.

And then we talk about the Jeb can fix it slogan, if you look on Twitter,
it`s trending worldwide. And it`s not trending on worldwide because people
think Jeb can fix it.

It`s trending worldwide because people are making fun of Jeb Bush. And
when you become an object of mockery in a campaign and you look silly,
that`s really tough to overcome.

You know, a quote that Jack Walsh character from “The Godfather”, he talked
about, you know, a man in my position cannot afford to be made to look

And right now, Jeb Bush actually looks ridiculous to a lot of people in
both the political class and a broader social media. That`s a huge problem
for him.

WAGNER: Well, in all fairness, Jonathan, I mean, I think a lot of people
acknowledge that one of Marco Rubio`s greatest weaknesses as an
establishment candidate, if you will, is his role in the gang of eight and
bipartisan immigration reform.

And if, in fact, as Katie says, this is a changed election. The right wing
base is not enamored of anyone that wants to conduct a bipartisan
immigration reform and yet Marco Rubio has not been attacked on this

One can only expect that as it goes on, as the race goes on –

PACKER: I don`t know about that –

WAGNER: As he goes – as he – well, among presidential – among his
fellow Republican presidential candidates, it`s basically Donald Trump is
the only person that`s really brought it up.

CHAIT: Yes, it`s absolutely right. But keep in mind in 2012, I expected
the rest of the Republican field to just tear apart Mitt Romney for
Romneycare, right?

He invented the idea for the law that they decided was going to destroy the
foundations of American freedom all together. But no one really had the
chance to stand up and just go after Romney.

He managed to kind of slick his way through that whole question and avoid
it. So, it`s conceivable that Rubio managed to do the same thing on
immigration reform, especially because the law never was enacted into law.

He gave up and he turned against it, and now he`s saying he won`t do it
again. And so, he may manage to muddle through on this.

WAGNER: Katie, let me get your thoughts as someone that worked on the
Romney campaign. I mean, do you think this is an issue – do you think
that immigration reform is a liability for Marco Rubio?

PACKER: Well, my firm actually did a lot of research on this in early
primary states just this Summer.

And we found that really only about, you know, a fifth to a quarter of
Republican primary voters in early states are particularly exercised about
that issue.

The vast majority of Republican primary voters do support some kind of a
reasonable movement to allow these folks to have legal status.

As long as there`s border security, as long as there`s some stipulation to
that. So that, you know, the voters that are really energized about that
are largely already in Donald Trump`s camp.

But that leaves 75 percent to 80 percent of Republican primary voters sort
of in the pond to fish from.

So, the other candidates that do have a reasonable approach like Ted Cruz,
Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and some of the other candidates as well, do have
some opportunity to grow with that – with that pool of voters.

WAGNER: Marc, really quick. In terms of reaching out to Hispanics, Jeb
Bush has said today and publicly he wants the “Nbc Telemundo” debate to
move forward.

He is making a strong play for Hispanic-Americans. Do you think this slice
of the electorate is basically been forsaken by the Republican Party? Do
you think there are still inroads that they can make at this point?

CAPUTO: Well, you – there`s only so far you can fall. I mean, Mitt
Romney was pretty low. And certainly, Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio – my
general experience with them and also looking at the polling, they poll
well among Hispanic voters.

I`m not sure that “Telemundo” or “Univision” or anyone of the Spanish
language networks is a make all-break-all for Republicans.

However, you do see the Republicans are slowly inching toward estranging or
infuriating Spanish language media.

And that can eventually translate out into a broader crowd and people can
start to think, well, this party is still is not interested in
communicating to me.

And one of the problems that Republicans have is forget about immigration
reform. Polls generally show that – polls generally show that they
support mandatory minimum wage increase and Medicaid reform, Medicaid

And Republicans don`t support that, and that`s a problem going forward,
getting the Hispanic vote.

WAGNER: A curious disconnect of voting patterns. Marc Caputo, thank you
as always for joining us –

CAPUTO: Thank you –

WAGNER: Tonight. Coming up, Lawrence Lessig ends his presidential
campaign saying the Democratic Party won`t let him be a candidate.

Does he trust Bernie, Hillary or Martin O`Malley on the key issue of
campaign finance reform. And who will get his vote? Lawrence Lessig joins
me next for an exclusive interview.

Coming up later, Ben Carson broke a record in the 2016 Republican
presidential race today, plus, what President Obama says about boots on the
ground in Syria.

New comments from the President tonight from “Nbc News”.


WAGNER: Tune in to Msnbc this Friday, November 6th when Rachel Maddow
moderates the first in the south candidates forum with Bernie Sanders,
Hillary Clinton and Martin O`Malley.

The forum will cover all the important issues from the economy to policing,
to the state of the Democratic Party in the south. You can watch it this
Friday on Msnbc starting at 8:00 p.m. Eastern.

And coming up, amid all the talk of Republican debate drama, the Democratic
Party had some of its own today.


the party won`t let me be a candidate and I can`t ask people to support a
campaign that I know can`t even get before the members of the Democratic


WAGNER: Lawrence Lessig joins me for an exclusive interview coming up


WAGNER: Today, the field of Democratic nominees for president lost one
more candidate, a Harvard law professor and campaign finance reform
crusader Lawrence Lessig.

While Lessig didn`t have the same name recognition or polling numbers as
candidates named Clinton or Sanders. In the 12 weeks of Lessig`s campaign,
he`d racked up some moderate successes.

Within the first three weeks of the campaign, he had crowd-funded more than
$1 million. His campaign was running TV ad buys in the key states of Iowa
and New Hampshire.

His one issue platform, campaign finance reform, had broken on to the main
stage at the October 13th Democratic debate. But he had not.

In fact, Lessig blames the DNC and the several times it changed the rules
for qualifying for the debates as the reason that he is calling it quits.


LESSIG: It is now clear that the party won`t let me be a candidate and I
can`t ask people to support a campaign that I know can`t even get before
the members of the Democratic Party.

I must today end my campaign for the Democratic nomination and turn to the
question of how best to continue to press for this reform now.


WAGNER: Joining us now for an exclusive interview is Harvard law Professor
Lawrence Lessig. Professor, thanks for joining me on this very big day.
It seems –

LESSIG: Thank you for having me –

WAGNER: It seems like the DNC kind of changed the rules on you here. For
those that aren`t aware of the exact situation, can you explain it to us?

LESSIG: Yes, it`s pretty simple. Until this week, the rule that the DNC
had announced, a rule that the chair had posted on a blog post on medium
was that you needed to get 1 percent in three polls, “In the six weeks
before the debate.”

So that means that between now and the debate, I would have to rack up
three polls at 1 percent and we were on our way to getting that.

Every poll that had my name since a Monmouth poll was finding me at 1
percent. But at the end of last week, my campaign director was informed by
the DNC that the rule was now three polls, finding you at 1 percent, at
least six weeks before the debate.

Which means that we would have already had to have qualified and everything
we`ve been doing for the last month was for no reason at all. So, under
that rule, there`s no way we would qualify and there`s no way we would be
in the debate.

WAGNER: And as you point out, in three recent polls, Monmouth, “Nbc” poll,
online and the YouGov poll, you`re polling at 1 percent, you would have
qualified for the debate.

I guess, I wonder if you think that there`s a motivation here in not having
you on the debate stage, especially given the exit of two candidates, Jim
Webb and Lincoln Chafee in recent weeks?

LESSIG: Well, I`m not sure the motivation. The frustration is, you know,
there is an issue that is not on that debate stage, that none of the people
are talking about the debate stage.

When you introduced me tonight, you said, I wanted to talk about campaign
finance reform and that`s certainly the way people understand this

But it`s actually something much more fundamental. What the issue is that
I want to talk about is the core corruption, a crippled and corrupted
institution at the core of our democracy, which is Congress.

Which makes it impossible for these candidates to be able to do any of the
things they`re talking about unless we find a way to address that crippled
and corrupted institution.

Campaign finance is one part of it. But it`s not the only part. And what
I wanted to do was to begin to have a conversation to begin this focus
because literally not once was the recognition of this elephant in the

This fact that we have the core institution of our democracy failing, even
acknowledged in that debate.

And we have to find a way to talk about it if we`re going to have a way to
solve it and be able to get any of the issues that we care about addressed
by this government.

WAGNER: Are you at all confident that either one of the former Congress –
well, one is presently, Senator Sanders and former Senator Clinton are
going to bring this issue up at all, are capable of talking about it?

And Senator Sanders has brought up the issue of citizens United and
campaign finance reform. He did so on the October 13th debate. Does he
have your vote as someone who might carry the banner on this?

LESSIG: Well, there`s no doubt that Senator Sanders and Hillary Clinton, I
think, have the right policies selected.

But the question is, have they committed to getting these policies actually
enacted first to make it possible for our Congress to actually do anything?

And that`s the critical difference here. These issues that I am talking
about which include campaign finance but also the way we gerrymander
districts to create this radically polarized, completely dysfunctional
House of Representatives.

These issues require an attention and a focus to bring the American people
around to recognize why we have to solve this problem first.

And what I am concerned about is that it`s very uncomfortable for
politicians to talk about the problem, the problem child in the room, which
is Congress.

To talk about how this institution has failed and will continue to fail
unless we bring attention to how it needs to be reformed.

And so, that`s why I don`t think literally anybody mentioned the problem of
this institution separate from referring to the problem of billionaires and
the problem of campaign finance.

But those are separate issues. We`ve got to find a way to restore a
representative democracy if there`s any chance for us to get the reforms
they`re talking about.

Whether it`s minimum wage or whether it`s a single-payer healthcare or
taking on the banks or dealing with Wall Street. All of these are
impossible if we don`t get a representative democracy back.

WAGNER: So, given where you think we are on that issue, I mean, how –
what is your – what is your correspondence been like with the – with the
chair of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Have you pushed back on this – I guess what we can say is, what appears to
be some criteria change for the debate rules?

LESSIG: Of course we pushed back. Steve Jarden(ph), who is the one
running the campaign and the one who has been meeting with the DNC, was
quite shocked that the very same person who had uttered the earlier version
of the rule flipped and then in almost an Orwellian-like way, said, no,
this has always been the rule.

But we have – you know, he posted on his blog post in “Huffington Post”,
the evidence of this transition and, you know, the frustration at
recognizing that as the political director put it, these are the rules that
are being handed down from the top of the DNC.

But what I am hopeful about – you know, OK, it`s not the end of the world
that I`ve been forced out of a campaign. Because this is not about me.

What`s important here is this issue that the Democrats are not willing to
address. They`re not willing to talk about.

They`re happy to talk about the problem of billionaires and the problem of
citizens united, but neither of those two ways of talking about this will
actually get us any real reform.

What we`ve got to begin to talk about is how we`re going to change the way
campaigns are funded. And that means using words like public funding of
elections, citizen funding of elections.

A word which was not uttered once at that debate even though Bernie
Sanders, Hillary Clinton and Martin O`Malley all have endorsed these type
of proposals.

But if we don`t explain it to the American people, if we don`t show the
American people why these changes are necessary, they will never happen.

It will be exactly like Barack Obama who made this a fundamental issue all
the way through April of 2008.

And then when he got to Washington, of course, he made no effort to bring
about a change in the way campaigns were funded or the change in the
corrupted system which he had identified and campaigned against –

WAGNER: Given where you think the party is on this issue, are you prepared
to make an independent run?

LESSIG: I`m not ruling out anything. I don`t want to make an independent
run right now. But what I want to do is to find the best way to put this
issue in the center of this debate.

Because what I found when I was out on the campaign trail, and it was an
amazing experience. It was the happiest work I`ve ever done, to meet
voters and to talk about this issue.

What I found is that people are passionate and so frustrated with the
corrupted government that they think they have got right now.

And when somebody talks to them about how it could be fixed, not by
pointing to constitutional amendments which nobody thinks are going to
happen, but actually bring about real change, then they are incredibly

And what I hope is that we can find a way to get our leaders to lead on
this issue, because I think there`s an incredibly untapped energy out there
that would actually transform this election if, in fact, someone were to
talk about it openly and strongly.

WAGNER: Lawrence Lessig, thank you for joining us tonight.

LESSIG: Thank you.

WAGNER: Coming up, the Republican response to the U.S. policy shift on


all fronts.

BEN CARSON (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And I think it`s a good idea.

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Either do it or you don`t do it.


WAGNER: So what is the Republican strategy on Syria? That`s just ahead.
But up next, what Ben Carson said today about Republicans.


WAGNER: Ben Carson is leading Donald Trump by six points in the latest NBC
News “Wall Street Journal” poll, but the good news for the doctor does not
end there. Carson is the second choice of 20 percent of republican voters
in the poll, meaning he is leading that category.

That makes Dr. Carson the first candidate to get 50 percent support from
republican voters as either a first or second choice. Donald Trump gets 35
percent combined support. Today, in Florida, Carson was asked about his
surge in recent polls.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: When you look at the polls and you see your
name at the top, you see Trump`s name at the top, what does that tell you
how voters feel about politics in this country?

CARSON: It tells me that they are a lot smarter than anybody thinks they
are and that they recognize that if we continue down the path that we have
been going, be as democrats or republicans, it does not matter.

If we continue down the traditional political pathway, we are going to get
more of the same and more of the same will take us across the brink, and we
will have no return.


WAGNER: Carson also continues to receive strong fund-raising support.
Yesterday, his campaign tweeted, “In the month of October, we raised $10
million and today we will receive our 800,000th donation.”

Joining us now is Josh Barro, A Correspondent for “The New York Times” and
MSNBC Contributor, Katie Packer and Jonathan Chait are still with us. OK,
Josh, looking at these numbers, consistently every time a new poll comes

And, it shows either Trump or Carson at the top, I think it feels to a lot
of the republican establishment and certainly some people in the media,
that it is like looking – it is going through the looking glass. I mean,
this is counter to all the narratives we hear. This week it is Marco
Rubio, but you look and it is Ben Carson, who is getting 50 percent of the

it is 52 percent when you add it together the support for Donald Trump and
Ben Carson, then you have Ted Cruz even though he is a U.S. Senator, who is
obviously not an establishment candidate.

And, you know, people say, “Well, it has been like this before.” Herman
Cain led the polls in 2012. But, the combined totals for these candidates
are just so high and the combined totals for the establishment candidates
are so low. I do think there is this correct thing in the narrative,
though, which is that there is this silent primary to be the establishment

WAGNER: Uh-huh.

BARRO: And, that is not necessarily going to show up first in the polls.
It is going to show up in fund-raiser. It shows up in endorsements from
elected officials that they can then call in later when there is an ability
to consolidate all that establishment support.

So, I do think there has been a real swing in that support from Jeb toward
Marco Rubio. But, if the rules have all been thrown out in this campaign
and the establishment candidate is not going to be able to bring along
those voters like they did in the last few campaigns, then all that stuff
will not matter.

I also think the other thing missing from this campaign is Mitt Romney.
People forget Mitt Romney was actually really good at a lot of aspects of
politics. He was never super charismatic, but he was very on point in
debates. He was very good at identifying his opponent`s weaknesses and
pointing them out to voters and getting the better of them.

You might remember those exchanges with Newt Gingrich. He really beat Newt
Gingrich very badly in those debates. None of the establishment candidates
here have that level of skill, especially not Jeb Bush who has been super -

WAGNER: Well, Marco Rubio, I think, if we are going by the last debate
performance, certainly, made a forceful showing. But, to that point,
Katie, I mean to Josh`s point, let us talk a little bit about Dr. Ben
Carson. Because, I think a lot of people do not understand.

I mean one of his senior advisers today said or an adviser to him said on
Andrea Mitchell today that he thinks Dr. Carson and Mr. Trump are almost
bullet proof. That there is really nothing that can be done to topple them
in a way. And, I guess I wonder what is your take on that and what is the
establishment missing about the narrative in this case?

PACKER: Well, I think that there is a lot of misunderstanding about who
the voters are that are supporting these candidates. The notion that Ben
Carson and Donald Trump sort of represent the same kind of voters, I think
is really faulty.

You know people that are supporting Donald Trump already know everything
there is to know about Donald Trump. The people that are supporting Ben
Carson are still kind of learning about him, the rest of the electorate is
learning about him. But, he is attracting a really different kind of

He is attracting the very strong evangelical, Christian conservative voter.
That is why he is doing well in Iowa. That is what really different kind
of voter than what Trump is attracting. And, so, they are not really one
in the same. And, frankly the notion that Donald Trump is some kind of

This is a guy that is grown up, driving in chauffeured driven limousine,
living in Manhattan his whole life. He has had access to power. Bill and
Hillary Clinton were at his wedding for crying out loud. The idea that he
is not part of the establishment, and he is some kind of outsider is
something that I find a little bit laughable.

WAGNER: Yes. To that end, Jonathan, Ben Carson tackled the subject of
evolution at the Cornerstone Church in Nashville, Tennessee, yesterday.
This is what he said. Let us play the sound.


CARSON: “Listen. Carson, you know, how can you be a surgeon, a
neurosurgeon, and believe that God created the Earth and not believe in
evolution, which is the basis of all knowledge and all science.”

Well, you know, it is kind of funny, but I do believe that God created us
and I did just fine. So, I do not know where they get that stuff from.
You know, it is not true. And, in fact, the more you know about God and
the deeper your relationship with God, I think the more intricate becomes
your knowledge of the way that things work, including the human body.


WAGNER: And, that basically proves Katie`s point, Jonathan. I mean, this
is – he is going or an evangelical audience right there.

CHAIT: He is. But, I also have to say I do not think he is running for
president. I think he is trying to use the forum of a presidential
campaign to build a brand that he can monetize. I think one person, who is
much smarter than people give him credit for is Ben Carson.

I think because of his soft-spoken exterior people do not realize that I
think what is underneath that is a real smart shark, who understands that
he got a situation here that he can leverage. He is using the money he
raises to just build a bigger and bigger and more lucrative list. He is
not really doing a lot of things you would do if you want to become
president. But, he is going to make himself very rich out of this.

WAGNER: Well, so – and we are brought full circle to Donald Trump, Josh.


WAGNER: The person that everybody thinks is in it for the business and the
sort of brand awareness.

BARRO: Right.

WAGNER: Maybe it is actually Ben Carson.

BARRO: Well, but you can do both at the same time, right? It can be a
great double play. Maybe you become president. And, if you do not –

WAGNER: Side benefit.

BARRO: – “Hey, you double the staff to build your brand.” I am sure Ben
Carson –

WAGNER: Well, Mike Huckabee, sure did it.


BARRO: – would happily accept the presidency if it were handed to him. I
do not think there is a pure brand play for him. But, I would note about
the impressive fund-raising totals we have seen there and the impressive
poll numbers.

I would have two caveats about Carson. “The New York Times” poll that came
out last week, 80 percent of Carson voters said they may end up voting for
somebody else. It is not firm support.

He raised $20 million last quarter, but it cost him $11 million to raise
$20 million. He is doing a lot of advertising, direct mail, et cetera.
So, that number is not as impressive as it looks.

WAGNER: The spend rate.


WAGNER: Josh Barro, Jonathan Chait, and Katie Packer, thank you all for
your time.

PACKER: Thank you.

BARRO: Thank you.

WAGNER: Up next, what President Obama said today about American boots on
the ground in Syria.



WAGNER: The Obama Administration announced on Friday that for the first
time American troops will be deployed on the ground in Syria to battle
ISIS. Fewer than 50 Special Operations Forces will head to the country to
advise and assist U.S.-backed rebel groups, who have been fighting ISIS in
Syria. President Obama defended this decision tonight on “NBC Nightly


run special ops already. And, really this is just an extension of what we
are continuing to do. We are not putting U.S. troops on the front lines
fighting –firefights with ISIL.


WAGNER: The president`s explanation is unlikely to sway any of the
republican presidential candidates, who began criticizing the White House
move this weekend without offering much of an alternative.


TRUMP: I think we have a president that just does not know what he is
doing. He either do it or he either do not do it. 50 people. He puts 50



all fronts. These 50 American special Operators are going to go into a
very bad spot with no chance of winning, and at the end of the day, this
will not destroy ISIL.


CARSON: I think it is a good idea. I actually agree with that, but I
think that, that is only a small part of it.



sense to send a hand full of ground troops into harm`s way, when there is
no plan for them to win.



BUSH: I do applaud him for engagement with the special operators, but we
cannot get into a quagmire. There should be a real strategy to take out
ISIS and to take out Assad.



with the tactics of it and the numbers might have to be larger at some
point, but I think the bigger issue is, can they arrive at a strategy.


WAGNER: To date, there are nearly 4.2 million registered Syrian refugees.
More than 11 million Syrians have been displaced from their homes. And,
more than 220,000 people have been killed since the Syrian Civil War
started in 2011.

Joining us now is Molly O`Toole, Political Reporter for “Defense One.”
Molly, let me just first politically get your thought on what is happening
here. Rand Paul was asked about the president`s recent Syrian strategy and
says on Saturday, “He is not ready to send our sons and daughters back into
a war, but is not completely doing nothing to fight the Islamic State.” I
guess I wonder on the right, among conservatives, which wing do you think
is ascending, the isolationist wing or the wing of the hawks?

seen that it is the wing of the hawk that sort of having a resurgent here.
I think it is as much about anxiety prompted by the rise of the Islamic
State, particularly the beheadings we saw of the American journalists.

They really menace to tap into that and sort of have a resurgence after
that wing of the Republican Party sort of quieted down after the Bush
Administration, they are tapping into that. The hawkish wing is ascending.

People thought this would be sort of a moment for Rand Paul, that he was
going to tap into that war weariness, but with the rise of the Islamic
State, we have really seen the rhetoric favor the candidates, who say they
are strong on defense, that we should do more in the Islamic State fight.

Although as you pointed out, we have not seen a lot of specificity. They
focus on the Obama Administration does not have a strategy. This is too
little too late. We do not have specific recommendations from them as of
yet as to what they do differently.

WAGNER: Yes. To that end, the president said tonight in an interview with
NBC that this is basically an extension of what we are continuing to do.
That this is the way, and I think that is a view that in some circles
widely shared.

That this is now how we do not wage but sort of engage in – overseas,
which is to say limited, special ops, elite command units go in and where
we can use – where we do not have to use American boots or American
treasure, drones, we use those.

I mean, that is increasingly the way wars are fought. And, I guess I
wonder do you think that sort of – that strategy, that calculus changes if
another party controls the White House?

O`TOOLE: No, I do not. And, I think that that is the difficulty that the
republican candidates have had when they are more specifically asked about
what they would do differently. This is sort of the way that a wars will
be fought by the United States.

I do not think any republican candidate thinks – although Lindsey Graham
has gone the furthest to say, we need – I think he said, 10,000 to 20,000
U.S. troops, but as part of a coalition on the ground in Syria. I think
even the republican candidates acknowledged that the American public is not
going to be supportive of the kind of large-scale, ground combat
deployments that we saw in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And, we will be much more supportive of something more akin of what the
Obama Administration has done, which is focus on counter terrorism
operations, special forces for select missions, the war against Islamic
State has been fought primarily from the air, and with very – with less,
much less of a U.S. presence on the ground.

But, it is somewhat disingenuous in a way for the president suggests that
this is not a change in strategy at all. And, we have explicit statements
from the president as recently as 2013, more recently than that, that he
would not put any U.S. boots on the ground in Syria. So, there is a bit of
disingenuousness there as well in suggesting that this is not a shift even
for President Obama.

WAGNER: Molly O`Toole, thanks for joining us tonight.

O`TOOLE: Thank you.

WAGNER: Coming up next, what Jeb Bush said about Abraham Lincoln`s beard.
Do not miss that.



WAGNER: Jeb Bush spent part of his reinvention speech today lamenting the
fact that everybody everywhere seems to be telling him he needs to change,
something that no great leader like, say, Abraham Lincoln had to face in
his day.


BUSH: If Lincoln were alive today, imagine the foolishness he would have
to suffer. Think about it. Advisers telling him to shave his beard.
Cable pundits telling him to lose the top hat. Opposition researchers
calling him a five-time loser before he was 50.


WAGNER: But, Lincoln actually did have people giving him advice on his
appearance. In October of 1860, 11-year-old Grace Bedell wrote this letter
to then candidate Lincoln.

“Dear, sir, my father has just gotten home from the fair and brought home
your picture. I have got four brothers and part of them will vote for you
anyway. And, if you let your whiskers grow, I will try and get the rest of
them to vote for you.

You would look a great deal better for your face is so thin. All the
ladies like whiskers and they would tease their husbands to vote for you,
and then you would be president. My father is going to vote for you and if
I was a man, I would vote for you, too. Signed Grace Bedell, Westfield,
Chautauqua County, New York.”

Four days later, Grace Bedell received a response from Mr. Lincoln. “As to
the whiskers,” he wrote, “having never worn any, do you not think people
would call it a piece of silly of affectation if I were to begin it now?
Your very sincere well wisher, A. Lincoln.”

On his inaugural train ride from Illinois to Washington, the president
elect stopped in Bedell`s hometown and asked to meet her. She later said
that president Lincoln told her, he had been growing his whiskers for her.

Coming up, the latest on the mystery of the airliner that may have exploded
over the Sinai Peninsula. We have new information to share with you



WAGNER: Tonight, President Obama took the stage on Broadway. The
President spoke to democrats at a fund-raising performance of “Hamilton”
which is at the Richard Rogers theater and he shared his view on the
republican debate.


PRES. OBAMA: Every one of these candidates say, “You know, Obama is weak.
Putin is kicking sand in his face.” When I talk to Putin, he is going to
straighten out. Just looking at him, I am going to – he is going to be –
and then it turns out, they cannot handle a bunch of CNBC Moderators on a


If you cannot handle those guys, you know, then, I do not think the Chinese
and the Russians are going to be too worried about you.



WAGNER: A U.S. infrared satellite may mold clues as to what caused a
Russian commercial jet to break apart in midair and crash into the desert
of Egypt`s Sinai Peninsula on Saturday. All 224 passengers and crew were

According to a senior defense official, an American satellite detected a
heat flash in the vicinity of the Metrojet crash at the same time been.
U.S. intelligence analyst believe a fuel tank or a bomb could have caused
an explosion on the plane.

Investigators have recovered the plane`s flight data and cockpit voice
recorders. And, tonight, experts are examining a number of possibilities
for the crash. Metrojet`s deputy director said they ruled out human area
reporter and technical problems, and the only possible explanation is an
external impact on the plane.

But the head of Russia`s federal air transportation agency says the claim
is premature and is not based on any real facts. And, then there is a
local group affiliated with ISIS that claimed it downed the plane. Egypt
and Russia have dismissed that saying Islamic militants in the air do not
have the military capability to shoot down a plane flying at that altitude.

The U.S. has not ruled out terrorism but intelligence analysts say there is
no indication that a surface-to-air missile brought down the plane. We do
know that investigators are looking closely at a previous accident in 2001
when the plane`s tail hit the ground and dragged along the tarmac and was
subsequently repaired. Joining us now Laith Alkhouri, an MSNBC Analyst and
cofounder and director of Middle East and North Africa Research and
Analysis for Flash Point. Laith, good to see you.


ALKHOURI: So, let us start first with this idea of an ISIS affiliate in
the area. What do we know about this local group that is claiming

ALKHOURI: So, it is originally called Jamaat Ansar Beit al-Maqdis, and it
was established somewhere in the Sinai – North Sinai Peninsula shortly
after 2010. It started right before the revolution in Egypt and it began
operating in the Sinai.

Now, most of its operations were directed at Israeli cities, until it has
placed allegiance to ISIS back in November of 2014 that we saw most of its
operations get directed to Egyptian security forces.

And, of course with pledging allegiance to ISIS, it started training its
cadets with the same weaponry and on the same methodology – militant
methodology that ISIS trained its fighters on various factions.

WAGNER: There has been dismissal of them being responsible for this
because they do not necessarily have the capabilities to launch a surface-
to-air missiles to down that plane. What about bomb making, is that in the
repertoire of ISIS training?

ALKHOURI: Well, in repertoire of terrorist training, generally speaking,
we know that Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, AQAP, attempted to down an
airliner over Detroit at the end of 2009, what we know as the failed
underwear bomber, who smuggled unconventional explosives that would have
air in igniting on the plane –


ALKHOURI: – but could have actually had devastating outcome. And, so,
terrorist groups have attempted that. And, now the groups has, you know,
Eagles, which can down helicopters, for example, but only at about a
maximum of 16,000 feet. But, they do not have anything more powerful than

WAGNER: To the bomb making though. I mean Al-Qaeda is known to be a more
organized, coherent, hierarchical structure compared to ISIS. Is it
possible the elements from that sort of – the Al-Qaeda could have trained
– I mean we know that there is a split between Al-Qaeda and ISIS.

ALKHOURI: There is a split. It is very far fetched for Al-Qaeda to be
involved in this attack unless somebody is inspired by it, who probably
smuggled on IED onboard, somebody made an operative of some sort.

Now, the unconventional explosives could have passed through scanning
machines that are not the new ones and not – maybe some of the old
scanning machines that cannot detect these types of explosives. But to
shoot the plane down while it is in the air using man pads or surface-to-
air missiles is going to be pretty impossible for them.

WAGNER: Really quickly. How confident are you that we are going to get
full transparency from the Russians on their findings in the investigation?

ALKHOURI: Very little. Very little. They have not been transparent in
most of their operations. They have not been transparent in their
intervention in the Middle East, generally speaking. So, you know, I do
not think we are going to get transparency on this issue. I think it is
going to come from investigators, who might be assigned by number of, you
know, the Egyptian authorities and others.

WAGNER: A lot of eyes on this case. Laith Alkhouri gets tonight`s last
word. Thanks for your time, Laith.

ALKHOURI: Thank you.

WAGNER: Chris Hayes is coming up next.


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.>