IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

All In with Chris Hayes, Transcript 12/7/2015

Guests: Linda Sarsour, Bernie Sanders, Craig Futterman, Wesley Lowry

Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: December 7, 2015 Guest: Linda Sarsour, Bernie Sanders, Craig Futterman, Wesley Lowry


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

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Something bad is happening. And we can`t be the stupid ones.

HAYES: A night after the president`s call for vigilance and tolerance, the Republican frontrunner calls for a complete ban on all Muslims coming to America.

TRUMP: Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.

HAYES: Tonight, San Bernardino and the politics of fear.

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don`t know if sand can glow in the dark, but we`re going to find out.

HAYES: Then, more resignations and dash-cam video. And now, the feds are going to investigate the Chicago police.

MAYOR RAHM EMANUEL (D), CHICAGO: This is bigger than one particular incident.

HAYES: And as the Paris summit continues, Bernie Sanders on why climate change is the biggest threat facing us all.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Let me be clear about this. I see this as the major planetary environmental crisis that we face.

HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.


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

The day after President Obama called on the nation to rise above fear and resist the urge to discriminate in the wake of recent terrorist attacks, the Republican presidential frontrunner is now demanding that an entire religious group be barred from entering this country, according to an official statement from his campaign, quote, "Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the U.S. until our country`s representatives can figure out what is going on."

That candidate discussed his new proposal moments ago, including reading that statement aloud at a rally in South Carolina on board an aircraft carrier.


TRUMP: What`s happened is we`re out of control. We have no idea who is coming into our country. We have no idea if they love us or if they hate us. We have no idea if they want to bomb us. We have no idea what`s going on.

By the way, I have friends that are Muslims. They`re great people. But they know we have a problem. They know we have a real problem.

Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country`s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.


We have no choice. We have no choice.


HAYES: That last line got a standing ovation, by the way.

Speaking today to a prescheduled event on civil liberties in the Muslim community, Homeland Security -- Secretary of Security Jeh Johnson called on Americans not to let terrorism change how they treat fellow citizens.


JEH JOHNSON, HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY: In responding to this new environment, we must not vilify American Muslims. We must not throw a net of suspicion over American-Muslims and an entire religion. We must not force American Muslims to run and hide and retreat to the shadows.


HAYES: Some of Donald Trump`s Republican presidential rivals were quick to condemn his new proposals. Jeb Bush tweeting, "Donald Trump is unhinged. His policy proposals are not serious." From Lindsey graham, "Donald Trump has gone from making absurd comments to being downright dangerous with his bombastic rhetoric." John Kasich in a statement, "This is just more of the outrageous divisiveness that characterizes his every breath, another reason why he`s entirely unsuited to lead the U.S.

And Chris Christie, the radio host Michael, quote, "This is the kind of thing people say when they have no experience and don`t know what they`re talking about."

The response from Ben Carson was somewhat less forceful. He said in a statement, "Everyone visiting our country should register, be monitored during their stay as is done in many countries. We do not and would not advocate being selective on one`s religion.

While Ted Cruz has been making a play for Trump supporters and is beating him in a new Iowa poll that just came out today, declined to condemn the proposal altogether.


CRUZ: Well, that is not my policy. I have introduced legislation in the Senate that would put in place a three-year moratorium on refugees coming from countries where ISIS or al Qaeda control a substantial amount of territory.


HAYES: Joining me now, MSNBC political analyst and former RNC chair, Michael Steele, and Sam Seder, MSNBC contributor and host of "Majority Report".

Michael, I`ll begin with you. Your thoughts?



HAYES: You knew it was coming to you, buddy.

STEELE: I did. I did. Yes.

No. They call Rand Paul an isolationist. That`s the great irony here. I just -- I have never heard of anything that`s so antithetical to our Constitution. But not just -- not just the Constitution. That`s paper, words on paper, to the intrinsic values of this nation.

The other Republican candidates, though I appreciate their condemning it, they have to figure out how to pull this conversation away from the ledge on which it now finds itself.

I don`t understand -- I get the fear and the frustration that a lot of Americans have and feel. I thought the president`s milquetoast speech last night was just that. It didn`t do very much to alleviate that fear. He started talking about things that people really aren`t focused on and concerned about, like gun control and being nice to your neighbor.

They get that inherently, Chris. They want to see, OK, how are you going to protect me from someone blowing me up in a theater or I`m sitting at a cafe or at a Starbucks. That`s where their intrinsic concerns are.

And Donald Trump is unfortunately playing into that in a way that I think is somewhat dangerous.

HAYES: Well, let me say something. Sam, I want to get your response to that, because I know you want to say something.

Two things. One, when I am fearful, I find a little bit of milk and a little bit of toast calms me right down. Second of all --


STEELE: But they`re not good together.

HAYES: Second of all, I will say that, you know, this idea about the sort of what the American populace wants right now -- part of the issue here is the other candidates have opened the door that Donald Trump is walking through. I just -- just so that we`re clear, it was just a few days ago that a lot of candidates, not just Donald Trump, including Jeb Bush, the establishment moderate, was proposing a religious test for refugees.

So, if the logic is, Muslims are too dangerous to let in as refugees, well, then why should -- why stop at refugees? I mean, this is a logical extension of something that Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and a whole bunch of people were saying.

SAM SEDER, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, it`s not just limited to the immigration policies. When Marco Rubio goes out there and says we`re in a war of civilizations. Well, you know what, frankly, if we are in a war of civilizations, Donald Trump`s plan, if people are as afraid as Michael is of getting blown up in a Starbucks, then Donald Trump`s plan makes sense. Maybe we should stop all immigration completely, I mean, if we`re in a war of civilizations.

I mean, look, what Donald Trump was saying is obviously, it`s repugnant, it`s antithetical to American values, and it -- the groundwork for that has been laid by years of Republican rhetoric, including even the premise that people have to be worried about being blown up.

STEELE: That`s not just. Sam, that`s just not true.

SEDER: Hold on for one second, Michael.

STEELE: Yes, that`s not true.

SEDER: Even the premise that people need to be worried about being blown up in a Starbucks. The fact of the matter is what took place in San Bernardino was different from what happened in Sandy Hook only insofar as that there were little kids who weren`t killed, and there was more kids were killed in Connecticut when that attack was.

These people couldn`t do anything more than buy guns legally, get guns legally, and go out and use them and shoot them in a random killing. Their motivation may have been somewhat ideological but we`ll never know. But even if we were to know, the fact is that they don`t have the ability to do something like what we saw in Paris, where they send in --

HAYES: Well, not yet. We don`t know.

STEELE: You don`t know that. You don`t know what the other half of the plan was.

SEDER: We`ll see in 16 years out from 2001. The fact of the matter --

STEELE: It makes no difference.

SEDER: This is what Donald Trump is feeding on.

STEELE: Excuse me.

SEDER: If you`re going to legitimize that type of fear, then Donald Trump`s solutions would make sense.

STEELE: Hey, Sam, it`s not a question of whether I want to or you want to legitimize it. This is what people are feeling. Do you spend any time talking to people in the real world?

SEDER: Of course I do, Michael. Yes, in fact, I do every single day.

STEELE: Have you not heard this fear from average people?


STELEE: Why are diminishing it?

SEDER: I walk amongst regular people.


HAYES: Let me ask you this, Michael. Let me ask you this.

STEELE: Why are you diminishing it? Why is it foreign to you to think people actually believe and feel that? Where did they come from, number one.


SEDER: I think it`s quite possible this type of fear can be ginned up. We don`t know who is coming into this country? We got to stop Muslims coming from Syria because of refugees? I`m sorry. That plays into an irrational fear.

STEELE: I am not condoning that policy, if you want to call it that, from Donald Trump.

SEDER: It`s not just Donald Trump.

STEELE: But what I`m saying is, the second point, is that you`re wrong. The George Bush, during his administration, made it very clear that this was the space that he did not want the country to go into. This was something that Republicans emphasized a great deal during the war on terror. We weren`t running around saying these kinds of things.

Don`t sit there and paint this broad brush --


HAYES: Let me say this.

STEELE: Reduce -- one last point. Reducing this to the partisan political B.S. is part of the problem and actually having a conversation about how we solve the problem.

HAYES: So, that`s the question, right? So, part of the issue here, Sam`s contention is that when you -- when you talk about how scary -- first of all, there is a question about are Americans scared independent from how politicians and the media talk about the threat. I don`t think you could divide those two, right?

Clearly, we spend a lot of time talking about this threat. Clearly, it is terrifying to consider going to a holiday party and find yourself shot and killed by someone engaged in what seems like completely evil massacre out of the blue, totally random. Same thing for the people sitting in the cafe, right? I mean, anything like that is a horrible thing to contemplate. It happens a lot more in the Middle East than it happens here, we should note, right?

SEDER: Or if you`re going to everyday Iraq, you`re 5 years old and you`re going to school.

HAYES: Right. The question is, does the sort of talk about the fear -- Michael, your point there about -- to me, gets at something I kept hearing about the speech last night and connects to what Donald Trump is saying, right?

The question is, do you want leaders to speak to that fear? Do you want them to say it`s OK to feel afraid but I`m going to make you not feel afraid, do you want to stoke that? I mean, take a listen to one of the things that Barack Obama has said last night that`s gotten a lot of criticism when he`s talking about a responsibility to Muslims around the world. Take a listen to this.


BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Just as it is the responsibility of Muslims around the world to root out misguided ideas that lead to radicalization, it is the responsibility of all Americans of every faith to reject discrimination. It is our responsibility to reject religious tests on who we admit into this country. It`s our responsibility to reject proposals that Muslim-Americans should somehow be treated differently.


HAYES: Now, let me just say this, Michael. I want to play this for you. This is Cruz and Rubio responding to that portion of the speech last night.

STEELE: Right.

HAYES: Take a listen.


CRUZ: We don`t need a president who goes on national television and lectures the American people like a schoolmarm, who condescends to the American people and says the problem we have is Islamaphobia.

Now, the problem we have is a president, commander in chief, who refuses to recognize our enemy. Our enemy is radical Islamic terrorism.

SEN. MARCO RUBIO (R-FL), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATATE: The cynicism tonight, to spend a significant amount of time talking about discrimination against Muslims. Where is the widespread evidence that we have a problem in America with discrimination against Muslims?


HAYES: Now, in Rubio`s defense he said this before the person who is whooping him in the polls recommended we stop all Muslims coming into the country. But that was -- Mike -- I guess, Michael, my question is what -- the emphasis on the rhetoric here, the president isn`t -- I understand the substantive critique that he`s not taking threat seriously enough, but this sort of insistence that he has to use the right words seems to play into Donald Trump`s hands.

STEELE: Well, yes, it does, Chris. It goes to the sense that -- you framed it, I think, absolutely correctly, the right words. When you`re president and you`re in that situation, the expectation -- maybe it`s a false one by the American people -- is that that comes to you naturally. You -- in these moments like this, you have a way to find the words that help us understand not just the policy but what we can expect, how we should feel. I mean, how we should think and how we should react and respond.

I think in a real sense, that`s what the -- that`s what the blowback, the feedback, taking aside the partisan rhetoric, was all about.

HAYES: The other side of that, of course, which is just speaking to people`s id, is what you get when you get Donald Trump.

SEDER: Of course. I think Michael is right. The president should put this threat in perspective, let us know what we should do, what`s best to maintain American values.

You know, look, I`m not going to let George Bush off the hook either. He was pretty good about not demonizing American-Muslims. He did gin up enough fear into people that we went and attacked a country that did nothing to us on 9/11.

HAYES: Michael Steele and Sam Seder, thank you both.

STEELE: You got it.

HAYES: Still to come, we`ll look at the potentially dangerous repercussions from Donald Trump`s comments on Muslims.

Plus, the continued reverberations from the Laquan McDonald video, now a DOJ investigation. A third top official steps down, the latest ahead.

And later, Bernie Sanders unveils an expansive climate plan today, calling climate change a major national security threat.


SANDERS: We have to look at this as if we`re fighting a war. And we are fighting a war. And the war is against climate change and our goal is to save the planet for our kids and our grandchildren.




OBAMA: Muslim-Americans are our friends and our neighbors, our co-workers, our sports heroes. And yes, they are our men and women in uniform.


HAYES: Amid Donald Trump`s tweet storm last night, responding to president`s Oval Office address he specifically referred to the line about Muslim-Americans being sports heroes. Trump wrote, "Obama said in his that speech Muslims are sports heroes. What sport is he talking about and who?"

What sports and who? Well, perhaps Trump doesn`t know every sports Muslim sports hero in American history. But it`s surprisingly he was apparently hard pressed to think of an example. He could have chosen the basketball superstar Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, a Muslim who Trump engaged in a public spat with in September and to whom Trump sent a handwritten note following an op-ed critical of his candidacy. Or Trump could have brought up Muslim boxing champion Mike Tyson who actually tired Trump as an adviser in the late `80s and who endorsed Trump for president just this year.

And, of course, there`s the other boxing legend who Trump seemingly couldn`t recall. Muhammad Ali, who famously converted to I slam in 1964 and man Trump referred to as his friend in a throwback Thursday Facebook post in May.

Now, coming up, the dangerous implication of Donald Trump`s rhetoric and those policies regarding Muslims. That`s next.



TRUMP: Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country`s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.


We have no choice. We have no choice.


HAYES: Joining me now from the site of Donald Trump`s rally in South Carolina where he just said that is NBC News correspondent Katy Tur.

Katy, I think I have an idea of how this proposal played in that room, but you were actually there. How did it play in that room?

KATY TUR, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: It certainly played really well. You could see in the video that we were playing on MSNBC live that he got a standing ovation when he introduced the idea of a ban.

And when w spoke with supporters, they say that this is a wise move. They say that allowing any Muslims in this country, one veteran said this exactly, that it would be a slap in the face to all of his friends and all of his supporters who died on the battlefield in Afghanistan and Iraq. They like this.

And part of the reason is a lot of them say they are scared. They are scared of terror. In our latest MSNBC news polling, 60 percent of them say that one of their biggest concerns is about being a victim of terror.

When they see Donald Trump, they see somebody who is unequivocal, somebody who is black and white about the issues, somebody who said that he`s going to bomb the hell out of ISIS, he`s going to bring back waterboarding, and that he is going to fix things.

They don`t want shades of gray. They don`t want diplomacy. They don`t feel that it`s worked. They want somebody who says he is strong in the face of what they have seen as weakness when it comes to the fight against terror. And that weakness, according to them, is coming directly from President Obama.

HAYES: All right. Katy Tur, thank you very much.

While people certainly do overuse the trope of playing into the hands of ISIS, what Donald Trump has called for, a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the U.S., does seems like the genuine article. Trump`s position will make headlines worldwide, already has, just as his stance on Mexican immigrants became a focal point in Mexico. And Trump may have handed ISIS one of their greatest propaganda tools yet.

Joining me now, MSNBC foreign correspondent Ayman Mohyeldin, and Linda Sarsour, executive director of Arab Americans Association of New York.

Great to have you here.

Ayman, as someone who spent a lot of time in the Middle East and in different parts of the Muslim world, looking at how what the U.S. does reverberates there, what -- how will this be covered there? Will this get play?

AYMAN MOHYELDIN, MSNBC FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT: It will in some circles. I don`t think on the official level, it will take a lot of -- I think a lot of governments will not pay a lot of attention to it. I don`t think you`re going to hear a lot of commentary in terms of official response. I don`t think that a lot of the governments who know the responsibility of a U.S. president and knows what they can implement in terms of serious policy is taking a measure like this seriously.

I think they`re putting it in the context of this is a person who is running for office. He needs to win. He is trying to mobilize and galvanize his base in whatever way, play to their fears. But I don`t think any serious official in the Middle East will look at it.

Now, other groups, ISIS, extremists, even individuals and popular people in the Middle East --

HAYES: And media outlets too. I mean --

MOHYELDIN: A hundred percent. You`re going to have a lot of opinion writers. You`re going to have a lot of people say this is what America is exactly doing to Muslims.

HAYES: Look, this is the real face has been revealed, right?

MOHYELDIN: Absolutely.

HAYES: As opposed to this is an outlier, or this is someone who is --


MOHYELDIN: In a nutshell, in a nutshell, they`re going to say, this is the America that is at war with Islam, and this is exactly what they`re going to want their followers and their supporters to look at the U.S. as, as a country leading the war against the religion of Islam, against Muslims around the world, treating them differently, and preventing them from coming to the U.S. and to feed their own base and their own ideology for whatever agendas they have.

HAYES: Linda, at one point today, there were follow up questioning that said, well, what about American citizens who are abroad right now who are Muslims, or American servicemen and women who are Muslim? It was unclear whether they could come back or not. And then maybe servicemen and women can come back, but it`s unclear. I mean, look --

MOHYELDIN: Or journalists.

HAYES: This is clearly not particularly well thought out. It`s pretty scary stuff.

LINDA SARSOUR, EX. DIR. ARAB AMERICAN ASSN. NY: I mean, you`re watching the face of an American fascist right now. We`re allowing his rhetoric -- where is the chairman of the Republican Party? Where are all the people dissociating himself or themselves from his rhetoric?

This is absolutely scary. Let`s not act like we don`t know our history, that we`ve never went into this direction. Do I believe that he can`t implement policies like that? I know better that he can`t.

But where is the silent majority? He already talks about what he would do to the Muslims that were here, talking about a Muslim registration base that he was going to have us register.

HAYES: And let`s remember, people defended him and saying, well, it was a reporter that proposed that and he was going along -- I remember that. We had a long thing litigating that. This came from him.

SARSOUR: Yes, this banning Muslims from immigration came from him. And I`m going to tell you this much. This is not just about Trump. I don`t care what Trump says.

What scares me more is the actual people who support them, the cheering in the room, the thousands who show up to the rallies, the support that he`s receiving online. And to be honest with you, I`m not seeing the alternative. Where is the silent majority in our country saying absolutely not, not on our watch?

HAYES: Let me ask you this question. I`ve been wanting to talk to you about this. "The Times" wrote a piece about different ways in which the San Bernardino attacks reverberated through different Muslim-Americans. Different sort of stripes and walks.

One refers to it as a sort of nightmare, in that, you know, here, you have the situation of these folks who seem unremarkable in every way, right? Like he`s a bureaucrat and like they got married and they came back and it`s like there`s a prayer rug and a Koran, and they`re pious, but like, yes, so are millions of other people. And then they do this.

What is it about -- I mean, what is your reaction to what happened last week and how that is sort of working hand in glove with all the stuff that`s been stoked before it happened?

SARSOUR: The shooting that happened in San Bernardino is absolutely outrageous. And the Muslim community is outraged, like we would be outraged about any shooting of any innocent people. But the framework that we`re working including the framework our president is using when he only mentioned Fort Hood, San Bernardino and Chattanooga, which are all three shootings committed by Muslims and wanted to ignore the many shootings that are happening by others, including other right wing extremist, pro-lifers and others makes this seem like terrorism, mass shooting is only a Muslim problem.

And when he called on the Muslim community that we had to root out that extremism, I`m cool with that, I`m all about that. But who`s rooting extremism in other communities?

And he didn`t call on us as a country to stand together against all forms of extremism. I am tired of this idea that extremism can only mean Muslims or Islam or people who are associated with Islam. Extremism comes in all forms and we have seen that, but why is it that we`re only obsessed with Islam and Muslim communities? As if we`ve never cooperate with law enforcement ever. Forty percent of plots that have been foiled in this country have been by Muslims and information from Muslims.

HAYES: Ayman, let me ask you this. You cover parts of the world in which -- we see new polling about how people are scared about terrorism, right? I understand that. It`s a terrifying thought.

But you cover parts of the world where -- I mean, there were periods in Iraq where it was a blood bath. It was every single day. It was during the sort of height of the worst part of that sectarian civil war. You`ve been in parts of the world where it really is an ever present daily threat.

How do the politics in those places respond to it? And does it look like what`s happening here with this kind of very intense fear-based rhetoric?

MOHYELDIN: I think in some of the recent developments in countries like Egypt, you see some similarities because Egypt has shifted, if you will, to the right because of the crack down on what is describing as terrorism and insurgency. It`s cracking down on civil rights. It`s cracking down on journalists. So, there is this kind of over compensation, if you will, by the state to try to bring law and order.

But I don`t think the United States should be comparing itself to any of the Arab countries. None of the Arab countries are democratic, pluralistic. None are founded on the ideals of tolerance and liberalism. So, I don`t think that the U.S. should be saying --

HAYES: That`s not the benchmark.

MOHYELDIN: Yes, that should -- we should not be looking at countries in the Arab world and say, oh, they`re fighting terrorism and this is how we want to do it. It`s starting down from Israel down to the Arab countries, one by one.

So, their experiences are very unique because they`re dealing in an authoritarian environment. The United States is not in that place. So, the metric in terms of the climates are very different.

The Arab world has, without a doubt, suffered from terrorism for many years, for many decades, all kinds of terrorism. And as we were just hearing, the guest before made the point in the segment before, Muslims are being killed by terrorist groups more than anybody else, more than any Westerners. So, they are dealing with this, they are living on the front lines of global terrorism. I would say that is the front line.

HAYES: Yes, Ayman Mohyeldin, Linda Sarsour, thank you both. Really appreciate it.

Still to come, the head-snapping press conference from Mayor Rahm Emanuel today. And how he responded to an announcement of a wide-ranging DOJ investigation into the Chicago police department. That`s ahead.


HAYES: As hysteria in certain corridors grows over immigration from certain groups, there was a promising development in Texas. Today, 12 Syrian refugees as scheduled, arrived in Texas. And after the state attorney general withdrew a request for a temporary restraining order to stop their resettlement in that state.

No pictures or videos of the refugees were released to the media, which is probably for the best. Six are children and all 12 refugees were expected to join family members who had already been settled in Dallas and Houston.

One family was expected to take a low-housing income apartment in northeast Dallas, according to the associated press and volunteers had already collected furniture and necessities for the apartment, even two bicycles for the children.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott had joined 30 other states after the attacks in Paris in saying they did not want to take more Syrian refugees. Texas had taken in 250 Syrian refugees prior to the Paris attacks and about 250 more are currently scheduled to be resettled there.

The Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton claims in a statement the request for a temporary restraining order was dropped, because federal government had provided information regarding the first group of refugees who arrived today.

But the underlying lawsuit against the federal government and the resettlement agency continues. And that drew this response from the resettlement agency: "The International Rescue Committee has worked in coordination with Texas officials for 40 years to the benefit of Texas communities and the refugees we serve. Refugees are victims of terror, not terrorists, and the families we help have always been welcomed by the people of Texas. The IRC acts within the spirit and letter of the law, and we are hopeful this matter is soon resolved.

Tomorrow, Presidential candidate Ted Cruz, senator of Texas, is holding a press conference to discuss a bill he introduced last month entitled The Terrorist Refugee Infiltration Prevention Act.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) RAHM EMANUEL, MAYOR OF CHICAGO: The Department of Justice announced a special investigation into Chicago`s Police Department. We welcome it. And Chicago as a city will be better for it. We accept it. And we need it.

As I mentioned this morning over at the police department to the leadership, that we are going to welcome this investigation. We`re going to cooperate with it. And it`s in our long-term interest.


HAYES: Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel announced earlier today that he now welcomes the wide-ranging Justice Department investigation into the patterns and practices of the Chicago Police Department. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced today the probe will look into whether Chicago police have engaged in constitutional violations and whether there has been a pattern of abuse.

Now, all this coming in the wake of a brewing scandal in Chicago that is now threatening to consume the mayor himself. On November 24th, the Chicago Police Department at the behest of a judge`s order, released dash-cam video showing the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Laquan McDonald by Officer Jason Van Dyke.

A week later Mayor Rahm Emanuel fired his top cop, Police Superintendent Gary McCarthy saying that, quote, "the undeniable fact the public trust in the leadership department has been shaken and eroded.

Then last Friday, we got a look at hundreds of pages of police reports from Laquan McDonald`s shooting, reports that appear to differ dramatically from what`s seen on the video. The video of the October 2014 shooting showed Van Dyke shooting McDonald 16 times. Van Dyke has since been charged with first degree murder.

Van Dyke, who is free on bond, says he will fight the charge and is the subject of a separate criminal investigation by U.S. attorney in the criminal section of civil rights division, which is also looking at allegations of a coverup by other officers.

Meanwhile, yesterday a man named Scott Ando, the head of the independent police review authority, or IPRA, resigned effective immediately. That`s the agency responsible for looking at allegations of misconduct made by members of the Chicago Police Department.

Then, today, Constantine Dean Andrews, Chicago Police Department`s chief of detectives, retired from his post. That`s three down if you`re keeping track.

And after all of this, today the Cook County State`s Attorney Anita Alvarez released dash-cam video of another fatal shooting, a shooting that happened over a year ago as well and just eight days before McDonald was fatally shot.

That shows Officer George Hernandez shooting a man named Ronald Johnson.

Right now there are protesters on the streets of Chicago demonstrating against Johnson`s death.

Unlike, Van Dyke, the state`s attorney decided against charging Hernandez saying Johnson had resisted arrest and the video shows Johnson wielding what prosecutors say appears to be a gun.

The Johnson family says he did not have a gun. The attorney for Johnson`s family excoriated today`s entire process, particularly states attorney Anita Alvarez.


MICHAEL OPPENHEIMER, RONALD JOHNSON FAMILY ATTORNEY: She relied on the IPRA investigation when 12 to 14 hours ago the head of IPRA resigned and/or was fired because of the shoddy investigations that IPRA does.

This is a joke. It`s the blind leading the blind.


HAYES: When these two high-profile police shootings, the rash of staff shakeups, the Chicago PD and Mayor Emanuel right now are playing defense on multiple fronts.

It was only five days ago, that Mayor Rahm Emanuel opposed a broader federal civil rights investigation into the Chicago Police Department. Now it appears he had no choice, but to reverse course. And the question right now is what`s the next shoe to drop?

Joining me now, Craig Futterman, professor at University of Chicago law school and founder of the civil rights and police accountability project, and Wesley Lowry, national reporter for the Washington Post.

Craig, I`ll start with you, I`ve never -- I lived in Chicago. I was a reporter in Chicago for years, I have never seen anything like this, like what we`ve seen in the last week. I mean, what is your reaction to what has happened?

CRAIG FUTTERMAN, UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO: Chris, it gives me hope. As these issues in Chicago, as you know, these aren`t anything new. Police abuse has been a long-standing problem. It didn`t start with this administration, it didn`t start with this superintendent. So many scandals that we`ve lived through over the years. And we often hear just the same things after each scandal. Hey, let`s form another commission, some heads roll. But nobody up to this point has had the political courage to address the underlying issues that have allowed a minority of police officers to abuse the most vulnerable among us with impunity.

So, I think the feds coming in now, it really provides an opportunity for some hope, not a panacea but some hope if we all can work together toward real reform, something that I haven`t seen in my lifetime in Chicago.

HAYES: Wesley, you have been reporting on police issues for well over the last two years. And my question is what`s the significance of a DOJ patterns and practices probe, what`s that look like, what`s it mean for Chicago?

WESLEY LOWRY, WASHINGTON POST: Well, it`s -- so it`s much broader than a civil rights probe. For example, when DOJ comes in and they say we`re going to investigate Laquan McDonald shooting, or you know an example being when they went into Ferguson to investigate said they were going to investigate the Michael Brown shooting, right, that`s a specific probe that looks just at the circumstances of one shooting, one interaction and it`s a very high bar, a high standard to prove that the Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson may have committed a civil rights violation, right, and we didn`t see that.

In a broad patterns and practices probe, what the Department of Justice is doing is they are looking at all of the policies, all of the implementation by the department to see if there is any constitutional violation.

So they`re looking at traffic stops, they`re looking at neighborhoods where police presence exist. They`re looking at how people are booked, if they`re pulling two suspects over for the same crime, how often are they arresting these people based on race, based on age? And so they`re looking for any type of systemic discrimination.

And so what we`ve seen very often when they do these investigations, they often find this type of discrimination and it leads to broad, swooping reforms in these departments.

HAYES: Craig, there are two issues here, right? There is the sort of issue about the system in Chicago, police oversight, whether IPRA is a, you know, the kind of policing the police actually works. I mean, you know, Scott Ando is going. We have covered on this show pretty credible allegations by former investigators who said, you know, that they were pushed to not find disciplinary cause.

But there is also this -- the continued question of the Laquan McDonald shooting. I mean, Rahm Emanuel got up there today and people said, wait a second your own Chicago Police Department with a sign off the man who is now the deputy -- the interim superintendent signed a report in March saying this shooting we`ve all now seen the video of did not violate department policy.

FUTTERMAN: That`s exactly right, Chris.

So, what you just talked about a second ago is one of the deepest issues in Chicago long before Emanuel, which is the code of silence. I mean what happened -- the shooting. I mean, let`s call it what it was, it was an execution.

But what happened after the execution to me is even more interesting. What happened after the execution is what goes on each and every day in Chicago. So when there is a police shooting, when there is a charge of police brutality, there is a circle the wagons mentality that goes not just at the bottom, but goes all the way up to the top, the culture.

So, what did we see immediately after? So, we had officers in the beginning before the shooting who were doing the right thing. And suddenly after the shooting, first thing they start doing is you`ve got to shoo away witnesses, everybody knows about the Burger King video coverup now. Witnesses are intimidated. And most importantly, then these lies, and lies -- official lies.

Even though we have a video that shows exactly what occurred, so every officer on the scene said one of two things and these are the stories that are told, and this goes back time, either you back up the officer and you tell the exact same lie which is basically this kid came at the officer with a knife, and just didn`t happen. And then number two -- then number two, and this is -- this is just as telling, is then, or you say I didn`t see anything.

I mean, so the officer who was sitting in the car that recorded this whole incident, she said, oh, I just looked down during the entire shooting, maybe for a second.

HAYES: Right.

FUTTERMAN: But when you unload 16 shots? So that`s the real systemic issue that this is talking about the code of silence and something that this administration...

HAYES: And that applies in the Ronald Johnson video, which I want to briefly play for you, Wes, because there is a difference between what -- whether the shooting itself is justified is distinct from whether or not it was accurately reported at the time. And while this case seems more complicated from the fact perspective than say Laquan McDonald, what sticks out in the Ronald Johnson video is it doesn`t seem to necessarily match what police said.

LOWRY: Of course. And I think that`s a really important distinction to make, right, Chris? You know, what we know from covering these over and over again is that there is a lot of legal gray area and that in reality many -- most of police shootings, most fatal on-duty police shootings occur within the allowance of the law. They`re legally justified.

Now, that`s not to say that I think these are shootings that should occur or that most -- normal reasonable people think they`re shooting that should occur.

But in terms of the legal latitude that we give police officers, most police shootings are legally justified.

But there is a second question is, the question is, after this shooting, in the aftermath of this shooting, what did the police say happened? What were the statements they issued to the press? What were their -- you know, what did they say happened? And what we see in this video is that they said one thing and the video seems to show something else. And that erodes the trust.

HAYES: That is the sort of bedrock question here.

Wesley Lowry, Craig Futterman, thank you both.

FUTTERMAN: Thank you so much, Chris.

HAYES: Still ahead, my interview with Bernie Sanders on fighting what he calls a grave threat to global security. Stay with us.



JIMMY CARTER, 39th PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The first time I went for an MRI of my brain, the four places were still there but they were responding to the treatment. And when I went this week, they didn`t find any cancer at all. So I had good news.


HAYES: That was President Jimmy Carter yesterday announcing he is cancer free while speaking at a Sunday school class he teaches in Georgia.

That surprising development comes less than four months after he first announced his illness saying he had melanoma that had spread to his brain.

Now, doctors cautioned this does not mean Carter is cured as there may be cancer cells that escaped detection or could be cells that return.

But as the 39th president said this is most certainly, quote, some good news. And let`s be honest, that`s pretty welcome right about now.


HAYES: Tonight the clock is ticking for negotiators racing to make a deal in Paris at the climate summit that will, simply put, decide whether or not the international community actually alters the current trajectory of the world away from total climate catastrophe, something that even ExxonMobil is predicting will happen if we continue business as usual.

Now world leaders now just have five days left to come up with a framework for such a deal in which agreements for each country are pledged to, to reduce carbon pollution.

All this week, we`ll be taking an in-depth look at those climate talks which are supposed to wrap up in Paris on Friday. And the gathering of world leaders has for the most part been overshadowed by some big traumatic events.

On the eve of the negotiations, 130 people were massacred at a night of deadly attacks in Paris. And last week 14 people shot to death in San Bernardino, California.

I think it`s fair to say the climate talks are not front of mind for many American voters or the media at the moment. And that is precisely what makes climate change such an insidious threat to both the planet`s health and security.

Because the danger posed by climate change is not as instantly and viscerally horrifying as a terrorist attack, that`s why when the president called climate change the biggest challenge to future generations and referred to it as an immediate threat to our national security, citing the DoD and many other sources, he was largely met with ridicule from the right.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Obama is in Germany to meet with world leaders for the G-7 summit, trumpeting one of the biggest threats facing the world today: climate change.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not surprising.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: People are more concerned in this administration and in the State Department with climate change, with global warming, instead of children that are being executed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He says climate change is number one, which is why Putin and Iran and North Korea love him because, while they`re dismantling the world he is playing hackie sack (ph) with Bill Nye the Science Guy.


HAYES: Now President Obama isn`t the only one arguing climate change is a threat to future generations. Today, presidential candidate Bernie Sanders released a climate plan that reiterated a point he`s made more forcefully before, that climate change is the greatest threat to our national security.


JOHN DICKERSON, CBS NEWS: In the previous debate you said the greatest threat to national security is climate change. Do you still believe that?

BERNIE SANDERS, 2016 DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES: Absolutely. In fact, climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism. And if we do not get our act together and listen to what the scientists say, you`re going to see countries all over the world -- this is what the CIA says, they`re going to struggling over limited amounts of water, limited amounts of land to grow their crops. And you`re going to see all kinds of international conflict.


HAYES: The Senator from Vermont`s position, perhaps not surprisingly, also generated a less than kind response from many on the right.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah, he is brilliant, that guy. I mean, al Baghdadi will be sawing Bernie Sanders` head off and he`ll saying, as his neck is being sliced, oh, if only we had had an emissions trading scheme. This is insane.


HAYES: Nothing funnier than the image of al Baghdadi sawing a head.

Bernie Sanders tells me what he thinks about his critics next.



PEGGY NOONAN, NEW YORK TIMES: Bernie Sanders essentially said a major problem with all of this ISIS stuff and terrorism and what`s going on in the west is climate change and global warming, which makes him, to many people, look slightly daffy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I think ISIS -- they don`t care what Republicans say about Syrian refugees. They`re like laughing at Bernie Sanders for saying climate change is the biggest threat. It`s crazy.


HAYES: Vermont Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders has repeatedly asserted that climate change is the greatest threat to national security of this country. And for that position, he has, as you`ve seen, been mocked by many conservatives.

I asked him to respond to those critics who called him out of touch with his position when there are threats like ISIS in the world.


SANDERS: Obviously, ISIS is an immediate threat. We need to have an international coalition to destroy ISIS. I believe that the boots on the ground have got to be the Muslim nations and I agree with King Abdullah of Jordan who made that very point.

But not to understand what the scientists are telling us, that if we do not transform our energy system away from fossil fuel, you`re going to see the mass migrations of tens and tens of millions of people who are going to be moving away from coastal areas, who are going to be dealing with floods, who are going to be dealing with drought, who are going to be dealing with extreme weather disturbances, who are not going to be able to get fish from the oceans because of the acidification of the oceans. Not to understand that that will cause massive instability in this world and more conflict is not to understand reality.

That`s what the CIA says, that`s what the U.S. Department of Defense says, that`s what governments all over the world point out.

I believe that we have got to be extremely aggressive, leading the world, in understanding that we have a planetary crisis. And we have got to bring the world together if we`re going to leave this planet in a habitable way for our children and grandchildren.

HAYES: The Paris talks are happening right now and they`re on precisely this question. In the past in Copenhagen, for example, the last where I believe the last round of talks were, in Durban there was another round of talks, people have criticized the U.S. and the role its played. They have said the U.S., even under the administration of Barack Obama who obviously accepts the science on climate change, has negotiated the bilateral agreement with China, even under him it`s played a destructive role, that it has watered things down.

Do you agree with this? Are you confident that this administration is playing the leadership role you`d like to see it take?

SANDERS: Look, compared to my Republican colleagues, who unbelievably refuse to accept the science, refuse to do nothing to transform our energy system, are very dependent on the Koch Brothers and the fossil fuel industry for their campaign funding, obviously compared to them the president is doing a very, very good job.

Should he be doing more? I think he should.

Look, I think as I`ve said a moment ago, let me be clear about this, I see this as the major planetary environmental crisis that we face. And if you read what the scientists are telling us, what they are saying is there is a very short window of opportunity in order to prevent the temperature of this planet from rising 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century.

That is preposterous. That will bring about disastrous impacts throughout this entire planet, impacting billions of people.

So, while my Republican colleagues may not accept the science, I think the vast majority of the people who have studied this issue suggest that we are in an urgent moment and that we have to be absolutely aggressive. We have to look at this as if we are fighting a war. And we are fighting a war. And the war is against climate change, and our goal is to save the planet for our kids and grandchildren.

So, I think we`ve got to put all the resources that we can in cutting carbon utilization, I believe strongly in a tax on carbon, moving aggressively to solar, wind, geothermal, other sustainable energies, putting money in research and development, to leading the world, to working with China, Russia, India. We can`t do it alone.

What those countries increasingly understand the crisis as well.

So, I see this as a major, major issue. We have got to be more aggressive than we`ve ever been.

HAYES: All right, Senator Bernie Sanders, candidate for president in the Democratic Party. Thank you very much.

SANDERS: Thank you, Chris.

HAYES: And that is All In for this evening.