All In With Chris Hayes, Transcript 11/30/2016

Guests: Michael Burgess, Lawrence Tribe, Jerry Nadler, Felix Salmon, Keith Ellison, Linda Sarsour

Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: November 30, 2016 Guest: Michael Burgess, Lawrence Tribe, Jerry Nadler, Felix Salmon, Keith Ellison, Linda Sarsour




DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT-ELECT OF THE UNITED STATES: I could be President of the United States and run my business 100 percent.

HAYES: The conflicts and the questions mount.

TRUMP: So, in theory, I don`t have to do anything, but I would like to do something.

HAYES: Tonight, the Trump announcement that he will do something that so far doesn`t amount to anything. Then -

TRUMP: Drain the swamp!

HAYES: How does Trump square his Goldman Sachs Treasury pick with his populist promises?

TRUMP: It`s a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class.

HAYES: Plus, growing fears over the president-elect`s response to the attack in Ohio. Beyond the headline, new details on the deal to keep Carrier jobs in Indiana. And as dems stick with Pelosi, Keith Ellison is here with his plan to fight Donald Trump. When ALL IN starts right now.


HAYES: Good evening from New York. I`m Chris Hayes. We are now just 51 days from Donald Trump becoming President of the United States, and more and more people appear to be confronting the very real possibility that Trump will use the full force and power of the U.S. government to benefit his sprawling business interests and enrich himself and his family.

Today, a largely unknown, apparently pretty plucky little government office, the Office of Government Ethics, which is charged with preventing conflicts of interest in the executive branch took to Twitter to congratulate Trump for addressing the issue, unleashing a very Trumpian nine-tweet tweet storm that included, quote, RealDonaldTrump, OGE is delighted that you`ve decided to divest your businesses. Right decision!" "Bravo! Only way to resolve these conflicts of interest is to divest. Good call." And "We told your counsel we`d sing your praises if you divested, we meant it." That was not a hack. It was real. We made sure. It was also sadly what the kids called trolling or to put it in another way, it was the Office of Government Ethics calling Trump`s bluff.

You see, this morning, Trump announced on Twitter, of course, that he would hold a news conference on December 15th along with his children, quote, "To discuss the fact I will be leaving my great business in total in order to fully focus on running the country in order to make America great again."

Trump wrote that he was not required to take this step under law, but then he felt that leaving his business is, quote, "Visually important." Hence, legal documents are being crafted which take me completely out of business operations," as Trump added. "The Presidency is a far more important task." This was greeted in some corners as actual substantive news, generating headlines like this, Trump leaving businesses to focus on running country.

But in reality, Trump`s announcement means virtually nothing. Trump did not provide further details but two Trump staffers told reporters today that Trump is simply planning to follow through on his vow to hand his businesses over to his kids, a step he has long promised to take.


TRUMP: I would put it in a blind trust. Well, I don`t know if it`s a blind trust if Ivanka, Don and Eric run it. But is that a blind trust? I don`t know. But I would probably have my children run it with my executives and I wouldn`t ever be involved, because I wouldn`t care about anything but our country, anything.


HAYES: Yeah. It`s not a blind trust. As the office of government ethics noted in its sarcastic tweet storm today, the only way for Trump to resolve these conflicts of interests is to divest, that is to sell off his assets and put the revenue in a true blind trust that neither Trump nor crucially his family, his children, his loved ones, presumably he`ll be talking to every day knows what he owns. Trump however seems to think that despite not taking that undeniably necessary step to protect the country, he is doing America a huge favor.


TRUMP: According to the law, see I figured there`s something where you put something in this massive trust and there`s also -- nothing is written. In other words, in theory, I can be President of the United States and run my business 100 percent, sign checks on my business. So, in theory, I don`t have to do anything, but I would like to do something. I would like to try and formalize something because I don`t care about my business. So, I don`t have to do anything, but I want to do something if I can.


HAYES: Now, we do not know the full scope of Trump`s conflicts since his company is private and, of course, he never released his tax returns. But we do know that as president-elect, Trump has already met with Indian businessmen building a Trump-branded luxury apartment building, asked the British delegation to oppose wind farms which he fears will wreck the views at one of his Scottish golf courses, and allowed his daughter, Ivanka, to participate meetings with foreign dignitaries despite planning to have her help run his businesses.

And there`s the Trump International Hotel in D.C. just located just around the block from the White House in a tax payer owned old post office building just down the street from where Trump will soon be living. Already diplomats are flocking to the hotel in order to curry favor with Trump, which means he is already profiting from his role as soon-to-be public official. That`s not the half of it. Trump leases the space from the federal government, which means that he is about to become both the property`s landlord and its tenant.

Trump will, again, if nothing changes, violate that lease on the first day he takes office since, for fairly obvious reasons, the lease explicitly states the following, no elected official of the government of the United States shall be admitted to any share or part of this lease or to any benefit that may arise therefrom. Crucially, even if Trump hands the property over to his kids, it doesn`t come close to solving the problem since he will continue to have a very vested interest in that hotel`s success.

Joining me now Congressman Michael Burgess, republican of Texas. Congressman, it`s good to have you, as always. Do you agree that this is a problem?

REP. MICHAEL BURGESS (R), TEXAS: Chris, thanks for having me on. Good to be with you, long-time no see, and we had a big election a couple weeks ago and I haven`t had a chance to chat with you.

HAYES: We sure did.

BURGESS: So, it`s good to be with you.


HAYES: Why the word, congressman. Congressman, are you taking a victory lap? Is that what you`re doing?

BURGESS: No, no, no. In fact, I with some interest read your tweets about the election of 140 years ago, the Tilden-Hayes conflict. Was that a relative of yours?

HAYES: You know, I`ve often wondered but it turns out, that Hayes was in the United States way before my Hayes of my ancestors were. Let me ask -

BURGESS: I see. So, you don`t have a republican in your background. That`s what I was trying to figure out.

HAYES: No, there are. My grandfather, boy, man, he was all - he was all the way. Let me ask you this. You - I think - this doesn`t strike me as particularly ideological, right? We`re not talking about the proper way to structure American health care markets or top marginal tax rates. You know, across the ideological spectrum, I mean, you would agree this is a real problem, right?

BURGESS: Look, we recognize and you and I have acknowledged in the past that Trump was an unconventional candidate, now he`s an unconventional president-elect. He`s been very successful in his private life. And look, I kind of know something about that. I had to walk away from my medical practice 10 years ago. That`s hard to do for someone my age, I will tell you it was difficult. So, I can certainly sympathize that he may be having some difficulty with leaving that. But this is a smart individual who has smart people around him. And I will trust that they will make the correct decisions.

HAYES: Well, would you - so, here`s my question, this is actually a great - a great example, right? So, you were a practicing physician, as I understand. You had a very successful medical practice.

BURGESS: Very successful.

HAYES: Yeah. You left that medical practice behind entirely, right? You didn`t give it over to your kids, it`s not something you`re actively consulting or -

BURGESS: They were not licensed to practice medicine in the State of Texas, so that would have been hard.

HAYES: Right. Well, that would have been problematic, obviously. But my point being, that this wasn`t just a kind of an on paper, arm`s length thing. I mean, you divested yourself from it. And it`s no longer under your purview. You`re now completely separated from it.

BURGESS: Right. It wasn`t required. And certainly there are physicians who have maintained some type of practice when coming to congress, and I debated it. But the type of practice that I maintained was a 24/7 hands on, full time job. I knew this was an important 24/7 full-time job. So, I had to make the decision. And when I was running, people asked me what would you do. And I said, if I`m elected, I will serve in congress, I will no longer be your doctor.

HAYES: I want to honestly and genuinely praise you for that, because I know it`s a difficult thing and obviously, it could be a difficult thing. And obviously, it could be the case that you did that and then two years later, you got voted out, and then all of a sudden you got to start from scratch again. It seems to me that your own admirable above and beyond actions in this case are a pretty good standard for a man who is going to be the most powerful man in the United States with, I think, you and I would agree, the most difficult job in the world.

BURGESS: Well, look, we know some of his closest advisers are his children and I suspect his kids, Don and Ivanka are studying this at the present time, and goodness knows they`ve all got good lawyers. This is not something that`s being handled lightly. I do not - I mean, I have not talked to the president-elect about this or anything else, in fact, in the last three weeks. But I expect them to make the correct decision. And I do know this, I mean, he has said it over and over again. He is devoted to what he has chosen to do. It was a hard decision to make and I know it was not easy for them, but I trust them to make the right decision when the time comes. And as you pointed out, we`ve got 51 days until he takes the oath.

HAYES: Yeah. It strikes - it strikes me, though, that the article one constitutional duty that you have and you and your members - your colleagues have, is oversight of the executive. It`s something that the republican congress has pursued zealously with this White House, it`s something that republican promised -- congress promised to pursue zealously if Hillary Clinton had been elected. In fact, you`re one of 52 members who signed a letter asking for the IRS to investigate the Clinton Foundation.


HAYES: So, it doesn`t seem to me that trust really is necessarily the best way to fulfill that constitutional duty. Isn`t it your job as a member of congress, the article on constitutional body to actually oversee that and make sure he makes good on it?

BURGESS: You bet, you bet. But he`s got 51 days. And I - and again, I - the president has - this has been an unconventional campaign, he`s an unconventional president-elect. I - you know, I have been so impressed with how they`ve gone about the cabinet selection.

HAYES: Yeah.

BURGESS: I think he has listened to advisers. I think he`s made studied decisions of the decisions that have been made. Some people are frustrated because there`s some other decisions that haven`t been made.

HAYES: Sure.

BURGESS: But I think it`s because he wants to have the information at hand before he - before he actually enacts it.

HAYES: I`m going to call - I`m going to call the standard, which I think is the standard that should be followed, the "Burgess Standard". And we`ll get you back on the show, and see if Donald Trump needs the "Burgess Standard".

BURGESS: I trust he will. And I`ll try to divert it to the Hayes-Tilden conflict again.

HAYES: Thank you very much, appreciate it.

All right. Joining me now, Laurence Tribe, a professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School. And professor, we`ve got a few things before us. I mean, one is there are some folks - so, in a strict statutory sense, it does seem to be the case that there is no statutory law that says the president has to divest. There are, however -


HAYES: There are, however, it does seems some constitutional issues. How serious do you see those?

TRIBE: I think they`re very serious. The constitution specifies that no official of the U.S. government, certainly not the president, can receive any economic benefit from any foreign government. It`s very basic and very clear. And just listening to Congressman Burgess, he sounds like a nice guy.


TRIBE: But he`s talking as though it`s an issue of time management. So, Donald Trump said I`ll - I won`t worry about the details. I`ll leave that to Don, Jr. and Eric and Ivanka. Big deal. It`s just a facade. The point is that even if he looks away from the details and doesn`t pore through them, every foreign government where he does business, and that`s dozens of governments, knows perfectly well that if they grant a permit or grease a palm or do something for Ivanka or for Don, Jr. with respect to a hotel in Istanbul where actually Trump himself said he had a conflict of interest.

HAYES: Those were his words.

TRIBE: They will be currying favor. They will be doing things that enhance the family wealth. And around the world, that`s the way palms get greased. It`s often to the prince and not the king that a special favor is done or that a payment is made. And I think it is estimating the American public to be utterly stupid if they think that this facade is going to solve the constitutional problem. The office of government ethics is a nonpartisan body and although they chose an unconventional way to deliver the message, they were right. That is simply looking the other way while the family empire grows and receives financial benefits from not only our allies like the U.K. and Scotland, but people who are sometimes with us and sometimes against us like Turkey and maybe Russia.

Looking the other way while they pile money into his coffers through his kids is not solving the constitutional problem at all. From the very moment this man takes the oath of office, he will be a walking, talking violation of the United States constitution.

HAYES: Well, those are very strong words.

TRIBE: I don`t think that the Electoral College really ought to give that kind of power to somebody who takes an oath he knows he can`t keep.

HAYES: Wow, Professor Tribe, strong words. The point about the prince and the king, I think is a really important one because obviously, I remember hearing stories about the business empire of Hosni Mubarak`s son, which were not because of Mubarak`s son`s business acumen, of course, they were - they were just the basic corruption of the Egyptian state.

Laurence Tribe, professor at Harvard, thank you very much. Appreciate it.

TRIBE: Thanks, Chris.

HAYES: All right. Joining me now Congressman Jerry Nadler, a democrat in New York. Well, congressman, you`ve heard your colleague Michael Burgess who says he trusts they will figure out the right thing to do. You`ve heard Professor Laurence Tribe who says he will be a walking, essentially, constitutional time bomb. What`s your position?

REP. JERRY NADLER (D), NEW YORK: I agree with Professor Tribe. I don`t think there is anything he can do to solve that problem other than completely divesting himself of all the interests, converting it into cash and putting that in a blind trust, because otherwise, he will know or his family members will know when someone is doing something that benefits his own financial situation. And that`s a conflict of interest with his job as president.

And contrary to what he said, by the way, it is not true that a president can`t have a conflict of interest. There`s certain statutes from which he`s exempt, but there are others from which he is not exempt. He can`t have a statute of - a conflict of interest. And when Mr. Trump says that a president can`t have a conflict of interest, is exemption (INAUDIBLE) conflict of interest laws, it reminds me of President Nixon saying that when a president does something, it`s legal, no matter what it is.

HAYES: You know, the remedy here, right, constitutionally would seem to be the impeachment because that is the way that the constitution would deal with violations of the law when undertaken by the President of the United States. Short of that, though, right? I mean, what do democrats in the house minority, what can you do since there is no real cop on the beat? I mean, the Office of Government Ethics, God bless them, tweeting that it`s about the most vociferous we`ve seen anyone try to enforce this.

NADLER: Well, we`ve asked -- a number of us have written a letter to the chairman of the judiciary committee asking for hearings on this. I don`t know that they`ll grant them, but you know, that we`ll have hearings. But the fact of the matter is the house has wasted time and millions of dollars of public money on ridiculous investigations, repeat investigations, eight different investigations of Benghazi and of Hillary Clinton`s alleged misconduct. When the President of the United States is walking into inherent conflicts of interest, inherent possibilities of violating the constitution, the emoluments clause and other things, then there ought to be hearings at least.

HAYES: Yeah. It seems if nothing else, that this hotel that`s around the corner from the White House, in which he`s going to be the landlord and the tenant in which he possibly will be violating that lease on day one, that seems like a pretty distinct, specific and obvious thing that`s got to be resolved.

NADLER: Well, it is. And - but there are dozens of other things which will come to light and some which won`t come to light that will have to be resolved. There`s really no precedent for this. We certainly also ought to pass legislation requiring the president and for that matter candidates for president and other offices to reveal their taxes, because -

HAYES: That`s a good point.

NADLER: -- a lot of his - a lot of his conflicts we won`t even know about because he hasn`t revealed his holdings and his taxes.

HAYES: Maybe there can be some bipartisan good government reforms on statutory fixes to this. I remain hopeful. As always, Congressman Jerry Nadler, thanks for your time tonight. I appreciate it.

NADLER: Quite welcome.

HAYES: Coming up, the big day for democrats who chose their leader in the house tonight. My interview with Congressman Keith Ellison on his plan to lead democrats in the era of Trump. Plus, the following is a statement of fact. Donald Trump just picked one of the executive producers of the movie "Suicide Squad" to be America`s next treasury secretary, not a sentence I thought I would ever read. Meet the ex-Goldman Sachs banker Trump just tapped to drain the swamp, next.



TRUMP: For those who control the levers of power in Washington and for the global special interests, they partner with these people that don`t have your good in mind. It`s a global power structure that is responsible for the economic decisions that have robbed our working class, stripped our country of its wealth and put that money into the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political entities.


HAYES: That was a portion of Donald Trump`s fairly powerful closing ad released just before the election in which he took aim at the political establishment, the global elite, notably hedge fund billionaire and Hillary Clinton donor George Soros and Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein. It was in that ad that Trump portrayed Goldman Sachs the embodiment of the global power structure that quote, "Robbed our working class." Well today, Donald Trump announced he wants a former Goldman Sachs banker to run his Treasury Department. Steven Mnuchin was the Finance Chairman for Donald Trump`s campaign. Before that, he`s a partner of Goldman Sachs for 17 years, also the son of the Goldman Sachs partner, his first hedge fund was named after the dunes outside his Hamptons home.

When Mnuchin left Goldman in 2002, he went to work with the aforementioned George Soros, of course. Years later, Mnuchin led a deal to buy the California subprime mortgage lender, IndyMac, change the name to OneWest. And during a 10-year, Mnuchin made a small fortune during the depth of the housing bust, running his bank that some called a foreclosure machine.

According to the California Reinvestment Coalition, OneWest foreclosed on more than 36,000 homeowners under Mnuchin. Just a couple of years ago, the same coalition filed a complaint accusing the bank of locating branches in predominantly white neighborhoods while avoiding minority communities. In a joint statement today Sanders, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren said quote, "Trump`s choice for Secretary of the Treasury, Steve Mnuchin is just another Wall Street insider. That is not the type of change Donald Trump promised to bring to Washington. That is hypocrisy at its worst."

But here`s the thing, Steve Mnuchin is the second Goldman Sachs banker without any political experience Trump has tapped for a position. Incoming Chief White House Strategist Steve Bannon, a man who boasted about his publication Breitbart, being a platform for the white nationalist Alt- right, was the first. And there are reports Goldman`s Operating Chief Gary Cohn, who met Tuesday with Donald Trump, could head up the Office of Management Budget, as politico noted, Goldman Sachs is poised for a return to power in the Trump White House.

Joining me now, Felix Salmon, Senior Editor at Fusion. And the irony here of course is Lloyd Blankfein`s face in that ad. The idea of like Hillary Clinton is a puppet of the international globalist banking conspiracy --

FELIX SALMON, FUSION SENIOR EDITOR: And Goldman Sachs in particular.

HAYES: Specifically Goldman Sachs and the fact if Clinton had won because of Sanders and Warren, it would have been very hard for her to appoint any Goldman people because they would have went crazy, and now here we go, we got two and were possibly working on three.

SALMON: And yeah, and then, of course, there was the lovely irony of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren who were campaigning so hard against all of Trump`s promises on the campaign trail, and now, they`re very upset that he`s breaking those promises.

HAYES: Right, right, right. Well, of course, because the whole thing does feel like a bit of the bacon switch. I mean, when you run the ad that you run there, this sort of idea, this very Steve Bannon inflected idea that it`s the globalist plutocrats who are robbing the working class and then you put Mnuchin in the head of treasury, it`s all hard to square.

SALMON: And Mnuchin isn`t just a Goldman Sachs technocrat, he is as you said, the former president of OneWest Bank, or the Chairman (INAUDIBLE) of OneWest Bank, he oversaw a whole bunch of foreclosures, he is -- there`s also Wilbur Ross who just got appointed as Commerce Secretary who is like even richer than both of them combined who is a corporate raider. They make money by firing people, not by hiring people. This is the classic example of capital as opposed - you know, making money at the expense of labor.

HAYES: That`s exactly right. And in some ways, when - it`s funny when you look at the 2012 campaign versus 2016, you know, Trump was able to get Hillary Clinton on the wrong side of the Mitt Romney, Barack Obama divide, right, where she weirdly played the role of Mitt Romney, and it was like she was the corrupt person who had all the dodgy deals and was connected to the plutocrats and I`m the populist standing up for you. What we`re seeing here, when you`re looking at these folks, and particularly Mnuchin and Wilbur Ross of commerce is these are the one percent plutocrats that we associate with the sort of backbone of the Republican Party at this level.

SALMON: Right. This is "Davos Man".

HAYES: Right. This exactly.

SALMON: He`s filling his cabinet with exactly the Davos Man who he was running against on the campaign trail which is - I mean, it`s so shameless to almost be admirable.

HAYES: Well, here`s something I found fascinating. This is Goldman`s Sachs stock prices since the election of Donald Trump and I have talked to - I have a fair amount of sources, people I talk to on Wall Street for, you know, the years I`ve done reporting on Wall Street and finance. The mood there is, I got to say, pretty ebullient. Like I think a lot of people were scared of Trump of - or at least temperamentally scared. I think a lot of people are still temperamentally scared, but now they`re basically like, "Hey, this is looking good. We`re going to get big corporate tax cuts, we might get some fiscal stimulus, we`re going to probably get some Dodd-Frank roll backs, some deregulation." They`re pretty happy.

SALMON: Oh, you know what else they`re going to get? There is one thing that investment banks love more than anything else, and trading (INAUDIBLE) more than anything else is uncertainty and volatility. Because when the markets go all over the place and no one knows what the president is going to do next, that`s where they make their money. So, it`s not just Goldman Sachs, it`s more than (INAUDIBLE) all of the big banks, have seen their stock prices soar, this has been wonderful for Wall Street.

HAYES: Can I show you this graph, which I have a question about. This is Fannie Mae - this is Fannie Mae shares reacting to Steve Mnuchin being nominated Treasury Secretary. Just so we`re clear, that`s a 90-degree angle, that is people bidding up Fannie Mae shares like crazy when Mnuchin is named. What is that about?

SALMON: So, right now, the government takes all of Fannie and Freddie profits for itself. Because -- it only owns 80 percent of them but there`s this clever capital structure which means it gets to keep all of the profits for itself, and the minority 20 percent of shareholders who have been left out in the cold by the Obama administration are now hopeful that in this new capitalist frenzy --


HAYES: Oh, they`re going to get their hands on that money.

SALMON: Because Fannie and Freddie are hugely profitable, it`s because their shareholders haven`t seen any of that money ever since the financial crisis.

HAYES: Fascinating. Felix Salmon, thank you very much for joining us. Appreciate it.

SALMON: Thank you.

HAYES: Just ahead, new reporting on the staggering number of incidents of harassment, intimidation, committed in the wake of Donald Trump`s victory. Look at what`s being called the quote, "OUTBREAK OF HATE", coming up.



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.


HAYES: It was nearly a year ago that Donald Trump first called for a ban on all Muslims coming into the U.S. in the wake of the attack in San Bernardino, California. The declaration was one of the most chilling moments in candidate Trump`s campaign. Today, a little window into how a President Trump might respond to another new attack. In the wake of this week`s attack at Ohio State University when a Somali-born student drove his car into a crowd before stabbing bystanders with a knife, who was shot and killed by police of the scene. Fortunately, everyone else survived though some are still hospitalized.

The attacker appears to have been what folks call "self-radicalized", inspired by ISIS, judging by a video posted on Facebook. In the Islamic States Propaganda arm, took credit for that attack. Early this morning, Trump tweeted quote, "ISIS is taking credit for the terrible stabbing attack at Ohio State University by a Somali refugee, who should not have been in our country." Now, the 18-year-old attacker, who is a legal permanent resident of the United States came here in 2014 as a child along with his family, and it`s, of course, difficult to contemplate the extreme vetting regime that would be able to reliably predict a child`s future actions.

The President-elect`s response is also a reminder of the importance and the weight of a president`s response in the wake of an attack. Because when people are scared, they are at their most susceptible to truly awful policies and programs. Like policies banning all Muslims from entering the country where behavior that bullies and intimidates Muslims and immigrants. And there`s a disturbing new report that examines hundreds of those kinds of incidents in the wake of Donald Trump`s elections. Details on that, next.


HAYES: In the immediate aftermath of the election, reports of harassment and intimidation started to surface. In response, the Southern Poverty Law Center just released a report that tracked 867 hate incidents in the first 10 days after the election from submissions to the SPLC website and media accounts.

Now, incidents were limited to real world events. The account does not include instances of online harassment. It should also be noted SPLC said it excluded news accounts that turned out to be hoaxes, of which there were a few. But it was not able to confirm the veracity of all submissions.

That said, the report also notes the bureau of justice statistics estimates that two-thirds of hate crimes go unreported to the police. The report also notes the bureau of justice statistics estimates that two-thirds of incidents go unreported by the police.

It was the strongest the day after the election. Those numbers have since thankfully begun to drop off. SPLC categorized the incidents by motivation. For instance, 23 were anti-Trump, 187 were anti-Black, 280 incidents were anti-immigrant.

Now, we`ve seen examples of some of those kinds of harassment across the country caught on camera. For example, The Washington Post reported on a motorist in Queens, New York who allegedly yelled at a Moroccan Uber driver. The driver taped the encounter then reportedly gave it to a passenger who gave it to The Post.


UNIDENITIFIED MALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED) terrorist. I don`t care, bro, video. You`re a loser. You`re not even from here, you (EXPLETIVE DELETED)

Trump is president. (EXPLETIVE DELETED) so you can kiss your visa good- bye, scumbag. They`ll deport you soon. Don`t worry, you (EXPLETIVE DELETED) terrorist.


HAYES: Then there was a self-proclaimed Trump voter who started yelling at a Starbucks barista near the University of Miami a couple weeks ago.




UNIDENITIFIED MALE: Because I voted for trump.



UNIDENIFIED FEMALE: Congratulations.

UNIDENTFIED MALE: You lost. Now, give me my money back.

What is your name? I want your name. I want your card. OK. You`re garbage.


HAYES: Joining me now, Linda Sarsour, executive director of the Arab- American Association of New York.

Let me ask you this, one of the things -- so we`ve been going through these accounts, right, in many cases they are hard to confirm. And there`s also -- I want to be careful that we`re not doing something where we`re shining a flashlight and we`re saying, oh, there`s this new thing happening.

But there`s been stuff happening all along, you know what I mean? I wonder how you feel about that? Does it feel like from the folks you talk to, people in your community, like there is there something that happened after the election or does it not feel that different?

LINDA SARSOUR, EXEC. DIR. ARAB-AMERICAN ASSOCIATION, NY: Oh, I mean, it absolutely does feel different. I mean, Muslims, in particular, or those perceived to be Muslims, like Sikhs, have experienced hate crimes, you know, ever since days and weeks and months after 9/11. So hate crimes, assaults, are nothing new to us. But, yes, it absolutely has exasperated in the past two weeks since election where people that you ho may have went into a store or been in your neighborhood and have been normal, then all of a sudden people are looking you in a different way. There are people that are more emboldened to come out with their hatred, so even if they were holding it in before, it`s just the story we`re hearing every day, people being spit at coming to our adult education classes.

HAYES: Really?

SARSOUR: People saying go back to your country, sometimes using just the word Trump as a way to like to antagonize you at a supermarket.

HAYES: That, you know, I have say of all this, that`s the most upsetting part of this, because I`ve seen numerous occasions in which the invocation of the name of the sitting president-elect of the United States is being deployed essentially as a kind of slur.

SARSOUR: Oh, absolutely.

HAYES: Essentailly as a kind of -- and there have been numerous reports of this. And I think -- I`m curious what you think -- it`s probably reports like this are only capturing a tiny percentage of the kinds of incidents that are happening.

SARSOUR: Oh, absolutely. I`m pretty sure that there are refugees, immigrants, undocumented people who are already not reporting because they don`t want to be on the radar of the federal government or of law enforcement agencies. And oftentimes people don`t know that you can report harassment that somebody`s spitting at you in the street is something that you should tell law enforcement, that people should not be treating you that way or if you feeling that you may be endangered that you should report these crimes.

But a lot of people are not reporting them. So, I actually think that 867 maybe triple that, but we just don`t know because we know that people don`t always report those incidents.

HAYES: You know, there`s some news today about a woman named Katharine Gorka who has been named to Homeland security transition team. She has complained bitterly to the Department of Homeland Security trains its agents falsely, in opinion, that Islam is a religion of peace. She`s someone that writes about Islam for Breitbart. This is someone who is part of the kind of cottage industry of Islamophobia.

I mean, there`s a connection between what`s happening inside and what`s happening outside it seems to me.

SARSOUR: I mean, the current -- whether it be transition or actual appointments of the Trump administration are literally every Muslim`s worst nightmare being manifested into an administration. Gorka is an absolute nightmare. She has called for the sanctioning of Muslim organizations. She believes conspiracy theories about the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrating the government. This is a woman who is extremely hateful. She has written for Breitbart, but she also helps -- she`s from a think tank. People take her word for it. She`s being used as a, quote, pseudo expert on Islam and Muslims. And she`s a very dangerous woman to be appointed to help the transition of the Department of Homeland Security.

The question is security of whom against whom? And it`s her philosophy is the security of our nation from Muslims.

HAYES: Linda Sarsour, thank you for your time. Really appreciate it.

Still ahead, why Donald Trump`s Carrier deal appears to be more of a well executed PR move than a sign of any larger change to come. The story behind the headlines ahead.

And tonight`s Thing One, Thing Two starts right after this break.


HAYES: Thing One tonight, for the past six years North Carolina has seen Republican governance run rampant. In 2010, two years after North Carolina voted for President Obama, Republicans could control both houses of the state legislature for the first time in over a century.

As the Associated Press reported, not only does the shift give Republicans the power to govern, it gives them an inherent advantage for years to come. The GOP will be in charge of redrawing House and Senate districts.

Two years later Pat McCrory cemented GOP control becoming the first Republican Governor there in two decades and repercussions were swift. GOP state lawmakers drew district lines in a way to pack 49 percent of all North Carolina`s African-American voters in just three of the state`s 13 congressional districts. In 2013, it passed a voter ID bill dubbed by The Nation`s Ari Berman the country`s worst voter suppression law. That was ultimately ruled unconstitutional this year by a federal court.

But lawmakers still were able to cut voting access in other ways. Guilford County, which has a large percentage of black voters went from having 16 voting sites open the first week of early voting in 2012 to just one this year. Meanwhile, McCrory steadily signed a Republican agenda into law, enacting abortion restrictions, expanding concealed carry permits as well as signing a law restricting LGBT protections, the transgender bathroom bill that was so offensive that major corporations, including PayPal, Pepsi, and Deutsche Bank began boycotting the state.

It`s been a GOP free for all.

But North Carolina can be viewed as a kind of blueprint for all of America right now as Republicans will soon control the White House and both chambers of congress. And if we`re looking at that way it`s crucial to keep in mind what happened in North Carolina today. And that`s Thing Two in 60 Seconds.


HAYES: Since North Carolina Republicans won the general assembly in 2010 and the governor`s mansion in 2012, the state has witnessed a GOP agenda on steroids from right-wing legislation to voter suppression and extreme gerrymandering.

But there are two major pieces of news out of the Tarheel state. Today Roy Cooper, the Democratic challenger to Governor Pat McCrory extended his lead to more than 10,000 votes with all but six counties reporting. That matters because McCrory needs the margin to be less than 10,000 to call for a statewide recount.

And while that margin could still change, there`s going to be a recount in Durham County, Cooper`s campaign manager declared today game over.

So, looks like a Democratic governor is going to replace a Republican in North Carolina.

Meanwhile, late last night, a federal court ordered North Carolina to hold a special legislative election in 2017 with redrawn district lines citing an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The effect is that every state senate and House member will face re-election next year with new district lines.

Right now, America`s national politics look a lot like North Carolina in 2012. For Democrats wondering how to respond, North Carolina playbook is one place to start.



TRUMP: I was sitting home. I`m watching the news and I see 1,400 people get fired from Carrier. You`re leaving Indiana and we`re going to protect the people of Indiana.

Every single time you make an air conditioning unit you`re going to have a major tax to pay when you sell it in the United States.

You know, our politicians have been working on this problem for five years. Nothing ever happens, because they don`t understand, this is the only way, they want to give incentives.

There have to be consequences when they leave. There are no consequences.


HAYES: On the campaign trail, Donald Trump made a freaking example of Carrier, U.S. based air conditioning manufacturer, which about nine months ago announced plans to relocate 1,400 jobs from Indianapolis to Mexico. Trump claimed that by threatening steep tariffs on companies that export jobs he and he alone could convince Carrier and its ilk to keep employing American workers.

In this one case he already appears to have succeeded. As we reported last night, Carrier announced on a Twitter, "we are pleased to have reached a deal with President-elect Trump and VP-elect Pence to keep close to 1,000 jobs in Indy. More details soon."

Tomorrow, Trump and Pence will travel to Indianapolis for a kind of victory lap.

Now, it is a huge win for the 1,000 workers who now get to keep their jobs as well as a campaign promise fulfilled and a big public relations coup for the president-elect. What it is not, however, is an actual plan to create sustained job growth or manufacturing in the U.S.

Details about the deal are just beginning to trickle out. It seems that Trump may have opted for the carrot approach that he decried, incentives, instead of the stick. Rather than threatening Carrier with tariffs, the state of Indiana where Mike Pence is still governor, we should note, reportedly plans to entice the company with economic incentives as part of the deal to stay.

We don`t know the total cost of those incentives, but as economist Justin Wolfor`s (ph) put it, every savvy CEO will now threaten to jump ship, ship jobs to Mexico and demand a payment to stay, great economic policy.

According to one official, the Indiana Economic Development Corporation, Carrier`s parent company may have been concerned about a stick, however, about losing billions of dollars in federal contracts under a Trump administration.

John Mutz (ph), who is also a former lieutenant governor told Politico, quote, this deal is no different than other deals we put together at the IEDC to retain jobs, but the fact is that the difference is that the United Technologies depends on the federal government for lots of business, a major factor that changed is we had an election.

In a statement released today, Carrier said the deal was possible, because, quote, the incoming Trump/Pence administration has emphasized to us its commitment to support the business community and create an improved, more competitive U.S. business climate. The incentives offered by the state were an important consideration.

Again, we don`t know what those incentives are.

We did get a first look at that commitment to the business community with an interview with Trump`s new pick for Secretary of Treasury this morning.


STEVE MNUCHIN, NOMINATED FOR SECRETARY OF TREASURY: We`re going to cut corporate taxes, which will bring huge amounts of jobs back to the United States.

UNIDENITIFIED MALE: What do you think you`re going to get to that?

MNUCHIN: We`re going to get to 15 percent. And we`re going to bring a lot of cash back into the U.S.


HAYES: That`s the face of economic policy in the Trump era.

Now, the Democrats are trying to fight back and put together an economic agenda of their own. Up next, my interview with a man who wants to lead them.


HAYES: During the campaign, Hillary Clinton made the strategic decision to wall Donald Trump off from the rest of the Republican Party, at least rhetorically, portraying him as a singular figure and an exceptional threat to American traditions.

But, three weeks into the transition, Trump`s cabinet picks have made it increasingly clear, this administration is going to be extremely Republican, about as Republican as it gets.

Trump may have run as a populist insurgent, but ideologically he`s largely an empty vessel. And now that his party controls two whole branches of government, they`re filling up Trump`s agenda with items from the conservative wish list -- privatizing Medicare, cutting corporate taxes.

The big question now for Democrats, how to counter that Republican juggernaut.

I`m joined now by congressman Keith Ellison, Democrat from Minnesota, candidate for chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

And congressman, what`s the plan here?

REP. KEITH ELLISON, (D) MINNESOTA: Well, the plan is very simple: we have to really deliver for America`s working classes. That means that we need to fight for higher wages. We`ve got to fight for real trade deals. And we got to make sure that we are invested in training and everything else that Americans need.

HAYES: But congressman, you can`t deliver any of that, respectfully, in the minority of one House of congress.

ELLISON: But we can offer an alternative vision. And the other thing we can do, Chris, is we can make sure that the American people know that they`ve been given a bill of goods. They voted for certain things but what they`re getting is a cabinet full of billionaire lobbyists, white supremacists and people who really are not the ones who are there who are going to deliver for the American people.

There`s a guy in the cabinet now in the Treasury who was part and parcel of the whole housing financial collapse. We have another person, Betsy Devos, who is all in favor of privatization of education. We`re looking -- I mean, the people are not going to get what they have been promised in this election.

HAYES: This is a question to me. Is it Donald Trump, I think, was able to win that primary, in many ways win the election because of his sort of ideological deviations from the Republican Party. Do you think that will continue given the signs you see of what Ryan says he`s prepping in the House, who is around him, or are you going to basically get Scott Walkerism with a guy who likes to tweet a lot?

ELLISON: Well, I think we probably are going to get the worst of both. But you know, Elizabeth Warren said something really smart, which is personnel is policy. And if you look at who he is selecting to be at Treasury, you know, big hedge fund manager, involved in the financial collapse, the education thing very scary because we need education to be economically competitive, and also you know, Medicare and Medicaid now on the block with Tom Price, people need health care to be economically viable.

And so what we`re seeing is a set of appointments that will be the opposite of what people voted for when they thought he was going to be a working class champion. He might have played one on TV, but he`s not a real one, and we know that because of the choices he`s already made.

HAYES: Well, then, so how do you operationalize that? I mean, it seems to me that in the position that you`re in, there`s going to be some high profile fights and in the Senate they`re probably going to pick fights on who those nominees that they`re going to really go in after, in the House you guys are going to have fights about, say Medicare privatization possibly, something like that. I mean, what`s the broader message of the Democratic Party? What does the Democratic Party stand for in the era of Trump? Give me your elevator pitch.

ELLISON: The Democratic Party is the party of working people across this country. We`re not here for the special interests and the big money folks, we`re here for the people who pour the cement, drive the buses, the people who take care of the patients, who teach the classes, the real working classes of America. And we`re going to be fighting for them.

So yes, Democrats in the House and Senate and every state legislature and every city council will be fighting on that front.

HAYES: What has...

ELLISON: But it`s really about the grassroots, Chris.

HAYES: OK, yeah, but what has to change institutionally about the Democratic Party to make that a reality? Because what happened I think we saw an election in which the candidate for the Democratic Party raised a huge amount of money. A lot of that was from wealthy donors. I don`t think, you know, whether you morally fault her for that or not, you run for president, that`s part of what you do. Are there institutional ways you need to change the party to be a more credible party for working people?

ELLISON: Absolutely. We got to decentralize from Washington to the grassroots. That`s the real thing.

You know, the elected officials, they`re going to fight, but the real people got to be put in the game to fight are the people who have got to be put in the game to fight are the people who work on the grassroots every day all across this country. And that means the Democratic Party needs to be moving resources towards the grassroots to empower them. That means communications, technology, but mostly heart and a fighting spirit for working people.

HAYES: What`s the lesson for Minnesota? I was looking at a map. It was the Minnesota congressional -- am I correct that it`s all Democrats in your delegation in Minnesota?

ELLISON: Nope. No, we`ve got some Republicans in there, too.

HAYES: So, you -- but you guys have not seen the kind of sea change in that state the way that some other states around you have seen. You`ve had Democrats hold the line in Minnesota.

Minnesota`s a state that Donald Trump almost won sort of miraculously. What have you learned from Minnesota?

ELLISON: We learned that voter turnout strategies that operate 365 days a year really do work. That`s how we made sure Rick Nolan won in the eighth district when you had Stewart Mills threatening down there. That`s how we hung on during this wave for Tim Walsh.

In my own district, we outperformed the Democratic average by about 60,000 votes, which helped keep Minnesota red. So, he lost by about 42,000 votes but we over-performed the Democratic average in my district, and that kept us a blue state.

HAYES: There`s a story to be written about Minnesota right now.

Congressman Keith Ellison, thanks for your time, appreciate it.

ELLISON: Thank you, Chris.

HAYES: That is ALL IN for this evening. Make sure to tune in tomorrow for my exclusive interview with Senator Bernie Sanders. I`ll talk to him about the Democratic fight in the Trump era. More, you do not want to miss that.