Skip navigation

All In With Chris Hayes, Tuesday, September 9th, 2014

Read the transcript from the Tuesday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES
September 9, 2014

Guest: Angus King, David Phillips, Elizabeth Plank, John Sculley



CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST OF "ALL IN WITH CHRIS HAYES" (voice-over): Tonight,
on "All In."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. DAN COATS, (R) INDIANA REPRESENTATIVE: We are at a critical moment
facing a serious danger and now is the time to act together.

HAYES (voice-over): Congress is preparing for a vote. The President is
preparing his ISIS address and new polling shows Americans actually want
another war. Have they been misled? Then more NFL damage control.

ROGER GOODELL, NFL COMMISSIONER: We assumed that there was a video. We
asked for a video, but we were never grant that opportunity.

HAYES (voice-over): The NFL commissioner defends his actions. And, a day
after her husband was cut and suspended, we hear from Janay Rice for the
first time. Plus, one month after the death of Mike Brown, a big
announcement out of Ferguson.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: This is the iPhone 6 and this is the iPhone 6
Plus.

HAYES (voice-over): And, it is Christmas for capitalists. While everybody
swoons over Apple`s latest innovations, we will tell you about the
technology that will really change things. "All In" starts right now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES (on camera): Good evening from New York. I am Chris Hayes. The
President will address the nation on his plan to fight ISIS in a prime time
address tomorrow night, sending the message that America is back on war
footing before even delivering his message to the American people, and
telling Congressional leaders in a meeting today, he has the authority to
do it without their approval. It may not be an official declaration of
war, but a 9:00 P.M. address from the White House carries very particular
weight.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE INTERVIEWER: It is rare for him to seek in prime-time,
so I am wondering why that he chose to do it that way?

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Well, it means that the
President believes this is a high national security priority.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: According to a new polling from NBC News and Wall Street Journal,
most of the American public is ready to re-engage; with 61 percent saying
it is in our national interest to take military action against ISIS in Iraq
and Syria. We will get to whether or not that is justified in just a
little bit.

In Congress, lawmakers seem to be taking it for granted we are going to
war. They are not debating whether U.S. actually should step up its
military campaign against ISIS. They are debating whether or not Congress
should take a vote to authorize it. It is bringing together some pretty
strange bedfellows on Capital Hill.

Rand Paul who seems to have shed his misgivings about U.S. interventions as
in abroad saying, "If he were President, he would, quote, `seek
Congressional authorization to destroy ISIS military`." He is joined by
the reliable military intervention advocate John McCain, who is calling on
the President to come to Congress for authorization, as well.

On the other side of the debate is McCain`s customary ally, Lindsey Graham,
taking the somewhat unusual position as a sitting U.S. Senator that the
President should not consult him and his colleagues in Congress on whether
to launch a new military campaign. And, Graham is not alone. He is joined
by among others, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein and Carl Levin,
influential chairs of the senate intelligence and armed services
committees.

In a spectacular moment of rare Congressional candor, GOP Congressman Jack
Kingston, who himself supports taking a vote, articulated exactly why so
many lawmakers do not want to do so. Quote, "A lot of people would like to
stay on the sideline and say just bomb the place and tell us about it
later. It is an election year." A lot of democrats do not know how to
play in their party. Republicans do not want to change anything. We want
the pat run now. We condemn it if it goes bad. Praise it if it goes well
and asked him what took him so long.

In the meeting in the oval office today, President Obama told Congressional
leaders, he has the authority he needs to pursue his strategy against ISIS.
According to the White House, although the President did reportedly ask for
approval from Congress to train the Syrian opposition. The administration
has talked broadly about getting, quote, "Buy-in" from the Congress for the
anti-ISIS campaign. Buy-in, of course, a term that does not appear
anywhere in the U.S. constitution and whose actual meaning has proof hard
to pin down.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JONATHAN KARL, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: I do not know what Buy-in. I
covered Congress for years. I do not know what you mean by saying
Congressional buy-in. Buy-in seems to me would imply a vote of some kind,
either a vote on appropriations or authorization or a sense of a Congress
resolution, but some kind of a vote. Is that what you want from Congress?
A vote on this? Yes or no?

EARNEST: Well, again, if you want to get some insight into the President`s
current thinking about this, then I would refer to the answer that he gave
to Chuck in the interview 48 hours ago.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: White House is asking Congress to approve a $5 billion counter
terrorism fund proposed earlier this year that could be used to pay for
operations against ISIS.

Joining me now, Senator Angus King, independent from Maine. Senator, do
you agree with the White House that they have the authority to strike? It
appears, even inside Syria, without Congressional authorization?

SEN. ANGUS KING (I), MAINE: Well, I think you put your finger on the real
question is, I do not know what they are planning to do. And, that is
really the key to the answer to the question of what kind of authority. If
it is a continuation of air strikes within Iraq to defends Americans, to
prevent humanitarian crisis. That is one thing. Probably, do have the
authority for that.

If you are talking about destroying Syria, which by the way if you are
going to degrade and destroy ISIS, you almost have to, that is a whole
different deal. And, I tend to agree with the Congressman that you quoted
that it is too easy for Congress to stand on the sidelines and say, "Go
ahead, Mr. President" without voting, without taking a position and then
criticizing either way afterwards.

We are pretty good at second guessing around here. I think there is a
constitutional responsibility. There is this pesky thing called the
constitution, which says that the Congress has the power to declare a war.
The President is the commander in chief.

Now, there is a lot of sort of grey area between those two, but if you are
talking about bombing raids in a different country, if you are talking
about significant coalition actions, I think Congress has a responsibility
to step up and engaged on this question.

HAYES: Senator, since you are one of the few independence in Congress.
You are neither democrat nor republican. I am going to ask for some real
talk here. If there was a secret ballot in the house and senate, or just a
secret ballot in the senate on whether to have a vote or not, not having a
vote would win, would not it?

KING: I suspect you are probably right, although I have not taken any kind
of -- I do not have a poll on that question. But, I suspect you are right.

HAYES: Now, what do you actually want to see happen? Like you said, there
has been a lot of second guessing from a lot of quarters. The situation in
Iraq seems terrible with a huge amount of bad options. What do you
actually want to see happen coming out of the address tomorrow?

KING: Well, I have got sort of five things that I am looking for. The
first thing is I need to hear from the President what the American interest
is. What is our vital national interest that is at stake? What is the
risk here? And, we have to be careful. I men those beheadings of
journalists were awful and grizzly and inexcusable. But we are talking
about going onto a war footing. And, I think we need to know what is the
national interest at stake?

Number two, what are the goals? Are we degrading this organization? Are
we rendering them ineffective, which is largely what we were able to do
with Al-Qaeda, at least for a while, or are we talking about destroying
them, putting them out of business entirely, ousting them from Mosul. That
is a much bigger deal. And, so I think we need to hear what it is that we
are doing as a goal.

Third, this has got to be a coalition effort, Chris. If we do it by
ourselves, if we try to do it by ourselves, we know from recent history
that is absolutely not going to work. So, there got to be a coalition and
then we got to talk about -- I believe no combat, significant combat troops
and then finally, we have got to be sure that the government in Baghdad is
inclusive and does not create the situation where ISIS has a friendly sea
to swim in up there.

HAYES: Sen. Angus King of Maine, thank you very much.

SEN. KING: Thank you.

HAYES: A telling summation of what might motivate democratic senators to
support military action against ISIS as Senator King just noted. According
to a report of David Weigel, Florida Senator Bill Nelson said, quote, "All
they have to do is see the videos and then it is not a hard vote.

If the nation seems ready to go to war, it appears to be because of those
two horrific videos of Americans being brutally murdered. In the NBC
News/Wall Street Journal poll, 94 percent say they follow at least news
coverage of the beheading. That is an astoundingly high proportion. It
may explain the recent insurgent support for the U.S. air campaign against
ISIS.

According to another poll, spiking from 45 percent in June to 71 percent
now. But in the public`s mind in the coverage of ISIS, there are a number
of different considerations that have run together. First, there is no
debate over whether ISIS has committed murder or war crimes, as we they
have advertized doing that and we have the tape.

There is significant debate about the strategic threat ISIS poses to
stability in the Middle East, their strength, their ability to hold
territory and exploit sectarian fault lines and crucially, the efficacy of
American military intervention to address those concerns. And, finally,
there seems to be a broad consensus within the U.S. security establishment.
ISIS does not pose an immediate threat to regular Americans leading their
daily lives here in the U.S.

The FBI and Department of Homeland Security say, there are no specific or
credible terror threats to the U.S. Homeland from the group. While the
director of the National Counterterrorism Center said last week, ISIS is
quote, "Not Al-Qaeda pre9/11." Now, that is a very different assessment,
the one made by the public in the new NBC poll with almost half saying, we
are less safe now than we were before the September 11 attacks.

Joining me now, David Phillips, Former Senior Advisor of the United Nation
Secretary and State Department, now in Columbia University. The gap that
has opened up between the assessment of, let us say, the National
Counterterrorism Center and the American public, strikes me as a troubling
one if understanding because it seems that in some perverse way, the ISIS
propaganda meant to terrorize the American public has been incredibly
effective.

DAVID PHILLIPS, FMR. UN SR. ADVISOR: When the boy next door gets his head
chopped off and everybody sees it and is talking about it, that gives
compelling cause for politicians and the public at large to get involved.
The debate that is happening in Washington, the importance of having a
strategy, setting goals and developing a vision for Iraq and Syria is all a
by-product of what we have seen as a result of ISIS personalizing its
attacks.

HAYES: Right. But, the question, though, is given the salience of those
two brutal murders and the fact that they were done in this highly, you
know, sort of ostentatious way and it was on video and everyone ran that
video, we did not run the whole thing, but everyone ran chunks of it.

Does that necessarily -- that is a distinct issue from the threat ISIS
poses to Americans here in the U.S. And, also distinct issue about whether
U.S. Military intervention to be effective, right?

PHILLIPS: So, the beheadings were not an isolated incident.

HAYES: Right.

PHILLIPS: They massacred thousands of Christians in Mosul.

HAYES: Yes.

PHILLIPS: When they went into Sinjar, they told the Yazidis, either
convert, pay attacks or we will kill you. So, there is a pattern of
genocide. What we have developed in response to that is a way of combating
ISIS, using air power. No U.S. troops on the ground. The point of the
sphere are the Iraqi Peshmerga and the Iraqi army.

HAYES: Right. But, why should we be confident? Everyone says that air
strikes will not be enough. That seems to be a sort of universal -- not
universal but by a number of different sectors, from different analysts,
from different parts of the region and in the U.S., air strikes are not
going to be enough, right?

That there is going to have to be ground troops, you say, Iraqi or
Peshmerga. But the question is what gives us confidence that those forces
are going to be any better equipped to do things now than they were three
months ago.

PHILLIPS: Three months ago, they did not have any weapons. There was no
money in Iraqi Kurdistan because Baghdad stopped paying its obligation to
release funds from the national oil Income. The Iraqi Kurds have shown
that they are committed and capable. And, when they are well equipped,
they are capable of not only stopping ISIS, but preventing the genocide and
ruling that territory.

HAYES: So, what does winning look like?

PHILLIPS: Winning involves killing ISIS leaders, removing ISIS from the
theater in Iraq.

HAYES: Removing ISIS from the theater, what does that mean?

PHILLIPS: It means using American air power to destroy the artillery and
the APCs and the other equipment that they seized from the Iraqi army.

HAYES: And, what do you think is the timeline for achieving that?

PHILLIPS: That timeline has already started. This big debate about
Congressional resolution should have occurred previously. We are already
fighting ISIS.

HAYES: Yes.

PHILLIPS: We had 145 air strikes in the past month. How long will it
take? If our goal is to degrade ISIS, we can do that in short order. If
we want to decapitate its leadership and destroy the organization, that is
going to take longer. It will also require the U.S. to launch strikes
across the border in Syria.

HAYES: In Syria, right. David Phillips, thank you very much.

PHILLIPS: Thank you.

HAYES: NFL`s commissioner spoke tonight for the first time since Baltimore
Ravens Player, Ray Rice, was fired from the team and suspended from the
National Football League. We will bring you those remarks, next.

And, this is a live shot of Ferguson, Missouri where that city`s council is
meeting for the first time since the death of Michael Brown. Major changes
in how that town conducts itself from being announced tonight, MSNBC.COM`s
Trymaine Lee in Ferguson at that meeting. He will join me live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: That cringes news moment last night, which happened during ESPN`s
Monday night football broadcast pretty much sums up the spirit of the NFL`s
response to the Ray Rice controversy. The league seems to have been trying
to contain the viral storm and isolate the scandal, so it will not tarnish
the thing that they are selling for billions of dollars, the football
games. Tonight, for the first time since Ray Rice`s termination from the
Baltimore Ravens and his indefinite suspension from the NFL, at least
commissioner Roger Goodell spoke.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROGER GOODELL, NFL COMMISSIONER: We had not seen any videotape of what
occurred in the elevator. We assumed that there was a video. We asked for
a video, but we were never granted that opportunity.

NORAH O`DONNELL, CBS CO-HOST OF "THIS MORNING": So, did anyone in the NFL
see the second video tape before Monday?

GOODELL: No.

O`DONNELL: No one in the NFL?

GOODELL: No one in the NFL to my knowledge. And, I asked that same
question and the answer to that is no.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: The NFL is doubling down on its assertion that it did not see the
graphic video from inside a hotel elevator showing Ray Rice punching his
then-fianc‚e, Janay Pamer until yesterday morning saying in a statement,
quote, "We requested from law enforcement any and all information about the
incident including any video that may exist. We spoke to members of the
New Jersey State Police. We reach out multiple times the Atlantic City
Police Department and the Atlantic County Prosecutor`s office. That video
was not made available to us and no one in our office saw it until
yesterday."

It should be noted the reporting indicates the NFL did know more or less
what happened in that elevator, new video or no. After all, `The New York
Times" correctly know this week, not long after the assault, the police
investigated and determined that Rice had knocked out punk. Today, Nike
terminated Ray Rice`s endorsement contract simply saying, Ray Rice is no
longer a Nike athlete.

We also heard from Ray Rice, himself, in a statement ESPN, he said, in
part, "I have to be strong for my wife. She is so strong. We are in good
spirits. We have a lot of people praying for us. We will continue to
support each other." That is most significantly.

Janay Rice has spoken out, posting on Instagram a statement, which reads in
part, "No one knows the pain the media and unwanted opinions from the
public has caused my family. To make us relive a moment in our lives that
we regret everyday is a horrible thing to take something away from the man
I love that he has worked for all his life just to gain ratings is
horrific. This is our life. What do not you all get? If your intentions
were to hurt us, embarrass us, make us feel alone, take all happiness away,
you have succeeded on so many levels."

This has been a teachable moment about domestic violence in America. It is
also about a lot of women, as much of it directed at Janay Rice. People
judged her for the decision she has made in the wake of the incident.
Alongside of all of that anecdotes, some amazing hash tags have emerged on
Twitter, #whyistayed, #whyIleft with women talking about their own
experiences, starting something of a national dialogue on domestic
violence. What is clear is that engaging in violence against someone you
love is morally inexcusable and wrong. And, everything else around this
issue is complicated.

Joining me now is Elizabeth Plank, Senior Editor of MIC.COM, MSNBC
Contributor, Goldie Taylor. She is Managing Editor at FaultLines JPS. I
think that there is -- that statement from Janay Rice today hit me pretty
hard, because I played the video last night and I am here covering this and
there is the sense in which of all the people who have the biggest right to
tell everyone to shut the hell up and go away, it is her. And, at the
center of all of this is her and at the center of all of this is someone
that no one is really looking out for in some weird way. I feel like it.

ELIZABETH PLANK, MIK.COM SENIOR EDITOR: Well, I think Janay Rice`s life
started becoming a nightmare. Not when the media started criticizing
domestic violence, but when Ray Rice decided to knock her unconscious in an
elevator. I do not think the problem is the media or that the NFL has
finally taken domestic violence seriously that we are talking about. I
think that is very good.

So, I think it definitely is a little bit worrying to see her being more
concerned about his livelihood than her own. But, at the same time, we
should not be blaming her. We should not be judging her for that, because
for a lot of survivors, their livelihood is connected to the livelihood of
their abuser, too.

HAYES: Right. Goldie, I think this is just a key thing because there is a
sense even if people are not saying it and they are saying, of course, what
he did is monstrous when I see the video. And, there is a sense of like,
"Well, she married him the next day." You hear it. You hear people sort
of like giving her like -- you see people giving her sigh nigh. And, I
just want like everyone in America to step off Janay Rice. Whatever
commentary you are going to give, just step off. That is my feeling.

GOLDIE TAYLOR, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: I think my word for on Twitter scram.

HAYES: Right.

TAYLOR: And, I think I have used that word an awful lot over the last
several days. We do not have the right to litigate what is happening
inside their relationship. We do not have the right to cash more versions
on her. She is the victim in this situation. What we do have the right to
do is to hold public, you know, institutions accountable.

HAYES: That is right.

TAYLOR: So, that they can serve people like Janay Rice and all women like
her and I, who seek to have our voice heard in this justice system or in
this injustice system as it were. She was knocked out cold in an elevator.
Certainly, the NFL and the prosecutor there in New Jersey knew that when
they issued their initial sanctions and diversionary programs.

They knew that would out seen anymore of the video. The fact that video is
out today, reaffirms what many of us said at the very start of this. A
two-game suspension and a diversionary program simply were not enough for
whatever happened inside that elevator.

But, I will go back here and say this. We would not have needed to see
that tape if Ray Rice had told the truth up front, if he had not tried to
blame his wife for instigating or initiating or provoking this incident.
We would not be here today if Ray Rice had told the truth.

PLANK: And her treatment in this entire or deal has been horrendous. I
mean even at this press conference, that was so awkward and you felt like
she was forced to go there. He did not really apologize to her. He
literally said I am apologizing to everyone who is affected by this
situation that me and my wife were in like they were at the bunk or
something like that. So, he never really took responsibility, either.

HAYES: So, there are two things that I think come across in people`s
reaction to this. One is the idea of the abuser as having a moment of
losing their cool, right? You see this in the people like anger management
when the facts are in abusive relationship. Abuses often like minutely
controlled by the abuser applied with tremendous forethought.

And, then the other part of it is that a woman who stays in a relationship
like this is captive of Stockholm Syndrome or necessarily irrational. And,
I got to say, like a I have a lot of people close to me, who worked with
domestic violence victims in their lives, where people stay for all kinds
of reasons. Some of them are rational. Some of them are that people may
cost benefit calculations that are their own to make. And, that is nowhere
to be found in the way that we are talking about this.

PLANK: Exactly, and even if you look at the data, actually, it shows that
it is often the smart decision is to stay.

HAYES: Because leaving can be the most dangerous moment.

TAYLOR: Staying will save your life.

HAYES: Right.

PLANK: It is the most dangerous moment in a woman who has abused life.
So, if you look at even, you know, woman of color, who are desperately
affected by this problem, only make up 8 percent of the population and yet
make up 1/5 of all homicide partner victim. And, actually half of those
women were killed when they tried to leave their abuser.

TAYLOR: That is right.

PLANK: So, often, it is not just a complicated decision, it is a smart
decision, unfortunately.

HAYES: Goldie.

TAYLOR: Yes. I think that is exactly right. You know, on balance women
attempt to leave at least seven times before they are able to successfully
escape that kind of cycle. But, we are dealing with a complexity of issues
and people do make their own sort of cost-benefit analysis as to whether
they stay or go.

Someone said to me on Twitter that, "Well, she must have been trapped by
the lifestyle." What do you say to people living in poverty who stay?
What do you say to a people who faces eviction if they continue to report
domestic violence. What do you say to those people who lose a minimum wage
jobs? Are they then too trapped by the lifestyle? We do not know what is
happening inside that relationship day-to-day. We do not know what kind of
healing process is occurring.

But what our focus has to be, it has to be on those public institutions,
like the NFL, because certainly they are supported by us and our tax
dollars and all of those, you know, billion dollars being built across this
country. They really belong to us. And they are accountable to us. And,
I think that is where our argument has got to lie, you know? And we have
got to support Janay in any way we can.

HAYES: Three players in the NFL right now, who have been arrested and
charged with domestic violence who are just there, playing. Elizabeth
Plank and Goldie Taylor, thank you both. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: Parentless serves are a flank particularly in the Midwest where the
CDC has confirmed a number of cases of a virus that is are attacking the
respiratory systems of children. There is no marquee name for this bug,
which known as Enterovirus D68, a rare form of the virus normally
associated with a common cold.

CDC has confirmed 19 cases in Missouri, 11 cases in Chicago. And,
according to New York Times, roughly 1,400 people with severe respiratory
symptoms from infants to 21 year olds have also been treated since late
August at Children`s Hospital, Colorado. Three quarters of the 25 samples
the hospital sent the CBC have tested positive for the virus.

If, like me, you have young children constantly rolling around the germ-
infested world of playgrounds and day cares, this is enough to give you
pause. And, if you are certain kind of germaphobe, it is certainly does
not help that this news comes on the hills of the latest Ebola outbreak.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER (1): The worse Ebola outbreak in history has
killed more than 1,500 people in Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia and Nigeria.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER (2): U.S. College Campuses now on the alert
over the deadly Ebola outbreak in Africa.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LOU DOBBS, FBN ANCHOR: The White House announcing that the U.S. Military
will be sending aid to West Africa to combat the deadly Ebola out break.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: There has been a lot of news recently about Ebola, largely because
it is terrifying and horrible and deadly. And, according to the Center for
Disease Control, as of August 31st, there have been more than 1,800
suspected deaths. Even though this is the largest outbreak in the history
of the world, the director of the CDC said that, quote, "The window is
closing on the effort to contain Ebola."

Still, importantly, CDC says the outbreak does not pose a significant risk
to the U.S., which is an important to keep in mind since we have seen so
much media attention paid to the small number of Americans, who contracted
the disease. Heart disease and depression are much, much, much larger
threats to your loved ones than Ebola, or even this scary new Enterovirus
outbreak.

I have become convinced that generally in the world there are the types of
people. There are the kind of people who when they hear about something
bad happening in the world or scary or terrible, their first thought is
that is going to happen to me. And the people I love. And, then there are
the kind of people whose first thought is, that is never going to happen to
me or the people I love. We will kind of fall somewhere along the
spectrum. I fully admit my instinct is pretty much always a ladder.

I mean if ISIS were to take over Staten Island, I think my first thought
would be, "Well, they are never going to make it to Brooklyn, so me and my
family are good." The point here is that those instincts we have about how
we gauge threats when they are aggregated together into a political union
and run through the new cycle, which tends to excel at telling people about
threats, those have real significant policy consequences about how we shape
the risks that we face and the responses to them.

And, a lot of time, there is a massive mismatch between which really a
threat, something we should be spending a significant amount of resources
on and what is not a threat, something we should be spending a significant
amount of resources on. Our brains have evolved over time to consider the
threats we can see, and we have all seen the images coming through the
movies about Ebola-like outbreaks. We can close our eyes right now and see
the planes hitting the towers 13 years later like it was yesterday.

We have all seen the horrific, gruesome and the extremely visually
affecting spectacle of the murder of two American Journalists. And, you
see the effects of that in the polling data with the American concern over
the ISIS threat. 61 percent of Americans think it is in our national
interest to take military action against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

The fact the matter is, what is often the case is at the stuff that is most
threatening to us, a random drunk driver on the road late at night with a
carbon molecules floating around my head in concentrations not seen in at
least 800,000 years are not the easiest images to call the mind. And,
those of us in the world of cable news need to figure out how to deal with
them.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: It has become one of our great consumer rituals. Christmas for
capitalism, the spectacle of Apple dramatically unveiling its new products
in front of an auditorium packed with tech journalist breathlessly covering
every words spoken by current Apple CEO/Profit, Tim Cook.

Today, the company showed off a pair of new and improved iPhones, the
iPhone 6 and 6+, which are larger and thinner than past modes and seemed to
be response to the success of the Samsung Galaxy. Apple also unveiled its
first-ever smart watch. It is a kind of back-to-the future play, which
runs apps and works in conjunction with the iPhone and with a feature that
is either creepy, sweep, on somehow both allows users to share their
heartbeats with another Apple watch wearer.

The most of the cover today has been on these new devices. The most
potentially revolutionary announcement flew under the radar. It is called
Apple Pay. And, it is Apple`s play to have your smart phone replace your
wallet.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TIM COOK, APPLE CEO: I would like to show you just how fast and just how
easy it is.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE SPEAKER: OK, your total is $23.78.

COOK: That is it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: A few applause and laughter. Using your smart phone to quickly
make purchases is not a new idea, of course PayPal and Google are already
in the game. And, just a few days ago, a mobile payment service built by
the major phone carriers changed its name to soft card because its old
name, ISIS, had become a branding disaster.

But, Apple Pay, which works with iPhone and Apples new smart watch has a
chance to succeed in achieving the kind of skill that so far has been
elusive to other competitors. Apple`s partnered with a major credit card
companies and is agreement with Macey`s, Walgreens, McDonalds, Subway and
other major retailers to set up Apple Pay in their stores.

It works by an existing technology called near field communications, which
allows devices to swap data, whether photos or payment info, just by
tapping them together. Of course, it has only been a week and a half since
Apple had to deal with the fallout from someone that is most high profile
customers, most private moments had been compromised.

And, the company today seems acutely aware of concerns about effectively
handing over your wallet. Apple emphasized that the merchant does not get
your credit card number when you use Apple Pay, instead Apple Pay generates
a one-time payment number and security code for every purchase.

You know, the truly big money in tech goes to whoever manages to first gain
sufficient scale in a market that is in natural monopoly. Just ask
Microsoft`s Bill Gates and Facebook`s Mark Zuckerberg. Mobile payment is
poised as Apple CEO, Tim Cook put it today to forever change the way all
this buy things and Apple would like to be the ones controlling all of
that.

Joining me now, John Sculley, former CEO of Apple and author of Moonshot.
So John, why has this not worked already? A lot of people working on this
problem and why does Apple have a good shot of doing what others have
failed to do?

JOHN SCULLEY, FMR APPLE CEO: Well, first of all, this is a long game for
Apple. This is not an easy thick to start, because there is so many pieces
that have to be built, to built out a system. Think of it this way. When
we saw the build out of the mobile telephone system, it required pay
stations and cell towers and a whole infrastructure to be built.

Same thing is going to have to happen here. There are about 200,000
retailers that are going to be ready in October to be able to use Apple
Pay. But, there are probably 2 million retailers across the United States.
And, most of them have the old-fashioned card reader. They do not have
near field communications yet. So, Apple is the logical company to do this
and is one that is in a poise position to do it successfully because it has
figured out a lot of the pieces and has taken sometime to build them up.

HAYES: What is in it for the winner here of this, for a business sense,
right? I understand why debit cards are lucrative because there is a
swipe-feat battle and people -- everyone who is involved in the payment
system is basically taking a few sense here, a few sense there and pretty
sure you are talking about billions of dollars. Is that same business
proposition here?

SCULLEY: Well, here is the way I think of it. We are in the early days of
the big data revolution. And, what that means is we are getting billions
of sensory devices. Apple is putting a lot more sensors into their smart
phones and to their iWatch. We are going to be able to capture trillions
of bytes of data in real time and it is going to be processed.

And, you know what that is doing? It is shifting the balance of power from
producers to customers. Customers are suddenly getting smarter. They are
paying more attention to what other customers say than what the big brands
do.

HAYES: Well, let me say this. It is producing the balance -- mainly, it
is shifting the balance from producers to customers. It is also creating a
massive point of leverage and value for people who control that data.

SCULLEY: Exactly.

HAYES: Let us be clear.

SCULLEY: You have ---

HAYES: Who are not the customers.

SCULLEY: You hit the nail in the head. And, think about how you control
that. The way you control it is you build ecosystem. And, first is
Alibaba is a company that is going to public next week.

HAYES: Yes. It is China`s Amazon.

SCULLEY: It is China`s Amazon. It controls 80 percent of all E-commerce
in China. It is building an incredible ecosystem. And, Apple has an
ecosystem for certain kinds of products. It is now wanting to do this in
mobile.

HAYES: And, a payment system is a classic example of what an economist
called a network effect.

SCULLEY: Yes. Right.

HAYES: -- which the network grows more valuable with the addition of each
note, which is what we saw with Microsoft incompatible with an OS. The
more people that used it, the more valuable the network. We saw it with
Facebook. The more people that are on Facebook, the more valuable Facebook
is. And, that seems to be an increasing returns area of the payment
system.

SCULLEY: Now, you spot on that. Think of Amazon. So, why does Amazon
introduced a smart phone. It does not need to be in the phone business,
because it wants to keep people inside of its ecosystem.

HAYES: That is right.

SCULLEY: And, so Apple wants to build its ecosystem and expand and what
better way to do that than to have a mobile payment system. So, it is
going to take a few years to build this thing out fully, to touch 2 million
retailers and to be able to get everybody comfortable with it, but it is
going to be really, really big. It may be a creative elite that Apple has
been looking for, for sometime.

HAYES: There is a profound question here about sort of nature of Apple as
a company and also just the nature of modern economy, which is that it
started as a hardware company. It sort of became a hardware and a software
company and then it became a phone company. And, it has become kind of a
digital appliance company. And, if it loses this payment system, it almost
becomes, you know what is Apple as a company if it is running a huge
payment system?

SCULLEY: Well, the whole nature of being in high-tech is that you are
constantly having to reinvent yourself. But, Apple is always held straight
to some really keep principles that have been strong for it. One is that
it believes in no compromise in the user experience.

HAYES: Right.

SCULLEY: And, Apple has always been able to give the best user experience.
It believes the technology ought to be beautiful or ought to be really
simple. Here is an example of trying to make it really simple. It is
simple for the customer, Tim Cook says, "Hey, look at this. It is as
simple as that." But, there is a whole complex system behind it to make it
work that well.

HAYES: The payment system is good example Gmail and other, we live in this
world -- tech world in which there is all these different natural
monopolies where end-users experience is made better by having one person
you go to. And, yet, that is at odds with sort of competitive nature of
capitalism producing the best returns. John Sculley, thank you.

A big announcement tonight of changes coming to Ferguson. MSNBC.COM
Trymaine Lee will join us live from the first city council meeting since
the protest. You are looking at a live shot right now. Stick around.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: Tonight, what some are calling a new deal for Ferguson. And, this
hour, we are watching the first Ferguson City Council Meeting since the
protests erupted in response to the death of 18-year-old Michael Brown last
month, shot by police officer, Darren Wilson.

Arrests began in response to the shooting of Michael Brown and the media
coverage that followed quickly expanded to address not only the
relationship between African-Americans and the police, but the entire
weight of Ferguson Municipality structure. Starting with revelations at
Ferguson was in large running on fines and fees that affect mostly poor and
African-American residents. And, when people could not afford the fines
associated with tickets, warrants and more fines followed.

In fact, last year, there were more arrest warrants issued than there are
people in Ferguson. I will say that again. There were more arrest
warrants issued in Ferguson last year than there are people living in
Ferguson. It comes out to three warrants per household according to report
from the legal advocacy group, the Arch City Defenders. And, even in the
county where there are lots and lots of warrants handed out, Ferguson is a
dramatic outlier.

Last year, Ferguson issued twice as many warrants for thousand people as a
nearby city of Jennings, St. Ann and Hazelwood, all within St. Louis
County. Number of warrants issued by St. Louis, Kansas City, Springfield
and Columbia paled in comparison. And, all the warrants Ferguson issued
equal money. The city`s most recent budget reads, quote, "Due to a more
concentrated focus on traffic enforcement, municipal court revenues have
risen about 44 percent since 2011.

Today, 20 percent of the city`s budget comes from fines. There is a lot of
anger in Ferguson about this set of facts. And, tonight, city council
announced what appeared at first glance to be significant reforms to attack
the structural problems behind them. Joining me now, MNBC.COM National
Reporter, Trymaine Lee, who is at the city council meeting. What is it
like inside there?

TRYMAINE LEE, MSNBC.COM NATIONAL REPORTER: I think the tone was set from
the very beginning, following the pledge of allegiance, the justice for all
part. There was this rumble from the crowd that said, "Justice for all."
And, the city council tried to go through Monday in business. That city
council go through this kinds of meetings.

People, again, were fired up and cannot take it anymore. And, then they
got to the three ordinances that kind of strike some of the fees that are
associated with the warrants and how they will be used, and people
applauded. But, then when it got to the question answer portion of the
meeting, people were again rallied up.

They spoke of how blinker tickets or broken tail lights ended up with folks
with mounted on their shoulders, unable to get jobs because of the warrants
and arrests. And, so the tone inside is pretty intense as people are still
demanding answers that they are strictly not getting from the city council.

HAYES: So, let us talk about the three ordinances. So, the city council
has come together with three ordinances, which they are putting forward.
They say to address some of these issues. What are they? What would they
do?

LEE: OK. One is that in capped the use of the income generated from these
warrants, fines and fees, the 15 percent. And, only 15 percent can go to
the general fund. Understands now, all of that money you mentioned is the
second leading income source for the city generated from the warrants,
fines and fees.

It will be capped at 15 percent. There are a number of fines and fees
associated with missing court dates. And, all the fines associated with
not paying your warrants one time. And, so there will be -- as part of
this ordinance, there will be a program for folks who cannot afford, who
are trying making those payments, they will be able to defer payments or
make optional payment plans. So, that is kind of the gist of it.

HAYES: So, the idea here is to kind of get rid of some of the -- this kind
of handcuffs that people are put in around, you know, a traffic ticket
becomes a warrant, which becomes fines, which becomes another more and
become more fines.

The scene inside that room, you know, you and I saw what looks like a very
raw, very intense political awakening in a city that is, you know, 66
percent African-American in which of the city council is overly white. Do
you feel tonight like this is a new chapter in the politics of that town?

LEE: Oh, certainly, because when you hear the speakers talk, one after
another say, "You know, when are we going to remove the city council? When
are we going to get 100 percent voter participation? When are we going to
unite as a community, as a black community and make our voices heard? When
are we going to find candidates to stand up and replace the current
administration?

They pointed out again over and over that all the social institutions are
run and employed by white people. Going through the police department,
majority white police department. And, so people in the tone are still
very angry and very frustrated. But the message now is, when are we going
to step up and take some action to what is going on right now?

HAYES: Trymaine Lee in Ferguson tonight. Thank you so much.

LEE: Thank you.

HAYES: All right. Here is your question. What are the worst governments
in America? The answer? Next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: You hear it over and over again from politicians particularly on
the right. Big government is bad. Small local government is good. And,
Paul when he address the policing in response in Ferguson writing, quote,
"Not surprisingly, big government has been at the heart of the problem."

There is no smaller government more close to its constituents than the
local municipal government. In Ferguson, we saw a local government that
was not accountable to its residents and was simply not equipped to deal
with the problems inside its municipal borders. A part of that has to do
with accountability.

In last year`s municipal election in Ferguson, just over 12 percent of
eligible voters cast ballots and just 6 percent of African-American
residents voted. Ferguson is not unique in that respect. It turn out in
local election is famously low and accountability is often hard to come by.

A part of the reason why Jonathan Chait wrote in New York Magazine, quote,
"The myth of localism is rooted deep in our political psyche, left and
right alike, you small and local as terms of approbation, big and
bureaucratic as terms of abuse, none of us is equipped to see the
government that actually oppresses us is that which is closest to us."

Joining me now, MSNBC Contributor, Brian Murphy, Assistant Professor of
U.S. Political History at Baruch College, former Managing Editor at
PoliticsNJ.com. And, I want to talk to you because you have perspective as
an American historian. You also cover like hyper local politics like, what
the sheriff in country up to?

BRIAN MURPHY, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Right.

HAYES: And, the fact is often terrible stuff.

MURPHY: That is right.

HAYES: Not the sheriff in that county who I have known nothing about, but
as a general example.

MURPHY: Yes. I mean you get this -- I mean on one level, right? It is
difficult. There is so many different levels of government that it becomes
difficult for people to monitor, right?

HAYES: Yes.

MURPHY: And, Jonathan points out in the piece, "People just an abusing
party."

HAYES: As a proxy.

MURPHY: You have no information so you just vote on your party. And,
there is not much monitoring. Media does not tend to cover it. So, like
in Jersey, there are hundreds of municipalities, add in boards and
commissions and county governments and school boards and you have got
thousands of bodies.

HAYES: And, let us just be clear like a lot of those people are not
elected through anything like what we would really call a genuine
democratic process.

MURPHY: Or they are not elected at all.

HAYES: Right, or they are just not elected at all. But, even the ones who
are elected, it is like 7 percent of the people show up to vote and they
vote for the people endorsed by so and so.

MURPHY: Like the mayor in my town -- I mean no disrespect to him, but it
is the same guy who was there when I left high school. And, a lot of the -
- I mean, going back -- look at Jersey in the last year. A lot of it is
the very same people. That is a problem in and of itself. But there is
also, I think, this problem of local government. We are so used to
associating big government with problematic government that we almost do
not have a good vocabulary to talk about --

HAYES: Absolutely.

MURPHY: -- The civic problems that happen when you have an empowered local
government that is not accountable.

HAYES: Right.

MURPHY: Right.

HAYES: And, particularly because they make a lot of decisions that really
do matter for people, but it seems like a real problem even for a basic
kind of democratic theory perspective, which is it should not be the case
that the people that are saying assessing my property taxes, which if I am
a homeowner, happen to me a heck of a lot, right? My school system, my
property taxes that like, you should have a lot of citizen buy in on those
elections. But, in reality, you often do not.

MURPHY: It should be the tax hurt, right? That should be all that
matters, but we do not get that. And, in a lot of ways, that is sort of
built into the federal system. We have this sort of domineering British
Empire. We get this light government and then, what you end up getting is
a government that is in its local forum is really empowered by the national
state in very weird ways.

HAYES: Right.

MURPHY: But then the national state can pull back and just lead people to
fend for themselves, what just happened in the 19th Century with slavery
and then with segregation. Everybody, you know --

HAYES: Yes. Go look at the freedom summer documentaries. Mississippi is
essentially a country onto itself before the civil rights movements.

MURPHY: Like what would it look like if they had military personnel
carriers, right?

HAYES: Right.

MURPHY: But you do not need that to have that situation.

HAYES: That is exactly right. And, there is also a media component this.
We have seen, you know, the website you are work for, sort of Hyperlogo.
We have seen media, you know, State bureaus have emptied out. A lot of
local media emptied out. I went out to vote today in the primary New York,
and the thing I do most about -- I am a professional journalist, citizen.
I had no idea what to do with those people. None. There is an inversion.
Like if you are watching this right now, you know what the President is.
You probably know your Senators. Get down to Congress, your assembly --
things start to get a little hazy.

MURPHY: It is totally counter intuitive.

HAYES: Yes, and then it has real consequences for how those governments
run.

MURPHY: Right. It depends on if you have a place where there is a big
media market. People are going to behave differently. If they are not, or
you are in Jersey where you are between New York and Philadelphia --

HAYES: Exactly. And, no one is showing up to the city council meetings.

MURPHY: Right.

HAYES: You can get away with a lot. Brian Murphy, thank you very much.

MURPHY: Thanks a lot Chris.

HAYES: That is ALL IN for this evening. "THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW" starts
right now. Good evening, Rachel.




THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
BE UPDATED.
END

<Copy: Content and programming copyright 2014 NBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Copyright 2014 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>






Sponsored links

Resource guide