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

All In with Chris Hayes, Transcript 1/6/2016

Guests: McKay Coppins, Betsy Woodruff, Joaquin Castro, Mo Brooks, Alexis Goldstein, Barney Frank, Patricia Todd

Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: January 6, 2016 Guest: McKay Coppins, Betsy Woodruff, Joaquin Castro, Mo Brooks, Alexis Goldstein, Barney Frank, Patricia Todd


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

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The Democrats, if they bring a lawsuit on it, I mean, you have to get it solved.

HAYES: Donald Trump`s birther barrage continues.

TRUMP: I guess everybody is talking about it now that he`s doing better.

HAYES: Twenty-six days until the voting starts, the Republican fight gets simultaneous sillier and uglier.

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We will build a wall that works.

HAYES: Then, Bernie Sanders continues to pick a fight on banks.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We need a president who has the courage to stand up to the billionaire class and Wall Street.

JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC ANCHOR: Does Hillary Clinton have the courage --

SANDERS: Well, I`m running for president because I think not.

HAYES: Plus, how a runaway judge is trying to stop same-sex marriage in his state, and as the Internet trolls the armed militia in Oregon, we`ll have an update on the still one-sided Bundy standoff.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have no intention of spending any of my days in a concrete box.

HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.


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

Ted Cruz has had a pretty clear strategy so far in this campaign. We call it the drafting strategy here on ALL IN, refuse to attack Donald Trump publicly, hope that if and when Trump fades, Cruz inherits the lion`s share of the Donald voters.

But with just 26 days of the Iowa caucuses and Cruz holding a narrow lead in Iowa, the Donald has gone on attack, making it harder and harder and harder for Cruz to hold his fire.

Trump is now effectively asking whether Cruz, who was born in Canada to an American mother, could even legally serve as president, the same birther claim Trump first made baselessly against President Obama.


TRUMP: Let`s assume he got the nomination, and the Democrats bring suit. The suit takes two to three years to solve. So, how do you run? So, it`s certainly a concern I guess for the party. But I hope that`s not the case. I`m not involved in that, but a lot of people are bringing it up, absolutely.


HAYES: People just bringing it up. What are you going to do?

Luckily, Trump`s got a solution.


TRUMP: If the Democrats, if they bring a lawsuit on it, I mean, you have to get it solved. I would like to see Ted do something where maybe he goes into in a preemptive fashion in court to get some kind of an order.


HAYES: Late this afternoon, Trump again questioned Cruz`s citizenship, insisting he`d rather be talking about something else.


WOLF BLITZER, CNN: Do you believe Senator Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen?

TRUMP: I don`t know, to be honest, and I like him a lot. I don`t like the issue and I don`t like even bringing it up.


HAYES: Cruz for his part told reporters today he has no reason to worry.


CRUZ: As a legal matter, the question is quite straightforward and settled law, that the child of a U.S. citizen born abroad is a natural born citizen. People will continue to make political noise about it, but as a legal matter, it`s quite straight forward.


HAYES: It`s actually not quite as straight forward as Cruz would like. The Constitution says no person except a natural born citizen is eligible to be president. It doesn`t define natural born citizen. And while it`s true, most legal scholars maintain Cruz is in the clear despite his Canadian birthplace, the Supreme Court has never directly ruled on the citizenship provision for presidential office holders, leaving the issue officially as a matter of law unsettled.

Conservative commentator Ann Coulter for one is pushing the claim that Cruz is not natural born, which is a flip flop from her position earlier, but Cruz does at least have Jeb Bush on his side.


REPORTER: Do you think that Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen who`s eligible for the presidency?


REPORTER: Governor, on the --

BUSH: Look -- yes.


HAYES: God bless you, Jeb Bush.

Birtherism isn`t Trump`s only line of attack against Cruz, though Trump seems to be taking pains to make it look like he`s not attacking.


TRUMP: I always say it with a smile not too many evangelicals come out of Cuba, where you have Ted. And I do, I do say it with a smile because I don`t know. I`m not going to question anybody`s faith.


HAYES: I don`t even understand that one.

At a rally last night, Trump made a veiled reference to Cruz in complaining that he, Trump, deserves credit for coming up with the idea of building a giant wall on the southern border.


TRUMP: Every time somebody says, "We want a wall", remember whose idea the wall was, please? Because, you know, when this person said the other day, and again, I`m not going to mention the name of the person, but when this person said three, four days ago "the wall," I said, shouldn`t they give me some credit? They don`t give -- politicians do not give credit.


HAYES: Now, Cruz has actually been backing a wall since back in 2012. Immigration is one of the few issues where he`s showing a willingness to go after Trump as both men seek to win the vote for the GOP`s most hard line, most anti-immigrant members.

Asked yesterday if he agrees with Trump that all undocumented immigrants should be deported, Cruz asked absolutely, adding, and in fact, look, here`s a difference, he`s advocated allowing folks to come back in and become citizens, I oppose that." Ship them all out.

Joining me now, McKay Coppins, senior political writer for "BuzzFeed News", author of the new book, "The Wilderness", about the GOP effort to take the White House, and Betsy Woodruff, politics reporter at "The Daily Beast".

All right. Let me just say this about this natural born citizen issue, McKay. I think it`s petty and ridiculous and I think if Ted Cruz wins the Electoral College, then he should be the next president of the United States and that`s it, right?

That said, I remember when legal experts were talking about both Obamacare challenges and saying it`s very straightforward legally, it`s a straightforward legal question and Ted Cruz didn`t think it was straight forward. It turns out that got all the way to the Supreme Court.

So, it`s like, spare me a little bit about like that`s settled law.

MCKAY COPPINS, BUZZFEED NEWS: Well, yes, I mean, look, if we were having an actual legal debate about the substance of this, I would still favor the star Supreme Court litigator over the star of "The Apprentice", but that said --

HAYES: That is also true.

COPPINS: That`s not a what -- this is not about settled law. It goes with what he said about Cruz`s faith, about not many evangelicals coming out of Cuba.

HAYES: What is that? What is that? I don`t get that.

COPPINS: What he`s doing -- what Donald Trump has been doing from the start is he`s trying to otherize or, you know, exoticize Ted Cruz, right? And by doing -- you know, who knows what he`s talking about. I saw a Pew poll that said 5 percent of Cubans identify as evangelicals. There are a lot of Catholics. What he`s really doing is pointing to Ted Cruz`s race, ethnicity, right?


COPPINS: Just remember, this guy`s Cuban. You know, that`s what he`s talking about.

HAYES: But here`s problem with that, Betsy. If there`s a more unexotic human being than Ted Cruz, I don`t know who it is. It seems this guy is so in sync, so in line in every rhythm, cadence, gesture, belief with every e- mail that is being forwarded amongst every conservative grandmother in America, you will not be able to sort of exoticize this guy successfully.

BETSY WOODRUFF, THE DAILY BEAST: I think that`s absolutely true. On the other hand, Trump found one immigration issue where he`s further right than Cruz. That, of course, is the question of the wall and who pays for it. Trump told "Politico" today that the problem with Cruz`s immigration plan is that Cruz can`t actually get Mexico to pay for the wall.

So, in that sense, maybe Cruz will have a little trouble saying I get you internet commenters, I agree with you 100 percent on everything, because at least on that one little point, at teeny bit of discord.

That said, yes, I mean, look, Cruz is an affable, kind of nerdy, devout evangelical guy who is very difficult to exoticize. So, it`s a tall order. That said, we`ve been surprised by Donald Trump`s political talent before. So, who knows?

HAYES: Let me just say affable is contestable -- very bright, extremely bright guy, affable, I`m not sure.

But here`s the other thing. I mean, substantively, what you`re seeing as it continues to play out is that there is no too far right on immigration. Ted Cruz is leading with it. You could have seen this coming from miles away, whether it was Cantor losing in that primary. Like the base hates the idea of open borders, it wants a wall, it hates the invasion, it has a ton of demographic fear and there is no going too far when you play to that.

COPPINS: Well, that is absolutely true so far in this primary. I remember --

HAYES: Do you think there is a too far, though?

COPPINS: No. Policy-wise, I don`t know how far you can get. I mean, I don`t know if you can get much part than where we are now. What I would say is, politically, what I found interesting is Donald Trump and Ted Cruz both released ads this week about immigration.


COPPINS: Ted Cruz`s ad appealed more to resentment of the political elites who don`t understand, you know, conservative base concern over immigration. Whereas, Donald Trump went straight for just appealing to the resentment of Mexicans and immigrants and Muslims.

HAYES: Or in the case of the video he actually showed, Moroccans.

COPPINS: Or Moroccan border crossers, right? Ultimately, that may be the more ruthless and maybe cynical but effective strategy. He`s just going straight to the gut of it, whereas, you know, Ted Cruz is kind of dancing around it a little.

HAYES: The entire political media complex has been circling around Ted Cruz and Donald Trump as what happened in the schoolyard of third graders sort of like "fight, fight, fight", are they going to fight, when are they going to fight, when are they going to fight? And Cruz to his strategic credit has avoided it.

Can he be able to avoid it all the way to Iowa?

WOODRUFF: Maybe. We`re not sure, right? But so far, he`s been very cautious. I thought it was kind of cute when Trump brought up the birther issue, Cruz tweeted him a video of Fonzie in "Happy Days" jumping the shark. I mean, Cruz has really tried to kill Donald Trump with kindness. And I think so far, so good. Plus, you know, be all bare knuckle and angry wouldn`t translate that well.

Of course, the problem for Cruz is what happens after Iowa, because after Iowa, his polls numbers are basically kind of mediocre. There`s no reason to believe right now that what works in Iowa will also work, for instance, in Nevada. We`ll just have to wait and see.

HAYES: I mean, he`s -- the Cruz problem is he`s got Huckabee and Santorum as precedents in Iowa. He`s nowhere in New Hampshire. It`s very crowded above him. So --

COPPINS: And South Carolina, remember, is basically an establishment Republican state. It`s not actually the far right state that Iowa caucus is operating.

HAYES: All right. McKay Coppins and Betsy Woodruff, thank you so much.

Yesterday, Ted Cruz insists of the presidential campaign was finally getting serious.


CRUZ: You know, we`ve been through the silly season of the campaign, we`ve been through the media games, we`ve been through the attacks and the mudslinging. And this next month, it`s going to get worse. But the stage for the silly season is over. This is our time now.


HAYES: Since then, we`ve seen Donald Trump go full birther on Cruz, as well as Trump entering a feud with actor Samuel Jackson that revolved around golf, which included Trump tweeting this afternoon, quote, "I don`t cheat at golf but Samuel Jackson cheats with his game, he has no change and stop doing commercials."

Meanwhile, after "New York Times" reporter tweeted a photo of Marco Rubio wearing some fashionable boots on Monday, Jeb Bush, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz campaign all mocked Rubio`s footwear, with Paul even posting a video today to Twitter.


SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Hey, guys, I`ll be on "The View" in a few minutes. I`m here in Whoopi Goldberg`s office trying to choose some shoes. We`ve seen Rubio has those cute new boots and I don`t want to be outdone.


HAYES: It`s safe to say that on the campaign trail, silly season is pretty far from over.

It`s a very different story in the real world where many of the people who are targeted in these candidates` rhetoric are now targeted by the Democratic president, because over the weekend according to Homeland Secretary Jeh Johnson, 121 undocumented immigrants were rounded up in Georgia, in North Carolina, and Texas, as part of an Obama administration initiative that has been embraced by Donald Trump and criticized by both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. Those apprehended were mostly women and children and mostly Central American immigrants fleeing violence whose asylum claims have been refused.

The first group of those deported immigrants arrived in Guatemala today. You can see small children clutching their parents` hands, babies on their mothers` shoulders.

Joining me now, Democratic Congressman Joaquin Castro of Texas.

Congressman, I`ve seen a lot of people say, sure, the rhetoric is out of control with Donald Trump and Ted Cruz and them, but this Democratic president is sending women and children back to one of the most dangerous places in the hemisphere where some might face a really credible threat of violence.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO (D), TEXAS: Well, I mean, the first thing is that there`s no comparison between President Barack Obama and somebody like Donald Trump and Ted Cruz who at this point have not only went juvenile as you just went over a few seconds ago in their rhetoric but also incredibly scary and incredibly inhumane.

This president has been a strong advocate for immigrants by implement DACA, trying to expand it, also with DAPA. Now on this policy and the raids, I do disagree and I do think the administration acted too quickly.

We`ve got to remember that the overwhelming majority of the folks who came from Central America in the last few years are fleeing because they`re fleeing a country -- countries that are besieged by violence, by gangs and they`re in fear for their lives.

So, I`ve said all along we should treat them like refugees. I`ve said also I believe our asylum laws are outdated, need to be updated and also the process needs to be completely revamped. It`s completely broken.

HAYES: Yes. I mean, you use the word inhumane. Do you think what`s happening here is inhumane?

CASTRO: Well, I think that if we are sending back who are in rightful fear for their lives, then certainly, I think that our nation is better than that, and I think the administration should at least consider giving the folks who have been here, who have come here seeking refuge, an opportunity to allow the resources that we`re providing to the Central American countries, that was just in this big omnibus bill, an opportunity for that to work.

We`ve offered temporary protective status for people coming from nations like the nation of Central America and facing essentially what is essentially a new kind of civil war there. The civil war is between powerful gangs and a government that has been powerless to protect the people from them.

HAYES: The White House would basically say, look, this is a country of laws. There is a process for applying for asylum. My understanding is the people litigated their asylum claims and were rejected, that`s what happens.

CASTRO: Sure, and that sounds like a very strong argument. In fact, I think when most Americans hear that, they say, listen, I`m not for open borders, I`m not for letting everybody in, but I want to make sure people get their day in court so that they can make their argument and make their case.

What I`m saying is that the system right now for that process, for the application process is broken.

Two things real quick: first, the overwhelming majority of these folks are never represented by attorneys at all.

HAYES: Right.

CASTRO: Imagine if you were going in front of a judge with a complicated legal matter, you don`t speak the English language, you`re not even given the application in English, literally not necessarily. They don`t have to give you the application in English, you`re going in front of a judge and you`ve got nobody to help you through that process. That`s what these people are facing.

HAYES: All right. Congressman Castro, thanks for coming on. Appreciate it.


HAYES: Tomorrow night, Donald Trump heads to the heart of Bernie country and ALL IN is hitting the road, and we`ll be there to witness what is shaping up to be a huge event. I just want to set the scene for a moment. Trump is holding his rally tomorrow night in Burlington, Vermont, the home of Bernie Sanders campaign headquarters, the city where Bernie served as mayor, where he launched his presidential campaign.

Now, the Trump campaign have already issued 20,000 tickets to the event at the flint center which holds just over 1,400 seats. The police acknowledged they are worried today that in addition to Trump supporters, they expect protesters to turn out in force. An anti-Trump demonstration is already planned in the square in front of the Trump venue.

So, tune in to see how all of that goes live from Burlington, outside the Trump rally and the historic Vermont Pub and Brewery. That`s where we`ll be doing it. If you`re in Vermont, if you`re in Burlington, come down and join me, say hi, first come, first serve.

Tomorrow night in Burlington, where the Trump event will be huge. Our interview with Bernie will being huge, and the crowd will be really big.

Still to come tonight, conservatives continue to condemn Obama`s action on gun safety. I`ll talk to a representative from the state with one of the highest rates of gun ownership.

Plus, no more same-sex marriage in Alabama. That`s what the state`s Supreme Court justice is ordering. We`ll go to Alabama for the latest.

And later, Bernie Sanders puts Hillary Clinton on notice, but is it a fight he can win?

Those stories and more ahead.


HAYES: The pressure continues to mount for Rahm Emanuel to resign. Today in Chicago, mourners gathered for the funeral of Bettie Jones, the unarmed woman killed in the latest polling shooting in the city of Chicago, under circumstances that have still not been explained. Meanwhile, one of the senior attorneys in Rahm Emanuel`s own law department at city hall has resigned. His resignation coming right after a federal judge is ruling that this lawyer in questioned intentionally hid evidence in the case of another fatal shooting by the Chicago police.

Rahm Emanuel is calling for zero tolerance for city employees not holding professional standards. The mayor is also saying his law department isn`t covering anything up and it`s not necessary for the Justice Department, which is already investigating the police department, to investigate the law department as well.

Steven Patton, the man who runs the law department and is a confidant of the mayor`s, says the judge`s ruling doesn`t mean his office is involved in systemic abuse.

Just a little reminder here, the city`s law department deals with lawsuits against the police force, and according to the "Chicago Tribune", Monday`s ruling comes as a federal judge has cited and rebuked five city attorneys within the last year for withholding evidence in two separate police misconduct cases.

Whatever Rahm Emanuel`s ultimate political fate, the fact is there are now more if not fewer unanswered questions about the probity, integrity and conduct of his administration than there were when the Laquan McDonald tape was first released.



LT. GOV. DAN PATRICK (R), TEXAS: I want to see a day when every American citizen can simply have a gun and does not have to go through a long ordeal or pay a high price. We`re going to address that in Texas as well, because it`s the right of every individual under the Second Amendment. Let America have their guns and let them defend themselves and America will be a safer place.


HAYES: Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick is on "Meet the Press" a few days after his state`s new open carry laws took effect, which as the "New York Times" points out makes a gun-friendly state like Texas even friendlier.

Yesterday, the lieutenant governor called the president`s executive orders on gun safety, quote, "political posturing and more propaganda."

Another Texas politician, Representative John Culberson, responded by threatening to block federal funding for the Justice Department.

In a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, he wrote, quote, "The House Appropriations Committee will not provide resources to your development for the development or implementation of unlawful limitations on the unambiguous Second Amendment rights of Americans."

As "The Hill" points out, that would have to wait since last year`s trillion dollar spending deal already funds the department through September.

Now, there`s a fairly strong expert consensus that the president`s actions announced yesterday are squarely within his executive power. Yet, there are those who are quick to say that is not only is it bad policy, but the president has gone too far.

One of them, law professor and conservative John Yoo, who in 2002 is deputy assistant U.S. attorney general under George W. Bush, authored a memo arguing that torture, which is criminal, internationally and nationally, was permissible. He wrote that Obama`s executive action on guns is, quote, "regulatory overreaction to recent shootings."

You should know a thing or two about the government reacting to tragedy poorly.

Joining me now, Representative Mo Brooks, Republican from Alabama.

Congressman Brooks, your fine state of Alabama is a state of a strong gun culture, one of the highest rates of gun ownership of any state in the Union. It also has the third highest rate of gun deaths per 100,000 of any state in the Union.

Is that a problem?

REP. MO BROOKS (R), ALABAMA: Well, certainly any time you have people who are killing other people, that is a problem -- one of the gravest problems that we face. And I would hope that we as a society, particularly those elected officials in Washington, D.C. would try to address that problem that caused that problem rather than doing so much hype and hyperbole that is really not touching on the main issue.

The main issue is, why are so many of our youth in particular resorting to criminal conduct in order to make a living.

HAYES: Let me ask you about this --

BROOKS: That`s what we need to focus on, give them hope and give them job jobs, not give them despair and unemployment.

HAYES: When we talk about that guns and gun deaths in your state, that rate includes suicide. It actually makes up most gun deaths in this country. They are mostly people that take their own lives with guns.

Is that a number would you like to see come down? Do you think that the access to handguns is cutting short the lives of folks who are taking their lives because the gun is there who otherwise might not?

BROOKS: Well, let me emphasize something. With every single provision in the Bill of Rights, there is a good side and a bad side. For example, the Fourth and Fifth Amendments tend to let criminals go free, people who otherwise would be convicted, but for the right against unlawful search and seizure by of example in the Fourth Amendment, with respect to the Fifth Amendment, the right not to self-incriminate, which deals with confessions.

And as it is true with every amendment provision, every right that is the Bill of Right is also true with the Second Amendment. There are good sides and bad sides. But the good side is we have been a free nation because the Second Amendment allows us to arm ourselves to ensure we never have a dictatorial government.

HAYES: Is that why you think America -- I mean, do you think the reason we`re a free government, that freedom relies ultimately on having guns to use violence against the government?

BROOKS: That is certainly a factor. If you look at other countries throughout history who have suppressed the ability of the citizenry to own gun, I think you see a higher incidence of governments eventually evolving into a dictatorship because the dictators who are in control do not have to worry about the citizenry seizing their rights back.

So, there are many factors in our history that protect our democracy, but I would submit the second amendment is a big one.

HAYES: What about Saddam Hussein`s Iraq, which had the second highest rate of personal gun ownership in the world, right with the U.S.?

BROOKS: I`m sorry, I don`t know enough about those circumstances to be able to talk about them in an educated fashion.

HAYES: Let me ask you about this then --

BROOKS: By way of example, I don`t know if your premise is accurate or inaccurate.

HAYES: It is. In the case of Oregon, we see some individuals using the Second Amendment in precisely the way you described, right? They are armed, the fact they are armed is clearing changing the federal authorities and local authorities and how they deal with them, I think that`s inarguable, and they have a cause. Is that something -- do you look to Oregon and you say this is the kind of thing I`m talking about when I think about the Second Amendment preserving American liberty?

BROOKS: No, I would distinguish what`s going on in Oregon with the intent of the Founding Fathers in country. The intent of the Founding Fathers was to help insure that if there is a dictatorship, the American people are armed so that we can overthrow that dictatorship.

I would submit to you what we have in Washington, D.C., while it may be a misguided government making unnecessary errors, not helping the American citizenry as much as we should, it`s not a dictatorship, it just making bad public policy.

HAYES: My final question to, and I asked this last night of a colleague of yours, Representative Burgess, my understanding is you have a concealed carry permit in Alabama. Should citizens and members of Congress be allowed to carry inside the U.S. Capitol where you`re standing now?

BROOKS: Well, I`m one of those also who believes in property owners. And the property owner has a say and when a person can or cannot bring a gun unto their --

HAYES: Right. But you control that property. Would you support --

BROOKS: That`s the debate that we`re going to have to resolve. In more specific response to your question, I do not want citizens coming into capital grounds inside the United States Capitol, into the gallery of the states capitol with guns, given that the risks that are associated with that, given that we already have security with capitol police who do an excellent job of security.

HAYES: Oh, OK, so you oppose it.

Representative Mo Brooks, it is a pleasure, always. Thank you, sir.

BROOKS: My pleasure.

HAYES: All right. Still to come, local officials now say the armed militants occupying the Oregon wildlife refuge could face federal charges. The latest, ahead.



SHERIFF DAVE WARD, HARNEY COUNTY, OREGON: This community is a united family unit, and you don`t get to come here from elsewhere and tell us how we`re going to live our lives. We`re going to work through that ourselves.



HAYES: That was sheriff of Harney County, Oregon, speaking at a packed community meeting just moments ago asking for the armed takeover of a nearby federal facility to end.


WARD: I`m asking as the sheriff of Harney County that the people that are occupying our wildlife refuge go home, work your differences with whoever out through the appropriate channels and let us get back to our lives as we live them here.


HAYES: A group of militants have occupied buildings on a wildlife preserve to protest on behalf of two local ranchers who were convicted of setting fires on government land and are now serving jail time. Those ranchers have since disavowed the occupation, but the armed protesters, led by the sons of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy who had a standoff of us own with the federal government on his ranch, have no plans to end the armed occupation just yet.

That same county sheriff you just heard from told NBC News earlier, quote, "the FBI has assured me that those at the Malheur National Wildlife REfuge will at some point face charges."

A representative for the FBI could not confirm that assertion with NBC News.

But as one armed protester revealed on MSNBC last night, he`s not taking any channces. Arizona rancher LaVoy Finicum, told MSNBC`s Tony Dokoupil that he would rather die for the cause than be arrested in jail.

He broke free from the group holed up inside the federal building Tuesday evening to sit on a chair outside with only a sleeping bag, a blue tarp and a gun to protect him from the elements.

Mr. Finicum said he took that position so it would be easier for officers to find him should they serve an arrest warrant.


LAVOY FINICUM, RANCHER: I have been raised in the country all my life. I love dearly to feel the wind on my face, to see the sunrise, to see the mooon in the night. I have no intention of spending any of my days in a concrete box.


HAYES: But no arrest warrant came, which has perhaps prompted some in the group to reassess the supplies situation inside that bird sanctuary headquarters.

Earlier in the week, some members of the group seemed to have sent out a social media SOS asking for care packages from the public of much urgent need snacks, and energy drinks.

At the very least, the request inspired an internet meme or two. But as state law enforcement told Talking Points memo today, the men should feel free to head to the store and restock themselves.

A spokesman for Oregon state police remarking, "right now, they`re allowed to come and go as they want. We are not monitoring their movements."


HAYES: More than six months after the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry, Alabam Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, basically ordered judges in the state to ignore the ruling of the highest court in the land, and instead to continue to enforce the state of Alabama`s now null and void same-sex marriage ban.

Moore issued the order today in his role as the administrative head of the state court system saying that until the full Alabama Supreme Court rules on the effect of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on its state`s same-sex marriage ban, Alabama probate judges, those are the people who actually issue the licenses in Alabama`s counties, have a ministerial duty not to issue any marriage licenses contrary to the Alabam Sanctity of Marriage Amendment or the Alabama Marriage Protection Act.

Moore claims the U.S. Supreme Court decision applies only to the four states that were a party to that decision, that`s Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee.

But in October, the 11th circuit court of appeals said the U.S. Supreme Court`s ruling on gay marriage nullified the earlier decision of Alabama`s Supreme Court, which it upheld the same-sex marriage ban.

So, the main thing Moore accomplished today is to create confusion for probate judges who could be held in contempt by a federal judge if they refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Though he did also create headlines with the words Roy and Moore in them, which is something he is, to be fair, rather good at.

Joining me now, Alabama State Representative Patricia Todd.

Representative, catch me up here. I thought we -- maybe I`m naive. I thought we settled this. I thought this was done. I thought there was sort of -- we had you on the program several months ago. There was this kind of little dead end of rebellion. That seemed to be stamped out.

Where`d this come from?

PATRICIA TODD, (D) ALABAMA STATE REPRESENTATIVE: Well, you know, Alabama`s a little slow to catch on, I guess. I`m not sure why he decided to issue this order today. But he`s wrong. And, you know, my response is get over it, you lost. And we need to go back and do your job.

HAYES: Wait. Did this -- so this basically -- am I right that this essentially came out of nowhere?

TODD: Exactly.

I`m not sure what prompted him to do this today. I guess maybe he needs to raise more money for his foundation to pay his family members, I don`t know. But we were all sort of shocked that he issued this order today.

HAYES: Now in the intermittent period of time, my understanding is people in Alabama have been getting married, straight people, gay people have been getting married. The state is still there. It has not been hit by any kind of wrath. It has not descended into Gomorrah. I mean, how is life in Alabama after the Supreme Court ruled marriage equality is constitutionally protected?

TODD: Well, it`s been business as usual. Most probate judges have gone along with the Supreme Court decision. We`ve had a handful, but decided not to issue any marriage license, which is more of an inconvenience to straight couples than it is to gay couples. And they`re losing revenue.

The funny thing is that Justice Moore just last week issued a letter to the governor saying he did have enough money to run the state court system, but yet he`s encouraging them not to do their jobs, which means they`ll lose revenue.

So, I`m not sure what prompted him to do this. B ut he`s wrong. He`s going to lose. If probate judges, which some of them today, have said they`re not going to issue any more marriage licenses, because they`re confused. I don`t know how you can be confused by this. And you know, they`ll be held in contempt of court.

HAYES: Well, let me ask you this. I mean, in defense of the citizens of Alabama, this was not precipitated by some groundswell of activism or organizing or some outcry by the public of Alabama, right?


HAYES: I mean, it seems to me that actually it`s sort of not been a huge issue locally in Alabama. Am I right about that?

TODD: You`re exactly right. There has not been a groundswell of opposition. Most probate judges have fallen into line. They may have faulted at the beginning, but many more have come online to issue the marriage license and the world hasn`t come to an end.

So, we`re all sort of perplexed, as is timing, but it`s Roy Moore so we`re always prepared for anything when he`s in charge.

HAYES: All right, Patricia Todd, thank you. Always a pleasure.

Coming up, with just 26 days left until the voting starts in Iowa, Bernie Sanders picks a substantive policy fight with his pledge to break up big banks within his first year in office.

A former congressman and Hillary Clinton supporter Barney Frank responds ahead.


HAYES: The case surrounding the death of Sandra Bland, a 28-year-old black woman who was arrested during a routine traffic stop in Texas and found hanged in her -- three days later in her jail cell, just took an unexpected turn. Today, the grand jury indicted Brian Encinia, that`s the state trooper you see there, who arrested Bland on a -- they indicted him on a perjury charge saying he lied about why he removed Bland from her vehicle.

The misdemeanor perjury charge carries the possibility of a year in prison and a $4,000 fine.

Now, this is the same grand jury which two weeks ago declined to indict anyone from the jail or the sheriff`s office in connection with Bland`s death.

Following today`s indictment, the Texas department of public safety announced it would begin termination proceedings for Trooper Encinia.

The lawyer representing Bland`s relatives say they still have questions, asking why Trooper Encinia was not charged with assault or battery. We`ll bring you the developments as they happen.


SANDRA BLAND: For failure to signal. Yep. For a failure to signal.




HAYES: With just 26 days to go until the Iowa caucus, Bernie Sanders is not letting up on Hillary Clinton, picking a fight with her on an issue many see both a policy and political weakness: Wall Street regulation.

After going after Clinton yesterday during a speech where he announced he would break up the big banks within the first year of his presidency. Today, Sanders was back at it saying he did not trust the former secretary of state to take on Wall Street.


SANDERS: Do I think Hillary Clinton or many other senators have shown the courage that is necessary to stand up to the Wall Street power? The answer is no. And with the reason that I`m running for president, you know -- as you know, I`ve known Hillary for 25 years, we`re friends. But I think in this critical moment in American history when you have a Wall Street situation, when you have an American middle class, which is disappearing, when you have massive levels of income and wealth inequality. When you have got climate change, we need a president who now has the courage to stand up to the billionaire class and Wall Street.

JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC: Does Hillary Clinton have the courage to stand up...

SANDERS: Well, I`m running for president because I think not.


HAYES: Today, Clinton again touted her credentials on the economy after yesterday saying explicitly her banking policies were tougher than Sanders`.


CLINTON: With respect to my opponent, who is a friend of mine, I think I have a broader, more comprehensive set of policies about everything, including taking on Wall Street.

You know, I think Bernie`s giving a speech today in New York about what he wants to do to shut down the big banks in a week. Everybody who has looked at my proposals say my proposals are tougher, more effective and more comprehensive.


HAYES: Everybody -- I don`t know if that`s true.

Sanders, who focused his New York media swing on his Wall Street plan also stopped by the nightly show where he was asked about his choice of vice president if elected.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A lot of people would like you to probably join up with somebody whose name rhymes with Elizabeth Schmoren or something like that. I`m just -- I`m putting that out there.

SANDERS: Let me just say this, Elizabeth Warren is a very good friend of mine. I`ve known Elizabeth for a very long time, before she was in the senate. She is a great United States Senator. She has stood up to Wall Street, stood up to the big money interest.

So, she is a -- she and I will work together.


HAYES: No word yet on whether or not Warren would take the job. But today, she did give the senator from Vermont a shoutout on Twitter saying, quote, "I`m i`m glad Bernie Sanders is out there fighting to hold big banks accountable, make our economy safer and stop the GOP from rigging the system."

Just an hour later she followed up saying, "I`m glad that all the Dem candidates for president -- Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Martin O`Malley are fighting for Wall Street reform."

What happened in between those tweets? What kind of phone calls happened, do you think?

But whose plan is best? Former congressman Barney Frank of Dodd-Frank rises to Clinton`s defense next.


HAYES: Joining me now, Barney Frank, former democratic congressman from Massachusetts, CNBC contributor and a Hillary Clinton campaign surrogate.

Mr. Frank, so let`s start with this central idea of breaking up the big banks, the systematically important institutions, the too big to fail banks, good idea, bad idea? A lot of people like the sound of it.

BARNEY FRANK, FRM. CONGRESSMAN: Oh, I think it should be broken up to some extent and specifics. They`re not all the same.

But here`s my other -- here`s my biggest problem with Bernie Sanders`s approach. Well, there are two.

First, size alone is not the issue. Smaller institutions can be irresponsible. Countrywide did all these bad mortgages. And, you know, if we had had Glass-Steagall, it would not have prevented the abuses that led to the crisis. Glass-Steagall would have done nothing to regulate the kind of derivative manipulation that AIG, not a bank, got involved in, nor would it have stopped the bad mortgages, the banks -- as banks could have done them.

But here`s the problem, he does not say how small the institutions have to be.

Look, Lehman Brothers -- the failure of Lehman Brothers, again not a bank, not affected by Glass-Steagall, they went under and that precipitated the crisis.

Well, they were very small.

If you`re telling me that we cannot have any institution in America, financial institution, that if is so big that if it totally failed it could cause some stress, then I guess nobody could be as big as Lehman Brothers were, so you`re talking about taking not just the top five or six banks, but I believe many more and breaking them not into two or three, but maybe five or six pieces.

And I think frankly Senator Sanders is not coming out with what is important. How big is too big? Yeah, nobody likes excessive big.

The other issue is, and Hillary Clinton is quite right, working with some very thoughtful people, like Gary Gaessler (ph), who is the best regulator, the toughest regulator, a lobbyist for tough reform at the commodities futures trading division, the man who did more to try and restrain derivative abuses, you`ve got to get specific.

And you do have the non-banks, the shadow banks, and simply breaking up Morgan Stanley or Bank of America, isn`t going to do anything, literally not anything, to restrain shadow banking, which is why Secretary Clinton is very specific about what to do about it.

HAYES: Let me ask you this. Part of the context of that Wall Street speech yesterday is the idea that Dodd-Frank, which bears your name, while something that Bernie Sanders voted for and supports, didn`t go far enough and that in the system now there remains the potential for cataclysm crisis, the banks have too much power.

Do you think the banks still have too much power post Dodd-Frank?

FRANK: In some ways, yes, but the question is not whether we should do more but how you do it.

I was very pleased that Senator Sanders, are who voted for the bill, noted that -- in fact, one of the things he said he was going to do was to use some of the powers we put into the bill for the regulators. We have the Volcker rule, which is a very tough requirement that they get out of the business of proprietary involvement in derivatives.

So I think that as of today, yeah, they are still more powerful than they should be. But here`s the other point, by the way, in terms of bailouts, we made them illegal. The big bailout was of AIG. The bill that passed that Senators Sanders (inaudible) voted for, outlawed that. The Federal Reserve -- nobody could now do what was done before.

If one of these big institutions -- and this is critical, if one of the big institutions can`t pay its debts and is put out of business -- Sarah Palin was half right, which is better than her usual average when she talked about death panels in our legislation, but they were for big big banks, not for old ladies. And if a big bank can`t pay its debts, under the bill. And it`s put out of business and other big financial institutions are then assessed to pay those debts to avoid any harm to the taxpayer.

HAYES: All right, Barney Frank, thank you very much for your time tonight. I really appreciate it.

Joining me now is Alexis Goldstein, she`s a senior policy analyst at Americans for Financial Reform and former vice president at Merrill Lynch.

And Alexis, I`ve heard from a lot of folks in different parts of the state, this obsession with size, the obsession with breaking up the big banks sounds great because people don`t like the big banks, and by definition they`re big, but that actually misses the point, that it`s essentially a distraction. What do you say to that?

ALEXIS GOLDSTEIN, AMERICANS FOR FINANCIAL REFORM: Well, I say that that`s just not true. I mean, we have people like Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen who some have said is the most powerful women in the world and the FDIC, which is a really important banking regulator say that there are banks now, mega banks like JP Morgan that are so big, they could not be safely unwound or put through bankruptcy without harming the broader economy.

And I want to push back on what Barney said about, oh, Lehman wasn`t so big and they weren`t a bank and so Glass-Steagall wouldn`t have made a difference.

Lehman Brothers did not cause the crisis, Lehman Brothers exposed to the crisis. All of the mega banks who were a byproduct of the repeal of Glass- Steagall, which is the Depression Era law separating casino style banking from the more boring banking, they had the same positions, the same garbage subprime mortgages that Lehman Brothers had.

And so Lehman was just a canary in a coal mine, exposion all of the problems in the rest of the banks.

And I think -- you know, just like in the great depression, we had Supreme Court justice Louis Brandeis say that things like concentrated economic power leads to concentrated political power. Any time you have all that money swirling around in Washington, D.C., they own the show. And that`s still true today.

We see Wall Street lobbying at levels we haven`t seen since the financial crisis

HAYES: OK, but then if that`s the case, right, this is something that I asked Senator Sanders yesterday, then how do you do it? I mean, there`s no magic wand to wave. If the banks are as powerful as you contend, as Senator Sanders contends, then the idea of breaking them up might sound good on paper but what`s the actual pathway forward, which is in some ways Barney Frank`s point, right, like how do you go about this project?

GOLDSTEIN: so, I think you need an all of the above approach to breaking up the banks. You use the law that bears Barney Frank`s name, which requires that the regulators break up any bank that is too big to fail without harming the economy. You pass new legislation like the 21st Century Glass-Steagall Act, which is a bipartisan piece of legislation. Senator Warren is on it and Senator McCain is on it And then you need to involve the public and the grass roots in order to build this new voice that`s going to hold these people accountable.

You can`t just do one thing, right. If Glass-Steagall is repealed by a death by 1,000 cuts. And we need 100 small steps in order to make the financial system safer.

HAYES: So, what about this idea that -- I mean, here is a question, how big is the difference in your mind between what`s being proposed? You know, what he said about Gary Gensler, I think, you would agree with. I certainly reporting on it thought that Gary Gensler really was one of the best regulators in the Obama era, really was tough and has lent his name. Is there that much space between these two proposals?

GOLDSTEIN: Well, I have to say for a bank dork like me, like it thrills me to no end to hear these debates between who has the tougher plan on Wall Street, right, this is the reason that primaries are important.

But I will say that I think it`s important that we not say that Glass- Steagall wasn`t an important piece of financial reform. We had decades upon decades of stability.

I think it`s true that Dodd-Frank has a lot of things that it tells regulators to do. They need to be following the law. AFR just put out a report about the Volcker Rule, which Barney Frank mentioned, calling into question whether they`re implementing it correctly and calling for more transparency.

So, it`s really in some ways a matter of political will. And that`s why I advocate for this all of the above approach, right, new legislation, following the law, and grass roots movement to hold people accountable.

HAYES: All right, Alexis Goldstein, thanks so much.

That is All In for this evening. I`ll see you tomorrow night live from Burlington, Vermont where Donald Trump is holding a rally. We will be at the Vermont Pub and Brewery in the midst of the madness.