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

All In With Chris Hayes, Transcript, 7/1/2016

Guests: Maimuna Ahmad, Ryan Greer, Sabrina Siddiqui, Josh Barro, Joan Walsh, Tera Dowdell, Charlie Pierce

Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES Date: July 1, 2016 Guest: Maimuna Ahmad, Ryan Greer, Sabrina Siddiqui, Josh Barro, Joan Walsh, Tera Dowdell, Charlie Pierce


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


Another terror attack, this time in Bangladesh. Tonight the latest on what we know from Dhaka.

Then --

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESUMPTIVE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: Are you from Turkey, sir? Are you friend or foe?

HAYES: Donald Trump`s troubling response in the wake of terror continues.

Plus, more problems for the Trump campaign in the NBC News battleground map.

But will Vice President Christie or Gingrich help turn things around?

And the attorney general`s candid remarks over her airport meeting with Bill Clinton.

LORETTA LYNCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL: I certainly wouldn`t do it again.

HAYES: When ALL IN starts right now.


HAYES: Good evening, from Chicago. I`m Chris Hayes.

In just three days since a triple suicide attack on the Istanbul airport left over 40 people dead, attackers stormed a cafe in the capital of Bangladesh, Dhaka, detonating explosives, exchanging gunfire with police and taking dozens of hostages.

At this point, the deadly standpoint is going on nine harrowing hours. Four security personnel have been killed. We`ve been told most of them after one hostage escaped and officers rushed forward to help, only to be met by a grenade tossed at them from a balcony.

This all started around 9:20 p.m. local time, 11:20 a.m. Eastern, when a group or seven or eight attackers entered the Holey Artisan bakery located in an upscale area of Dhaka. That`s home to many expats and foreign embassies.

In the hours since that time, they`ve been holding around 40 customers and staff hostage at gunpoint, including at least one foreigner, according to the senior police official.

A news agency affiliated with ISIS claimed the group was responsible for the attack. That has not been confirmed by MSNBC or the U.S. government.

Joining me now on the phone from Dhaka, Maimuna Ahmad, an American citizen who`s lived there since 2011, now right down the street from where this is all taking place.

And, Maimuna, can you tell me? What things look like at this hour?

MAIMUNA AHMAD, EYEWITNESS (via telephone): Hi, Chris. It`s early morning here in Dhaka and things are relatively quiet on the street where I am, which is just a few blocks away from the O` Kitchen Restaurant. There`s just a few policemen and a few plainclothes individual kind of walking down the street, but nothing seems to be happening.

HAYES: Maimuna, the neighborhood, people have described it as upscale, as perceived as quite secure. There are a lot of expats. You live around there. Give us your sense of what that area is like.

AHMAD: Yes, I think that`s a fair characterization. You know, in previous times, it felt relatively safe, but then again, I would also say Dhaka in general feels relatively safe, except for in recent years things seem to be deteriorating, the state of law and order in general and sporadic attacks, obviously nothing as severe or scary as what`s going on right now.

HAYES: Describe to me the reaction today. There`s now a nine-hour siege that`s gone on. Is this something that has been, I imagine, on television all the time? Large areas cordoned off. Is the nation sort of watching this unfold in real-time?

AHMAD: Yes, I mean, I think there`s just shock and disbelief at what is going on. My husband and I were supposed to fly out last night for the start of Eid holidays here in Dhaka, but we were unable to when the area got cordoned off and all traffic has been stopped. And so we, like our friends and family across the city and the country, got a couple of hours of sleep and things feel pretty tense this morning as well. It`s just so unprecedented in Bangladesh, and it feels so surreal, because this is also a place that is quite popular, has been over the last couple of years.

My husband and I are there regularly, almost every week, and we know friends and friends of friends who are at the O` Kitchen Restaurant, which is attached to Holey Bakery, which is where this is happening. And could have easily been any one of us, and that is just truly frightening. And there`s a sense that we`ve rounded a corner and we`re not really sure if we can come back from this.

HAYES: You referenced before a sense of deteriorating law and order. There`s been a set of attacks that have been quite targeted, bloggers who have been called heretics by jihadists, gay activists, others who have been targeted for assassination, often in fairly brutal stabbings.

Is that what you`re referring to, this sort of ominous drum beat, but very targeted, that have preceded this event today?

AHMAD: Yes. For sure there has been a very troubling trend over the last couple of years of these targeted killings of specific Bangladeshi individuals who stand for progressive values, as well as random attacks of non-Bangladeshi citizens, perceived to be western, or not from here. But you have to understand this is also in a larger context of deteriorating law and order in the country generally and a sense of not really -- the government not really having control or trust from everyday people.

And there`s just a sense that the law enforcement agency, the government itself, are just losing legitimacy in the country in a lot of ways.

HAYES: All right. Maimuna Ahmad, thank you so much for joining me. I really appreciate it, and I wish you best and hope you and everyone there can stay safe.

AHMAD: Thank you.

HAYES: I`m joined now by Malcolm Nance, MSNBC terrorism analyst and author of "Defeating ISIS", Ryan Greer, former policy adviser at the State Department Bureau of Counterterrorism, now a fellow at the Truman National Security Project.

Ryan, maybe I`ll begin with you. Give us a little bit of the context for extremist violence in Bangladesh before today. There has, as I referenced before, been a growing number of attacks, and there`s been a number of attacks that ISIS has claimed there. Nothing of this scale thus far.

RYAN GREER, FRMER ADVISOR STATE DEPT. BUREAU OF COUNTERTERRORISM: That`s correct, Chris. Authorities are saying over the last couple of years, about 15 attacks that they can attribute to ISIS and their supporters. But let me say this, Chris. They`ve responded with 12,000 arrests. So if we were going to arrest our way out of this challenge, they would have done it already.

As the previous commentator mentioned, there`s a political oppression and rule of law problem. If you`re arrested 12,000 people, petty criminals and political dissidents, that`s only going to fear the atmosphere of political dissent, which is going to create the political demand for more attacks like this. So, after this tragedy ends, we have to ask ourselves, why is ISIS targeting Bangladesh for recruitment and how does this end? The answer is rule of law and opportunities for their youth.

HAYES: You know, Ryan brings up a point, Malcolm, zoom out for one moment, as we look at the last week. There was the horrible attack, of course in Istanbul. There was a 17-year-old American citizen, in a settlement in the West Bank who was stabbed to death in the Palestinian territories. And then there`s this ongoing attack.

And sometimes the rhetoric in the U.S. focuses on toughness, insufficient toughness, insufficient exertions by the state, excessively loose civil liberties. It seems to me in all three cases, it`s very hard to point to that as the source of the vulnerability.

MALCOLM NANCE, MSNBC TERRORISM ANALYST: Well, certainly. This isn`t a question of toughness. All of these incidents that you mentioned, none of them had anything to do with the United States or U.S. government policy. It had to do with policies in a local area, in very specific way.

Other than the fact that strategically some of the attacks were carried out against Westerners and the one in the West Bank may have actually just been coincidence that it was an American citizen. But for the most part, ISIS`s strategic campaign is to designed to destabilize nation states, to create chaos, to create mayhem, and also to create a situation where governments overreact and clampdown on their citizenry, and that of course allows them to recruit better.

We`re seeing here in Bangladesh, they managed to keep a covert organization for a long period of time. All of the attacks over the last two years, and I have an entire section of ISIS and Bangladesh in my book, have showed they`ve been individual weapons attacks of individual people, but of prominent secular people. And the Buddhist attack that we have last Friday, which was against poly theists.

So all of these things are part of a spectrum of ISIS and al Qaeda ideology, and that`s where all the trouble originates.

HAYES: Yes, we should just take a moment to note that the campaign of terror waged, it appears by ISIS, in Bangladesh, has been among the most chillingly vile in terms of the specific targeting of prominent individuals, who despite threats have done tremendous courageous things like be an LGBT activist or be a secular blogger. These are the kinds of folks who have been targeted.

Ryan, here`s my question for you. This period of time, as we are just looking in the last six months, and, of course, this is unfolding here. We have not confirmed that it is in fact ISIS -- reminds me of the years in the last decade, the mid-aughts of the Bali bombing, of the Mumbai attack, when al Qaeda seemed to be gathering strength and kind of spreading across the globe. That seems to have ratcheted back considerably and been replaced by the growth of ISIS.

How should we understand ISIS`s geographic spread at this moment?

GREER: Well, I have to say, Malcolm is absolutely right. These are local community, root cause grievances that lead people to identify with these ideologies. You could say, Chris, that al Qaeda was recruiting in the same types of communities in Bangladesh that now ISIS is recruiting. So, it`s spreading globally in areas where people feel disenfranchised and marginalized.

You`ve got people in Syria and Iraq with ISIS from over 130 countries. That`s most of the planet and it`s mostly people who feel marginalized by their home societies in some way.

We saw Bangladesh as a potential target for ISIS recruiting. They announced that in November of last year. So we knew that this was coming. And with political oppression rife and a lot of unemployed youth, the local communities that would have adherence to probably any terrorist ideology that let them express anger and hatred, because they`re so frustrated with their community lives, you know, if it`s not al Qaeda, it`s ISIS. And if it`s not is, it`s the next ISIS.

We have to get to the real root cause of the problems and not necessarily those who are tweeting from Iraq and Syria. Though, as you mentioned, Chris, ISIS has taken responsibility, or claimed responsibility, I should say, they claim they have killed 24 people and wounded 40, which suggests they have information from kind of the inside of the attack.

So, you know, there could be kind of a coordination mechanism, as you mentioned the Bali bombings, I`ll mention the recent Jakarta attack against police in the Starbucks there. Those attackers were mentored over the phone from Iraq and Syria. There could be some relationship like that.

But, again, I suspect, based on the previous ISIS affiliated attacks in Bangladesh, it`s probably home-grown terrorists who are more or less saying they admire ISIS or are using is for a branding advantage.

HAYES: It`s striking to me, Malcolm, in these two cases of what is unfolding right now in Dhaka, the ninth hour of the stand-off. You`re looking at pictures from a relatively affluent and leafy neighborhood in Dhaka where that hostage situation continues. We don`t have new details to provide you. Of course we`ll bring them to you as we do.

But in this situation, and in Istanbul earlier in the week, is had taken some effort, particularly in the campaign in Bangladesh, to target specifically either people that they could claim were unbelievers or heretics or foreigners. In both the Istanbul airport, and in this situation, you have them essentially slaughtering Muslims during the holiest period of the year.

NANCE: Yes. This is -- I want to point something out here that also touched on what Ryan said. These attacks are now doctrinalized under ISIS and al Qaeda. They have shifted from going after military targets, in some respects, to all of their attacks in these chaos-filled countries, or countries which have weak security infrastructures. They now go after hotels and restaurants, and mobility targets like airports where they can find Westerners.

However, we`ve noted very many times on this program, ISIS`s principal target is Muslims. They view that everyone outside of their apocalyptic cult, who does not go along with them, are legitimate targets, and that includes the 1.6 billion Muslims that don`t believe in this corrupt belief system they do. So they have no problem with that.

However, Ramadan has traditionally always been, for virtually every Islamic-based terrorist group in the world, a period where they didn`t have attacks. ISIS has only recently created Ramadan as a death month. As a matter of fact, only in the last two years. In the last ten days, which is supposed to be the days of peace, they have actually ramped up their attacks leading up to the Eid. It`s completely un-Islamic.

HAYES: Yes, and impossibly obscene.

Malcolm Nance and Ryan Greer, thank you for being here tonight.

NANCE: My pleasure.

GREER: Thank you.

HAYES: All right, we`ll continue to monitor the hostage situation as morning arrives in Bangladesh.

Next up, political news at home, Donald Trump makes yet another disturbing remark in the wake of a terror attack as his campaign faces new trouble ahead.

And later, Attorney General Lynch addresses the situations around her impromptu airport meeting with Bill Clinton.


JONATHAN CAPEHART, THE WASHINGTON POST: So, what on earth were you thinking? What happened?

LYNCH: Well, I think that`s the question of the day, isn`t it? .




HAYES: Denver-based Turkish reporter Yusuf Serce asked Donald Trump a question at the Western Conservative Summit in Colorado this afternoon, Trump responded with a question of his own.


TRUMP: Turkey? Are you from Turkey, sir? Good, congratulations. I actually have a very nice job in turkey. He`s saying, please mention Turkey. OK. I think he`s friend.

Are you friend or foe? Huh? I think he`s friend.


HAYES: Friend or foe.

NBC News caught up with the reporter on the other end of that exchange, who said he was trying to ask about the terror attack in Istanbul on Tuesday.


YUSUF SERCE, TURKISH JOURNALIST: I was trying to get please one answer about Turkey, you know. I got several questions, but at least I would try to, you know, attempt to ask him at least one question, you know what I`m saying.


HAYES: Trump did eventually talk about turkey, claiming the nation could defeat ISIS on its own.


TRUMP: Turkey has a tremendously powerful military, and they could wipe ISIS out by themselves. I would love to see that. Would we love to see that?


HAYES: Up next, why Trump has started what sounds like a high school football player still talking about the big game 30 years later. That`s next.



TRUMP: We`re allowing people to come into our country from Syria and other places that shouldn`t be allowed to come into our country. They could be ISIS. I used to say they`re probably not. But now I say many of them probably are.


HAYES: Donald Trump in Colorado today, claiming a significant number of refugees are actually secret ISIS terrorists -- of course saying that without any evidence whatsoever. Trump also took time to relive his glory days in the Republican primary. Like a high school quarterback at a 30- year reunion, stuck in the glory-less slug of middle age and wallowing in the minutia of that one big upset against the school`s main rival.


TRUMP: One of the things I`m most proud about is that in the history of the Republican Party, with 17 people running, I had the most votes of anybody that`s ever run in the primaries. We had almost 14 million votes. Think of it. Won 37 states.


HAYES: It`s not surprising Trump wants to live in the past because the present is looking pretty ugly. The updated NBC News battleground map released today gives Hillary Clinton 255 electoral votes between the likely Democratic states in dark blue and the states that lean Democratic mark in light blue.

Trump is looking at a total of 190 electoral votes from likely GOP states in dark red, as well as four states that now lean Republican. That means Trump would nearly need to sweep all of the toss-up states including some big challenges like Virginia to keep Clinton from 270 electoral votes she needs to claim the presidency.

As to explain Trump`s struggles in the polls, RNC chief strategist Sean Spicer offered this explanation.


SEAN SPICER, RNC CHIEF STRATEGIST: I think part of this is he`s not focused on a general election strategy. He`s not as well known. He has not done the things he needs to do and pivot to in a general election.


HAYES: Not as well known, Donald Trump. Not as well known.

That claim comes just a little more than two weeks until the Republican nominating convention in Cleveland, which remains a big question mark. Trump indicated today his wife Melania Trump plans to be among the speakers, but "The New York Times" reports much of the program remains in flux, including who will speak, how and when Mr. Trump will arrive and what he will say when he does. At one point, two aides told "The Times" Mr. Trump was not aware that the event had to be held in Cleveland, a decision made almost two years ago by the Republican National Committee.

Joining me now is Sabrina Siddiqui, political reporter at "The Guardian."

You know, Sabrina, you were on the trail and you used to watch the Trump stump speech come in, and he would spend I`d say a majority of time talking about his polls. Talking about the polls. Now he can`t do that because most of the polls show him behind. So he`s in a kind of almost pathetic way, spends that period of time talking about like the greatest hits from his triumph in the primary. Have you ever seen something like that?

SABRINA SIDDIQUI, THE GUARDIAN: No. But there`s so much about Donald Trump that we haven`t seen before, Chris.

And, look, we`re nearing now two months to the day when the Indiana primary, in essence, made him the presumptive Republican nominee. That was, of course, what forced Ted Cruz out of the race on May 3rd.

So he`s had nearly two months now to make this mythical pivot to the general election and it seems like every week, if not almost every day, his campaign puts out more and more indication that you`re going to start to see a more presidential Trump. He`s going to start to switch over toward policy and really trying to draw contrast with Hillary Clinton. And he`ll do it for about a day, then he`ll go back to himself.

The fact of the matter is, Donald Trump can`t help himself. He really is going to continue to be Trump. You pointed to that comment he made to the reporter from Turkey. Yesterday, he engaged a woman who said we should fire Muslims from the TSA. He`s going to continue and be himself.

And I think what`s concerning Republicans is in the meantime, he`s not building a ground game or raising the kind of money he needs to run a credible, general election campaign.

HAYES: And yet, here`s the one piece of good news that strikes me for Donald Trump in that battleground map, the state of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania has been declared a toss-up based on the battleground polling that we have at NBC News.

The other thing that makes you think it is a toss-up is the fact that there`s been a heavy ad buy announced by the Clinton folks in Pennsylvania. People talked all the time. Mitt Romney made the famous head faint toward Pennsylvania in the final days of the campaign and people talk about Pennsylvania is finally going to go red and it doesn`t.

But this strikes me, for the Clinton folks, maybe genuinely concerning at this moment.

SIDDIQUI: Yes, what we`ve always known is that if there`s a narrow path way that Donald Trump has to the presidency, it`s through the Rust Belt. That`s been his strategy, if there`s been a coherent strategy -- or consistent strategy, has been to try to tap into that frustration among working class white voters in states like Pennsylvania, as well as Ohio.

At the same time, I think because he can`t seem to stick to the script, he did give a speech earlier this week where it was certainly crafted by Paul Manafort. He was reading off teleprompters and he did go after Hillary Clinton on NAFTA and trade and tried to drive home messages that would resonate with that crowd.

But again, now you see him today reliving the glory days from the primary and not really making much sense on the stump. So the question is, can we even keep it up? When you get closer to the general and Hillary Clinton invests more and more in these states, and she has the ground game already in place, or certainly in it formation in a lot of states, he`s going to continue to be at a disadvantage and it will be really difficult for him to catch up.

HAYES: I continue to wonder what the heck this convention is going to look like. I mean, at one level, if he has a single talent, it`s showmanship. So, in that respect, it seems like this should be up his alley. At the same time, who is going to speak, who is going to want to speak? And how are they going to program and fill all the air time if no one wants to show their face?

SIDDIQUI: That seems to be the question of the hour, who is actually willing to appear at this convention and who among more incredible Republican lawmakers is willing to go and speak on Donald Trump`s behalf?

One of the problems that they face, the only people willing to accept a speaking slot are people who are going to reinforce his appeal in the Republican base, Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann, that`s not going to do much for Donald Trump`s campaign.

HAYES: Right.

SIDDIQUI: He needs people like Marco Rubio. He needs people like Ted Cruz. And they haven`t indicated whether or not they`ll attend the convention. And I think we already know a lot of the former Republican presidential nominees, they`re sitting it out.

So, it`s an open-ended questions who`s going to be there and he hasn`t given them reason in the last six weeks or so, to actually throw their support behind him and tie themselves to his candidacy.

HAYES: Sabrina, thanks for your time tonight. I appreciate it.

SIDDIQUI: Thank you.

HAYES: Coming up, forget about speaking, who would be willing to attach themselves to this campaign as Donald Trump`s V.P. pick? New reporting on the two Trump favorites and they`re perfect, ahead.



JONATHAN CAPEHART, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: A lot of people are like -- I mean, friends, want supporters, backers, were saying, what on Earth was she thinking, talking to Bill Clinton. So, what on Earth were you thinking? What happened?


LORETTA LYNCH, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well, I think that`s the question of the day, isn`t it?


HAYES: All right, from the standpoint of legal ethics, it appears that Attorney General Loretta Lynch did nothing wrong by chatting with Bill Clinton earlier this week at an airport in Phoenix. From the standpoint of the so-called optics that on cable TV love to talk about, having the nation`s top prosecutor talking to a former president while her department leads an investigation into the possibility of his wife possibly committing a crime, well, probably not a good look.

Now the meeting was entirely impromptu. Lynch says the conversations was personal in nature. The two the two talked grandchildren and golf and other things unrelated to the investigation into Hillary Clinton`s email practices at the StDte department.

But those assurances did, of course, nothing to convince Donald Trump.


TRUMP: Bill Clinton goes in the other day, into an airplane, just happened to be -- oh, just a coincidence. He just happened to be at the airport at this time. Think of it, just happened to be at the airport. You know he was talking about talking about golf and grandchildren. I love my grandchildren so much, but talking about them for nine or ten seconds, you know, what are we -- I love my grandchildren. I love that one. I love that one. Love, love, love that one. And look at the beautiful. I love these kids.

After that, what are you going to say, right?


HAYES: I will note, some have more to say than a few seconds on their grandkids.

But, here is the question, was this another bone-headed move by the ex- president, genuinely improper perhaps in some way, or classic Clinton media feeding frenzy over nothing? We`ll talk about it next.



LYNCH: The most important thing for me as the attorney general is the integrity of this Department of Justice. And the fact that the meeting that i had is now casting a shadow over how people look at or view that work is something that I take seriously and deeply and painfully. And so I think it`s important to provide as much information as we can, so that people can have a full view of how we do our work and why we do our work, and how this case is going to be resolved, as well as how all the cases that we look at are going to be resolved.


HAYES: In an attempt to quiet the political uproar from her impromptu conversation with Bill Clinton, Attorney General Loretta Lynch said today she would not interfere with final decision-making process about whether to charge Hillary Clinton in the investigation of her use of a private email server.

Lynch said she would leave that totally up to career prosecutors and FBI agents to decide, which is no small thing. I mean, typically the attorney general has the final word over whether prosecutors seek an indictment in a case like this.

Take, for instance, from the FBI sought to bring felony charges against David H. Petraeus, former CIA director, for mishandling classified information and lying about it. Her predecessor, Eric Holder, stepped in and reduced the charge to a misdemeanor.

Now, to be clear, Lynch is not formally recusing herself by any means. She could still review any decision on Clinton. She`s just saying she is not going to change it.

Still, for even Democratic politicians have been left shaking their heads at the ex-president`s move here. Democratic Senator Chris Coons said, quote, "it doesn`t send the right signal."

Joining me now, Josh Barro, senior editor at Business Insider and MSNBC contributor; Joan Walsh, national affairs correspondent for The Nation and MSNBC political analyst.

I guess I`m torn on this one. It just seems bizarre and boneheaded, although the context here is apparently this is a thing Bill Clinton does with people when he`s on the tarmac in the private jet portion of the airport and he finds out someone else is there, he gets out and goes to talk to them, including Ted Cruz. So, I guess that makes it less weird.

But I just find it a strange move.

Joan, what`s your feeling?

JOAN WALSH, THE NATION: Yeah, I agree. In the best of all worlds, he wouldn`t have done it. And my heart really goes out to Attorney General Lynch on this one. Because, you know, Jonathan asked the question we all wanted to ask, what were you thinking? And she can`t tell us. Because she may have been thinking, oh, my god, Mr. President, what are you doing?

HAYES: But you can`t kick him off the plane.

WALSH: How do you kick him off the plane? Do you grab your suitcase and barge past him.

And then secondarily, look, you know, I hate the word optics. We all agree, though, that the optics are bad. But the substance of this is ridiculous.

I mean, you have to believe that she is likely to be indicted and then you also have to believe that this was the best way he had to potentially talk to her and influence that. I mean, both of those things are crazy. And so the idea that we spend all day, you know, on cable news, not just our -- every channel, chasing this story, it led the news all day until the tragedy in Bangladesh. That`s wrong.

HAYES: Josh, you wrote a piece today about your concern -- your concern about the lack of concern for said optics amongst the Clintons. So I want to argue another direction on this.

Number one is I think what Joan said, I mean, from all the legal analysis I`ve read, the chances of indictment seem vanishingly small, a.

B, he`s the ex-president and she`s the current attorney general. In his mind, he`s just going to do the Bill Clinton thing. Why should this be such a big deal? Isn`t this just classic Clinton witch-hunt?

JOSH BARRO, BUSINESS INSIDER: Well, it`s a classic Clinton thing, But the classic thing is a problem.

I don`t think the word optics does this justice. It matters whether the public is suspicious that a political figure is subject to undue influence or is exerting undue influence. And this is just part of a broader pattern.

I mean, when Hillary Clinton went and took $675,000 in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs, why was Goldman Sachs paying her those fees. Maybe just because they thought she was going to be really interesting, or maybe because they thought that would put them in a better position with someone who would be president in the future.

Why were foreign governments giving so much money to the Clinton Foundation? Maybe just because they thought it was the ideal philanthropic entity to give to, or maybe they thought it would put in a good word for them with someone who was going to be president of the United States.

And the Clintons do not seem at all concerned about trying to prevent the creation of these concerns about what undue influence surrounds them. And this is just another small example of it. I wouldn`t worry about it if it weren`t part of the much broader thing.

But I mean, you describe it as an impromptu meeting. He went -- he got on her plane. He didn`t have to get on her plane.

WALSH: It was 103 degrees -- Josh, I loved your piece and I agreed with 70 percent of it, actually. But it was 103 degrees on the tarmac. I thought that was weird, too, until they said that. I`ve been to Phoenix in the summer. You`re not going to sit there and shake her hand and make small talk on the tarmac. It`s not -- it`s no longer...

HAYES: No, but the bigger -- the weirder decision is to go initiate the whole thing to begin with.

BARRO: Right.

HAYES: The normal thing to do is to just be like, hey, look at that coincidence, oh, Loretta Lynch, I`ll send her an email right now.

WALSH: Yeah.

HAYES: We`re sitting on the same tarmac.

WALSH: Hope you`re well.

HAYES: How is Janet Reno.

WALSH: How are the grandkids.

BARRO: You know, exactly.

HAYES: But Josh this, I think relates in some ways to the email situation, right, which is, I think their psychology -- and I`m not defending their psychology, because I agree with you, that it actually genuinely is harmful. Their psychology is, we are so unfairly persecuted and maligned by everyone, everyone already decides the worst of us, there is nothing we can do in our actions that will stop that, ergo why should I not go say high to Loretta Lynch who I like and who just saw Janet Reno who I appointed. And I want to tell her about my grandkids and my golf game?

BARRO: I think that is their psychology, but I think it`s incorrect. And I think we learned that in this primary.

I mean, for a long time, the idea of Clinton scandals was a thing that was pushed by the right and ignored by the left. And the Clintons were defended by people on their own side. And then you saw in this primary campaign, particularly the bank speaking fees really sticking to the Clintons. And I think this has to do with the fact that there`s been an overall decline in trust in establishment politicians and in institutions. People feel that they`ve been disserved by people in charge on both sides of the aisle for so long. And so people like the Clintons who could get away with this stuff in the late `90s when wages were growing really fast and people thought things were working really well, they said, hey, should I worry about whether people in Washington are in it for themselves, because they`re generating good things for everyone.

People need to be on their best behavior right now. I think this is something President Obama has understood. He has run such a low scandal administration, because he knows that at a time of such distrust you have to be even more trustworthy than normal.

The Clintons are just not at all conscientious about that.

HAYES: That I would agree with this. Although, one historical corrective, I would say, in terms of the the last round of this in the 90s in terms of this being pushed by the right and defended by the left, it is true in the impeachment era, there was a kind of running to defend the Clintons, but if you go back and read the archives of The Nation magazine, the magazine that Joan and I appear on the masthead of, they were not defending the Clintons. And not even -- I`m not even talking about like their economic policy, like, go read Christopher Hitchens in that magazine on every scandal that happened, he was sort of all in on it.

So there was this sense even then among the left -- and you see that mirrored I think in a certain portion I think relative small Sanders supporters, that they have the same vision of them.

WALSH: I mean, I wrote a scathing piece about his partner Mark Rich for Salon back in 2001 when he did it. So, you know, there are exceptions. Overall, I really think Josh makes a good point, that the world has changed. And they are not -- she -- let`s take them out of it. I think even she needs to be more conscientious about the appearance of being too cozy with the established powers.

HAYES: Well, let me say this, though, one thing I think we shouldn`t lose sight of here is I do think the right has succeeded in producing an expectation that the obvious thing for the FBI to do in this case is indict, despite the fact that I think from a legal perspective, that would be a massively unexpected result, not just because of the politics, but actually the way the FBI would go about prosecuting this.

And Josh, I do think a large part of this is they have created this expectation that like, you know, the handcuffs are coming out any day, and if they don`t, then they get to say that it was a manipulation.

BARRO: I think that`s an expectation among certain parts of the conservative base. But I think this meeting -- I think people can look at this meeting and think it was untoward even if they think that there was probably not going to be an indictment in the case. There is still an active investigation for which she is about to be interviewed probably this weekend. It`s just not the right time to be taking a meeting that looks like you might be trying to exert influence over it, especially if you think she`s almost certainly not going to be indicted, because then this thing will at some point in the relatively near future go away.

WALSH: I agree with Chris. I think they are definitely screaming about this. They partly do think it looks -- it is bad, it looks bad. But they`re partly screaming about it so they get to scream that the fix was in, when she`s not indicted, which she will not be.

HAYES: Final thought on this, is just that this was not a secret meeting, whatever you want to say about it -- untoward, improper, dumb, boneheaded, this was public -- for all intents and purposes, there were all sorts of people around and that`s why we know about it.

Josh Barro and Joan Walsh, thanks for joining us.

WALSH: Thanks, Chris.

BARRO: Thank you.

HAYES: Coming up, reports Trump could pick his running mate before the convention, a look at the VP short list ahead.


HAYES: All this week, we planned to bring you a series of reports on climb change in America and possible solutions to it. But tonight, the second time this week, a terrible news event took precedent. On Tuesday, it was the attack on the airport in Istanbul, Turkey. Tonight, it`s the attack on a popular restaurant in Dhaka, Bangladesh, and the hostage situation that continues to unfold there.

The fact that not one but two massive news events this week supplanted our planned series, highlights one of the ongoing difficulties in reporting in climate change. It is not happening in realtime in the same way. It is not immediately and instantly horrifying like the atrocities that have taken place in Turkey and Bangladesh, but it remains one of the most significant news stories of our lifetime, if not the most significant.

Tonight, we`re going to bring you an exclusive interview with Secretary of State John Kerry on U.S. efforts to combat climate change. We`ll look at the battle for solar power in one of the sunniest states in the country -- Nevada.

We`ll bring you those stories next week instead.


HAYES: It is daybreak in Bangladesh. And we are nine hours into the hostage situation there where a group of attackers stormed a cafe in an upscale neighborhood of the capital city. The stand-off is still not over as morning arrives. Police and security officials are staked out outside the Holey Artisan Bakery where around, we believe, 40 hostages have been held captive since armed attackers stormed that cafe at around 9:20 p.m. local time, 11:20 a.m. eastern.

A senior official told NBC News that four security personnel have been killed, most of them in an incident when a hostage managed to escape, and as officers rushed forward to help, a grenade was tossed from an upper balcony.

And ISIS affiliated news agency claims ISIS wa responsible, a claim that has not been verified by MSNBC or the U.S. government.

Now, all this comes just three days after a triple suicide attack killed over 40 people at an airport in Istanbul, an attack thought to fit the ISIS profile.

And we`re continuing to monitor the hostage situation in Bangladesh. So, keep it right here.


HAYES: The New York Times reported today the Trump campaign expects to announce Mr. Trump`s running mate before the Republican convention, which kicks off in just over two weeks. NBC News reporting suggests there are now four front-runners for that job -- Tennessee Senator Bob Corker, New Jersey governor Cris Christie, Indiana governor Mike Pence, who plans to meet with Trump in New York this weekend, and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

Gingrich would seem to be a particularly bad fit, at least ideologically, since Trump has been pounding a protectionist message, opposing all sorts of trade deals, and Gingrich has long been a staunch advocate for precisely those kinds of trade deals.

He was helping to round up the GOP votes for NAFTA back in the `90s and standing beside Bill Clinton when the former president signed that trade deal into law in 1993.

But NBC News has confirmed that Gingrich is being vetted for the number two slot and he seems to be willing to say whatever it takes to get the job.

"I basically agree with Trump`s speech on trade," Gingrich said in an email to Politico today.

Joining me now, Charlie Pierce, writer at large for Esquire, Democratic political consultant Tera Dowdell who happens to be a former contestant on The Apprentice.

Charlie, I`ll start with you. What do you think of this top four list?

CHARLIE PIERCE, ESQUIRE: Well, first of all, god is not a good enough friend of mine to have Newt Gingrich on the ticket, so I don`t know that that`s going to happen.

Second of all, if the Trump people are actually vetting Chris Christie, can the people in New Jersey who are investigating subpoena those files? I think this is a legitimate question.

And third, Mike Pence is sort of the Tim Kaine case, except that Mike Pence has been on the wrong side of just about every social issue for the last two years. A federal judge just whacked a restrictive anti-choice law today, and you remember that last year he signed one of those phony religious liberty bills into law a week before the final four, and the NCAA, which is located about two blocks from his capital, went out of its mind.

So, I mean, he doesn`t have a lot to choose from there.

HAYES: Yeah, Tera, you get the sense when you look at this four -- and I`m skeptical of both Corker and Pence frankly. I think enough of those -- those two men have enough of a future in the Republican Party that they would not want to necessarily roll the dice with a Donald Trump ticket.

But that`s not true for Gingrich and Christie who are both -- both don`t have the same kind of future and seem temperamentally kind of Trump-esque, and you think that`s what Trump likes, because he likes himself a lot.

TERA DOWDELL, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, Donald Trump`s first choice is obviously Donald Trump.

HAYES: Exactly.

DOWDELL: But since he can`t do that, he`s looking for a Donald Trump-like figure and certainly Chris Christie has one trait that Donald Trump, I think, really likes. He has that man servant level of loyalty, and that`s Trump is big on that.

I don`t see Chris Christie, though, being the pick. I mean, I`d be very surprised if he picked him, because first of all, you have the Bridgegate trial, which is going to be coming up. So, certainly that will get a lot of publicity if he`s running for vice president.

On top of it, Donald Trump I think does understand that he has to repair some of the relationships and understand how D.C. works at least. And so that`s where Newt Gingrich would have, you knwo, even though it`s been quite a while, he would certainly have more expertise there.

And with respect to Chris Christie, Donald Trump has rubbed a lot of Tepublicans the wrong way, we know that. The only person who`s probably rubbed as many Republicans the wrong way is Chris Christie. Republicans in New Jersey don`t even like Chris Christie. He has a difficult time with his own Republicans in his state. And he rubbed the Republicans in congress the wrong way on many occasions, and he has no real D.C. experience.

So I just don`t -- I don`t see that. And just in terms of baggage, he has more baggage than a Trump hotel. So, I really don`t see Chris Christie being the guy. But Newt Gingrich, on the other hand, just like Donald Trump, he said, just like you said, he`s willing to say whatever, whenever, to get back into the spotlight.

ANDERSON: Well, that is certainly true. I mean, I think this -- I think watching Newt Gingrich, who, not just now, there was a whole variety of trade legislation that moved through during the 1990s that Newt Gingrich was instrumental in pushing. The idea that he comes around and says I basically agree with Donald Trump`s speech, which was a complete repudiation of the entire agenda and bipartisan agenda and consensus, frankly, in the 1990s, I mean, that strikes me as essentially just a craven and desperate ploy to remain in the running.

DOWDELL: Oh, absolutely. Absolutely.

I mean, Newt Gingrich -- remember he sat on the sofa with Nancy Pelosi, saying that we need to do something about climate change.

So he has a long track record of being of different sides, or every side of issues, but so does Donald Trump. Donald Trump has changed his positions, taken multiple positions on multiple issues multiple times. So, that is not inconsistent.

And then on top of it when you look at a Newt Gingrich, they certainly have similar predilections as well in terms of their track record with women. And so I think they have a lot in common. And the word on the street is that Donald Trump likes Newt Gingrich.

HAYES: Well, here`s the thing, Charlie, here`s the reason I think it will be Christie. My sense of Trump is that -- and in talking to people that have spent time in his inner circle, or at least reporting on it and watching this unfold in the campaign, it`s of loyalty uberalis (ph). I mean, Cory Lewandowski was viewed by almost everyone as in over his head, not very good at his job. He was abusive to people, screaming at people. He said -- there`s all sorts of rumors about the kinds of things he would say to reporters when he called them late at night.

And yet Cory Lowandowski stayed in that job for a very long time, because he was loyal. And if you look at the Trump organization, it`s basically run by his kids.

So, if you`re Donald Trump, it`s like what do you want more than anything? You want loyalty. Chris Christie in abasing himself serially has seemed to show that the most.

PIERCE: Yes, Chris Christie has turned into Alfred the Butler. I mean, he is now the Trump family retainer. And Newt Gingrich will never be that, because as we all know who go back a long way with the former speaker, Newt Gingrich is one of the most unprincipled scoundrels who`s ever walked through Washington. I mean, I think you probably have to go back to Aaron Burr to find somebody whose principles are so flexible.

HAYES: I should note the guy has never shot anyone that I know of.

PIERCE: Well, that`s one of the more principled things Aaron Burr did. But that`s neither her nor there. If I`m Donald Trump and I bring Newt Gingrich on the ticket, my second hire is a food taster.

HAYES: Right. And that`s exactly right. That is -- you would have to watch your back from day one. And I think if you`re Donald Trump you`re looking for loyalty.

My prediction, I don`t make many, but I think Christie has got the inside track at this point.

Charlie Pierce and Tera Dowdell, thanks to you both.

That is All In for this evening. I want to say a happy Canada Day to all of our friends and neighbors to the north.

PEIRCE: Thanks -- are you guys going to be at the convention?

HAYES: And also happy July Fourth.