Skip navigation

All In With Chris Hayes, Tuesday, September 16th, 2014

Read the transcript from the Tuesday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES
September 16, 2014

Guest: Rajiv Chandrasekaran; Michael Schmidt, Sen. Chris Coons, Jon
Swaine, Tara Dowdell, Mike Pesca

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

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

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHUCK HAGEL, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: They murdered two
Americans over the last couple of weeks. I would say that is a pretty
imminent threat.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES (voice-over): The Pentagon leaves open the possibility of deploying
American combat troops against ISIS.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN. MARTIN E. DEMPSEY, CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: If there
are threats to the United States, then I, of course, would go back to the
President and make a recommendation that may include the use of U.S.
Military ground forces.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES (voice-over): This as the President sends thousands of troops to
West Africa to help in the fight against Ebola.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRES. BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We have to
act fast. We cannot dawdle on this one.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES (voice-over): Then, the investigation into the fatal police shooting
of a young black man in Utah.

CINDY MOSS, DARREN HUNT`S AUNT: It seems impossible that while someone is
lunging at you, they are being shot in the back.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES (voice-over): Plus, the Minnesota Vikings lose their first sponsor
since the Adrian Peterson`s scandal, while advertisers start to push back
against the NFL. "All In" starts right now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HAYES (on camera): Good evening from New York. I am Chris Hayes. Calls
to send U.S. ground troops into Iraq and Syria are mounting on Capitol
Hill, reaching a crescendo in a senate hearing today on the Obama
Administration`s campaign against ISIS.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES MOUNTAIN "JIM" INHOFE, (R) OKLAHOMA SENATOR: It will take an army to
beat an army.

LINDSEY GRAHAM, (R) SOUTH CAROLINA SENATOR: Do they have the Special
Forces capabilities to go in and kill the leaders of ISIL without us being
on the ground?

KELLY ANN AYOTTE, (R) NEW HAMPSHIRE JUNIOR SENATOR: I am not confident how
this is going to happen without the assistance of our trained special
operators on the ground here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: I do not think they will have the kind of
morale boost that we would like them to have. If they do not have the
confidence and they have air support that is enhanced with embedded
soldiers.

GRAHAM: Could you envision yourself recommending to the president, if
nobody else will help us, that we go on the ground and clean these guys out
in Syria?

INHOFE: It is foolhardy for the Obama administration to tie the hands and
so firmly rule out the possibility of special controllers and special
operators on the ground.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: It was an unusually dramatic hearing before the Senate Armed
Services Committee, which are testimony from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel
and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Martin Dempsey. But, at least
one tense exchange between two senators and multiple interruptions by the
anti-war group, Code Pink.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CODE PINK GROUP: INAUDIBLE

JOHN MCCAIN, (R) ARIZONA SENATOR: I always appreciate special attention
from this group, Mr. Chairman.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE CODE PINK MEMBER: You certainly do not represent the
generation of young American, who do not want to go to war again. U.S. out
of Iraq and Syria. Shame on you Sen. McCain.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: In their push for ground troops, multiple GOP Senators pointed to a
recent report in "The Washington Post" that Pres. Obama had overruled a top
general on the question of ground troops.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ROGER WICKER, (R) MISSISSIPPI SENATOR: Now, The Washington Post
reports that Mr. Obama has rejected the recommendation of his top military
commanders that U.S. Special Operation forces be deployed to assist Iraqi
army units in fighting the rebels.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: That has been a well-worn line of attack among the President`s more
hawkish critics. Obama versus the generals, as one former Bush advisor
titled an Op-Ed appearing today. General Dempsey shut down the report but,
notably, counter to the administration line. He left the door open to
boots on the ground.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN. DEMPSEY: My view at this point is that this coalition is the
appropriate way forward. I believe that will prove true; but if it fails
to be true and if there are threats to the United States, then I, of
course, would go back to the President and make a recommendation that may
include the use of U.S. Military Ground Forces.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: The Obama Administration later sought to defuse Dempsey`s comments.
White House Press Secretary, Josh Earnest, saying, he was, quote,
"Referring to hypothetical scenario." Just this evening, the chairman`s
spokesperson released a statement, clarifying his testimony, quote, "While
we have advisors on the ground of Iraq today, the chairman does not believe
there is a military requirement for our advisors to accompany Iraqi forces
into combat."

As he said in testimony, "If we reached the point, where I believe our
advisors should accompany Iraqi troops on attacks against specific ISIL
targets, I will recommend that to the president. The context of this
discussion was focused on how our forces advised the Iraqis and was not a
discussion of employing U.S. ground combat units in Iraq."

Joining me now, Rajiv Chandrasekaran. He is a Senior Correspondent and
Associated Editor at "The Washington Post," where he wrote that exact piece
that was cited today in the testimony that I referenced earlier. And, I
will start with, what is going on here? When I see a story like that and
when I see what is happening between state, the White House And the
Pentagon, I feel like there is lots of debates happening behind the scenes
that are exploding out into the public.

RAJIV CHANDRASEKARAN, "THE WASHINGTON POST" ASSOCIATED EDITOR: That is
right. And, there is a lot of parsing going on when officials are
testifying on the hill. Look, Chris, what is going on here is that
military commanders believe that the best way to defeat ISIL or ISIS or the
Islamic State, choose your term, is to have some U.S. special operators
there on the ground to help coordinate air strikes.

But, they recognize this is a nonstarter at the White House. So, they are
presenting it as -- and they have presented it as one of the options. But,
it was not the preferred option carried out to the President by Chairman
Dempsey.

HAYES: OK. Are not they sandbagging the White House by leaking that? I
mean, this reminds me of the debate over the amount of troops that were
sent in Afghanistan early in the President`s first term when you had, I
believe Stan McChrystal, giving a speech in London while the debate was
happening, planting a flag on what the numbers should be.

CHANDRASEKARAN: Well, unlike that debate in Afghanistan, I do not think
there is a concerted effort to try to push that line from the military.
But, I think what we see is, people -- military wanting to at least give
themselves a little bit -- not necessarily wiggle room, but to insulate
themselves in case the strategy as promulgated by the President does not
play out as hope. They can say, "Well, you know, we urged something a
little bit more in one of our many options."

HAYES: Well -- and, I have to say, it does not necessarily seem like a
farfetched scenario, given the fact that as you chronicled in your
fantastic book, in your reporting in Afghanistan, we spent 13 years
attempting to degrade, destroy and dismantle a Jihadi organization militant
army called the Taliban, who are still there.

Still run parts of Afghanistan at the cost of thousands of American lives
and hundreds of billions of dollars. You know, why do we think that is --
we are going to have more success against ISIL.

CHANDRASEKARAN: Well, that is a great question, Chris. And, you know,
this whole discussion about, you know, should there be a small number of
U.S. combat advisors on the ground with these forces? It takes us away
from the much bigger questions here, right?

I mean, ultimately, this comes down to, will the Iraqis engaging political
compromise? Will they be able to rebuild their army? How do members of
this coalition come together and support of this? What is the real end-
game in Syria? These are the big questions. And, yet, we are kind of
focused on just one tiny element of this broader effort.

HAYES: And, I think the reason that element has emerged today as a kind of
sticking point is precisely because the gravity of further involvement,
this kind of sucking sound, you can feel very powerfully right now. Here
is John McCain talking about how -- not only do we have to go against ISIS,
we also got to take the fight to Assad. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MCCAIN: It seems to me that you have to neutralize Bashar al-Assad`s
air assets if you are going to protect these people that we are arming and
training and sending in to fight. For us to say that we are going to go in
and help and train and equip these people, and only to fight against ISIL.
You are not going to get many recruits to do that, General. I guarantee
you that. And, that is a fundamental fallacy in everything you are
presenting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: For his part, Bashar al-Assad promulgating this propaganda of
alliance chasing Barack Obama. Assad, of course, means lion in Arabic.
All right, so, what do you think about the kind of gravity of that?

CHANDRASEKARAN: Look, McCain, Lindsey Graham, others who have been very
hawkish on Syria, see this is a way to try to expand the campaign here.

HAYES: Yes.

CHANDRASEKARAN: And, I think what we got from the White House is that,
they are formerly drawing the line, going after ISIL. And, then, at some
point, trying to get to some sort of negotiated solution in Syria, but not
trying to turn this into, what we turn into, effectively, a two-front war
in Syria, which at this point would completely bugged down the forces you
are trying to feel against ISIL and could be the prescription to draw the
United States and other allies much more deeply into Syria, which is
something that many Americans do not necessarily want.

HAYES: Yes. Just the polling here, if you watch the senate committee
today, the hearing you would think there was a strong political push for
ground troops. Only 34 percent of Americans in the most recent polling
want air strikes and combat troops. 15 percent want no action against
ISIS. 40 percent, airstrikes only. So, there is a mismatch between that
polling data and the members of committee. Rajiv Chandrasekaran of "The
Washington Post." Thank you.

CHANDRASEKARAN: Good to talk to you, Chris.

HAYES: At the senate hearing today, Senator John McCain asked one of the
witnesses a pretty leading question about the domestic threat posed by
ISIS.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCCAIN: Are you concerned, Secretary Hagel, about our southern border? We
received testimony from our Homeland Security people that our border is
porous and the people who are now free to travel to the United States and
also either radical elements might cross our southern border to attack the
United States?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: This contention that ISIS will exploit our supposedly lacks border
security has been making a rounds in certain quarters of the media,
particularly conservative media. Popped up last week in a video by the
conservative activist, James O`Keefe, reportedly showing how easy it would
be for ISIS -- that is not a real ISIS person. That is someone in a
costume to cross the Canadian border with a bag full of Ebola, marked
Ebola. And, again, in a segment yesterday on Fox News --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GARY PAINTER, MIDLAND COUNTY, TEXAS, SHERIFF: People along the border were
the trail to these people come across have found Muslim clothing. They
have found Koran books that are laying on the side of the road or the side
of the trail.

So, we know that there are Muslims that have come across and being smuggled
into the United States. They need to bomb them. They need to take them
out. I would like for them to hit them so hard and so often that every
time they hear a propeller on a plane or a jet aircraft engine that they
urinate down both legs.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Claim persists, despite having been debunked repeatedly. Most
recently in a pretty thorough new piece in "The New York Times" that was
unusually pointed in this language. Quote, "Conservative groups and the
leading republicans have issued stark warnings like those that ISIS and
other extremists from Syria are planning to enter the country illegally
from Mexico."

The Homeland Security Department, the FBI and lawmakers, who represent
areas near the border say, there is no truth to the warnings. Joining me
now is the author of that article, Michael Schmidt, reporter for "The New
York Times." Michael, how did this idea start to gain traction?

MICHAEL SCHMIDT, "THE NEW YORK TIMES" REPORTER: Well, some conservatives
are very focused on the border. And a group called judicial watch put out
a report last week that said that there were ISIS Militants right over the
border from El Paso in Mexico preparing to launch car bomb attacks in the
United States.

Now, they put out that report, the Department of Homeland Security said
that it was not true, but local media and media across the country began to
pick it up and people began to believe that it was true.

HAYES: That is a pretty strong claim that there are ISIS militants across
the border from El Paso preparing to launch car bombs specific claim, what
is that based on?

SCHMIDT: Well, they base that on anonymous law enforcement officials that
they were quoting. Now, those law enforcement officials that they quote in
their stories said that federal officials were on a heightened state of
alert. And, a local military base had gone to a heightened state itself.

Now, the government came back. The Obama Administration came back and said
that, that was not true that there was nothing to it. But, that did not
stop it from rolling. And, as you saw yesterday on Fox News that Sheriff
from Texas said that Koran had been found at the border, that they had
found, you know, other things and that this is a huge issue. So, the story
continued.

HAYES: And, yet, just to be clear. When you reported this out, you found
no evidence that that was the case?

SCHMIDT: Well, what the Department of Homeland Security says is that, "We
have no information that shows that ISIS is planning an attack at the
southern border. What they do not say is that, yes, there are problems
with the southern border. Yes, people can get pass the southern border.
That does happen. That does happen, everyday. But, they are saying is we
have no information about an active plot coming from Mexico from ISIS
Militants.

HAYES: There was also a kind of amplification that happened, which is
interesting, which is conservative media outlets picked up the judicial
watch report. They reported it. And, then, I saw on social media that
ISIS allied or sympathetic social social medial handles were re-tweeting
the report in the kind of celebration. "Look how strong we are. Cowering
your boots, America."

SCHMIDT: Yes, in Fox, itself, had two different stories on this. Fox
Latino, had a store about a hearing last week on Capitol Hill in which they
said that the news from the hearing was that there was nothing -- there was
no plots coming from Mexico.

Now, another story from Fox news said that we had a completely different
headline and completely different take saying that officials from the
Department of Homeland Security had said at the hearing that there indeed
was a problem coming from Mexico, so it sort of gone in different
directions.

HAYES: Do you think there is any way for a story like this to die?

SCHMIDT: Well, I do not know. I mean it seems like there is an outlet
anywhere for a lot of different things. And, this certainly is the most
partisan part of the conflict that we have seen so far. As you saw on
Capitol Hill today, there is not a ton of division there about U.S.
Military action in Iraq.

But, on this issue, we clearly divides on party lines and there are
congressman on the hill including one on El Paso, who sort of dedicated
themselves to try and fact check this issue and trying to push back on what
the conservatives are saying. And, as he admitted to me, he has not been
very successful.

And, there have been a lot of stories that have come out about it. He
said, this is better work for El Paso. And, he said I was on the phone
with media from Texas after this judicial watch report came out. I tried
to convince them that this was not true; but I figured, if I did not say
anything, I did not speak up, then it was just going to go on. So, it has
been a real problem for some democrats in Texas.

HAYES: And, I should also say the last 13 years since September 11th,
there had been occasional stories of this type, sort of a kind of girl talk
mash-up of the fear about the border and the fear about terrorism being
fused together into this kind of story. It is not a new thing. Obviously,
there is a certain urgency that is taking now, but this has been something
I have seen before. Michael Schmidt, thank you so many.

The President declared war today and committed up to 3,000 American troops.
What the mission is, ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: Today was the NFL`s worst day yet. We will explain why, ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: President Obama declared war on Ebola today. And, after meeting in
the oval office of Dr. Kent Brantly, the American Aid worker, who
contracted the disease in Liberia and has now recovered. The President
traveled to the centers for disease control in Atlanta for a briefing on
the outbreak and to announce a major increase in the U.S. effort to combat
it.

United States will deploy an estimated 3,000 military personnel to assist
in training healthcare workers, build new treatment clinics and, otherwise,
try to limit the spread of Ebola in the hardest-hit nations, Guinea,
Liberia, Sierra Leone. Administration plans to spend an estimated $763
million over six months to fight the disease with the money being used to
provide home health kits, personal protective equipment, mobile labs and
other resources.

At the CBC in Atlanta today, the President stressed the prospect for a U.S.
outbreak of Ebola, which can only be contacted through bodily fluids is
extremely low. And, explained why the U.S. was acting to fighting outbreak
in West Africa, he said, quote, "Spiraling out of control."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRES. BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: If the
outbreak does got stop now, we could be looking at hundreds of thousands of
people infected with profound political and economic and security
implications for all of us.

So, this is an epidemic that is not just a threat to regional security. It
is a potential to global security if these countries breakdown, if their
economies breakdown, if people panic. That has profound effects on all of
us even if we are not directly contracting the disease.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: More than 2,400 people are known to have died from Ebola so far.
And, the actual death toll is believed to be much higher. The World Health
Organization today warned that instances of the disease are going from a
linear to exponential. That is a classic exponential curb you see there
from this chart on Ebola cases in Liberia between March and August.

An exponential growth is a terrifying thing. Researchers say that if
recent trends continue, think about this. There could be as many as
277,000 new Ebola cases by the end of 2014, about 56 times as many cases as
there are now. WHO warned today the crisis as, quote, "Unparalleled in
modern times."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. DAVID NABARRO, SENIOR UN SYSTEM COORDINATOR FOR EBOLA: Because of the
way in which the outbreak is advancing, the level of surge we need to do is
unprecedented. It is massive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: In the hardest-hit countries, the public health system is
approaching collapsed, wrenching pictures show Ebola-stricken victims dying
in the streets. Some of them have been turned away from overwhelmed
treatment centers. Many of the stricken now have little hope.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRES. OBAMA: These men and women and children are just sitting, waiting to
die, right now. And, it does not have to be this way. The reality is that
this epidemic is going to get worse before it gets better. But, right now,
the world still has an opportunity to save countless lives.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Joining me now, Senator Chris Coons. He is a Democrat from
Delaware; Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on African
Affairs. Senator, there has been calls for the U.S. to do more. Your
reaction to this announcement today?

SEN. CHRIS COONS, D-DELAWARE: Well, Chris, I am grateful and proud of
President Obama for stepping up today and making the declaration that we
are going to bring to the fight against Ebola, America`s unique
capabilities. They are going to deploy 3,000 officials who are capable of
delivering on logistics, of constructing field hospitals, of training
public health workers and then we will continue to send volunteers.

From the beginning of this Ebola health crisis, Chris, it is American
missionaries and health volunteers, who have been carrying much of the load
of the work. I had a conversation two weeks ago with President Ellen
Johnson-Sirleaf of Liberia. And, it was a difficult and desperate
conversation, where she was pleading for a more dramatic intervention.

Today, the President in the United States stepped up significantly. And,
it is my hope that when history looks back at this record outbreak of
Ebola, that today will be marked as the day that the beginning of the end
of this Ebola crisis began and that the United States arrived to really
bend the curve of this public health crisis in the right direction.

HAYES: So, that is the big question. You mentioned President of Liberia,
Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, the sense that I have gotten from the reporting is
that Liberia in particular, which has the worst hit, is really scared of
some kind of collapse. I mean just kind of real genuine collapse, if this
does not brought under control. And, they do not have the resources to do
that right now.

SEN. COONS: That is right. The President sent me a letter, sent our
President a letter and sent a number of American leaders a letter roughly
two weeks ago that laid out a very grim scenario. Liberia is a country,
which has been slowly recovering from a devastating civil war.

As I am sure, you know, their President received a Nobel peace prize for
her work in recovery from that war. But, on my last visit to Liberia last
August, I was strucked by just how little they had then in terms of
infrastructure and resources and public health capability.

Today, everything that they had built in terms of recovery from their civil
war has been lost. And, the country stands on the edge of a collapse. So,
our intervention and the intervention by philanthropic individuals, and
foundations and by our allies from the developed world is absolutely
essential to stave off disaster in Liberia.

HAYES: I was reading some of the testimony by Dr. Brantley today and it
opened up a little window into the logistical difficulty and complexity
here. He was talking about how hard it is to treat this disease when you
have to wear all of these protective gears to protect the health care
workers.

And, that just -- The danger of the contagions slows everything down, makes
everything more difficult and it is in that slowness. Essentially, the
disease has been allowed to spread. What do you see as the U.S. mission
here? How are these 3,000 people and U.S. money and U.S. troops, how is
that going to address that problem?

COONS: Well, at the very most basic level. First, we got combat
engineers, who are experienced from their work in Afghanistan and Iraq and
elsewhere in setting up sites, field hospitals in remote sites, providing
water, providing power, providing security and providing a stable and
secure place from which to deliver health care.

So, that is exactly what is needed in the remote areas of Liberia where
there is no health infrastructure and whereas you mentioned in the
introduction. Other folks who are coming to seek assistance in the few
hospitals that exist in the country are being turned away. So, at the very
least, our engineers are going to be delivering field hospitals.

Next, we are going to be using the unique logistical capabilities of the
U.S. military to deliver tens of thousands of personal protective equipment
sets; so, that health workers, volunteers, community leaders can engage in
out reach to those who are stricken with Ebola or who had some threat of
contracting Ebola and do so without great risk to themselves.

And, then last, there will be a great education program, where roughly 500
a month public health workers will be trained. As I think you well know,
Chris, the steps that need to be taken to help prevent the spread of Ebola
and help those who are stricken with it to recover are relatively simple.

HAYES: That is right.

COONS: They are just very hard to deliver in a country with very little
clean water or electricity or public health facilities. And, so, we are
literally going to be helping to build that public health infrastructure
with out partners and allies.

HAYES: So, this is -- as I understand it, this is the U.S. army. The U.S.
Arm Forces, which has tremendous logistical expertise. If there is one
thing they can do aside from fighting, it is get stuff set up and get
things from point A to point B and distribute things and build stuff; all
of that logistical expertise being used to create the logistical
infrastructure necessary to create a kind of situation that could contain
this epidemic. It is fascinating, fascinating mission. Senator Chris
Coons.

COONS: That is right. And, Chris before we leave this topic, we should
not forget that the United States has not some ways, the unique ability to
also develop treatments such as ZNAP and a potential vaccine and a
significant amount of the funding congresses intending to approve this week
will go towards that important end.

HAYES: Senator Chris Coons, great thanks.

COONS: Thank you, Chris.

HAYES: In the case that echoes to Michael Brown case. Law enforcement in
Utah are giving new details to explain why it was their officer shot and
killed a man from the back. That is ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: One of the most-watched grand juries in the country will now have
more time to decide the fate of Ferguson Police Officer, Darren Wilson. A
judge has ruled that the grand jury convene to decide if Wilson will be
charge in the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown can now meet
until January 7th after its original term expired last week.

Meanwhile, all the anger and frustration in Ferguson has not gone anywhere.
Organizers and activists are watching the grand jury extremely closely,
waiting to see if the 12 people, who make up the grand jury will indict.
Much of the activists and community focuses squarely on the St. Louis
Country Prosecutor Bob McCulloch. Tonight, St. Louis county council
meeting erupted into calls for McCulloch to be replaced.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ACTIVISTS: INAUDIBLE

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: McCulloch could have filed charges himself against Officer Wilson;
but, instead, chose to present all of the evidence gathered to the grand
jury and let them to decide. But, according to "The Washington Post," it
is something he has done before. A report, quote, "There had been at least
four instances in which McCulloch presented evidence to a grand jury
regarding a fetal police shooting and none of those cases was the officer
indicted.

The community of Ferguson will be waiting to see if Bob McCulloch repeats
that pattern again. And, today, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon, who passed up
the opportunity to replace McCulloch and appoint a special prosecutor, was
scheduled to be out fund raising for his fellow Democrat State
Representative Jeff Roorda, who is running for state senate.

That State Rep. Jeff Roorda, one of the people involved in fund raising for
Michael Brown`s shooter, Officer Darren Wilson, through the shield of hope,
a nonprofit order of the fraternal order of police. According to
"Riverfront Times," Roorda is, quote, "One of the officials listed of a
nonprofit state records." We will continue to follow the story closely.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: Family members of a 22-year-old Utah man shot and killed by police
are demanding answers, after new details have lead police to modify the
original story they used to explain his death. Last Wednesday morning, in
Saratoga Springs, Utah, Darren Hunt was shot and killed by police after a
911 call of a man walking around with a Samurai-type sword.

According to "The Guardian," Tim Taylor, the Chief Deputy Attorney for Utah
County said in a statement on Saturday when the officers made contact with
Mr. Hunt, he brandished the sword and lunged towards the officers with a
sword at which time Mr. Hunt was shot. The two police officers were placed
on paid administrative leave. An investigation was undertaken by the Utah
County Attorney`s Office.

But, Darren Hunt`s family has disputed the official account, particularly
in light of certain key details. First, this picture taken by Jocelyn
Hansen, who was reportedly at a gas station near a bank when she said she
saw Hunt and the officers talking. As you can see from the photo, Hunt`s
hands are at his side. He even appears to be smiling.

Jocelyn Hansen took this photo and she told ABC 4 Utah, quote, "When I
first saw police interviewing the young man, I felt like they were very
professional. They were keeping their distance. Their voices were never
raised. Hansen looked down to put her car in gear and says that this one
the scene turned deadly. I looked up, there were shots and there was a
chase."

There has also been an autopsy conducted by Hunt`s family. An attorney for
the family, Randal Edwards, saying the fatal shot struck Hunt at the center
of his back. Five other gunshots struck him from behind, including shots
to his legs, shoulder, elbow and hand. Family says multiple witnesses saw
hunt racing from police when he was fired upon. And, now, in light of
that, authorities have modified their account.

Chief Deputy Attorney Tim Taylor telling "The Guardian" that Hunt was, in
fact, alleged to have lunge at officers outside a bank several dozen yards
away from he ultimately died. It was outside the bank that Hunt was first
shot at by police, Taylor said. It was not clear whether he was struck on
that occasion.

Hunt then headed north and was shot several more times before eventually
collapsing outside the Panda Express, which is a restaurant. As for the
so-called Samurai sword, Hunt`s family calls it a souvenir from the gift
shop. Police Officers have not yet been identified. But, the Saratoga
Springs Police department interviews with them, pursuant to the
investigation are just now finally taking place.

One expected today, the other scheduled for Thursday. Joining me now, Jon
Swaine, reporter for "The Guardian" U.S. He has been covering the story in
depth. So, the story -- if the story has not changed from police, it has
at least been elaborated on. It was a very sort of terse statement at
first. This is more -- there are still a lot of questions we do not know?

JON SWAINE, "THE GUARDIAN" REPORTER: That is right. The statement that
was put on Saturday seemed to be pretty clear. There was encounter.
Darren Hunt made this lunge and he was shot; however --

HAYES: And, they -- presumably, they were in close-enough contact that the
lunge was threatening and they responded with deadly force.

SWAINE: Precisely. They now expanded on that to say he fled. And, by the
time he reached this restaurant, some 75 yards or so, he had been shot
repeatedly. And, as you said, his attorney says, all those shots were in
the back. The question of this is raised by this.

Did he do anything between leaving that first encounter and the spot where
he died to where he has been shot again? Did he threaten the police again?
Did he make any more movements allegedly with his sword? Because,
otherwise, one might ask, he has made this first movement. He has fled and
yet he is continued to be shot by police.

HAYES: I think when you just -- the most, basically, you hear police shot
a man in the back, you think, "OK. Well, how did that happen?" And, it
was interesting to me. This, of course, is not an official autopsy and so
far it is not the autopsy from Utah County. It is from someone hired by
the family.

You might expect that they would push back and say, "No. That is not
true." But, they do not dispute. I mean, notably, in the new account the
police give, they do not dispute that he was, in fact, shot from behind.

SWAINE: They do not dispute it and they do not confirm it, either best
saying that anytime -- they are saying that the State appointed medical
examiner is carrying out an official autopsy. They are saying it is going
to take some six to seven weeks before it can be ready. County authorities
are going to need to take that into account. They said before they
released any kind of official account decisively.

HAYES: Wait a second. They are saying six to seven weeks to conduct the
autopsy?

SWAINE: The county prosecutors say that they expect to need six to seven
weeks until they receive this official autopsy and then therefore, they are
ready to release their official account.

HAYES: The question, of course, I think a lot of people are having when
they read about the story is what is the deal with the sword? What was the
sword -- The family says this was a souvenir. It was a sort of dress-up
sword of some kind. What do we know about?

SWAINE: Well, based on reports that it was some sort of a toy. I think it
is important to point out that it is not quite right. It is not a toy. It
might be seen as a decorative or, as you say, a souvenir-type, replica
sword. But, it does appear to be made in metal. Prosecutors claim it did
have a sharpened edge and even a sharpened point. The disputed it. They
have said the edge was rounded. It could have represented any real threat
to any person.

Talking to his friends and family, they do not know why he was walking
outside with the sword, why he would have been in public with it. They
know he was kind of fun to playing with. It was a younger brother`s -- It
had been given to a younger for his birthday. But, so far, no one has been
able to give a full explanation as to why he was out there with it. And,
so, you know, that is going to need to be answered, I guess.

HAYES: -- had noted that the outfit appeared to be close to a Samurai
character and that Salt Lake City Annual Comic Con was the weekend prior
and wondered whether -- you know? But, we do not have the information
about that.

SWAINE: We do not. And, the family`s attorney have said -- attorney have
said they are open to that insight. They are looking into it. They do not
know that Mr. Hunt was particularly into this sort of thing. They do not
know for sure about what is happening, but they are definitely looking into
that and other scenarios.

HAYES: The question of race of course emerges here. This man was black.
We do not know the race of the officers. We know the area is predominantly
white which in he was operating. And, his mother, Susan Hunt, anguished,
anguished mother, as you see there, she said they killed my son because he
was black. No white boy with a little sword where they shoot while he is
running away.

SWAINE: This area is 93 percent white. It is 9.5 percent African
American. Friends of Darren Hunt, when he walked around this city,
Saratoga Springs, obviously, he stood out. He was slim black guy with an
afro. He was not like those people in Saratoga Springs.

Therefore, his mother has claimed that this was about race, you know, might
have some weight. The prosecutors are being quick to rule it out and say
there is nothing racial about this. However, the two police officers you
saw in that photo from that scene just shortly before the shooting are both
white.

HAYES: There is an awful scene, apparently, Susan, which that family finds
out that someone was shot. And, when they hear the description, a slim guy
with an afro, they knew immediately that it is their son. Essentially, the
sister runs down to the scene to find this out.

SWAINE: This is right. And, this is where the story begins to be more
reminiscing about the shootings we have had recently. The family could not
get access to the body. They were not able to confirm that this was their
son or brother that they believed it was. You know, the body was left in
for several hours. The police were investigating it.

But, the family had reported some trouble in getting access to the body,
access to officers who can tell them what happened. And, in fact, some
family members were taken to a police station and some questioned about why
he was doing something wrong. Why was he threatening officers? And, they
felt that they were coming under question when their relative had been
killed.

HAYES: Jon Swaine of "The Guardian." Thank you. Adrian Peterson may be
back to playing football this week even though he is facing felony charges
for child abuse; but some of his sponsors are pulling their support. That
is ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: Tonight, top dollar sponsors and high powered politicians are
stepping up the pressure on the NFL as the league continues to wrestle with
its biggest set of scandals in recent memory. Public outcry or the Ray
Rice domestic violence scandal and the Adrian Peterson child abuse
allegations defusing -- fueling a frenzied response from advertisers and
from the NFL. The stakes are getting higher all of the time.

The Minnesota Vikings chose to reinstate Adrian Peterson, arguably, the
team`s best player for this Sunday`s game after he was indicted last week
by a grand jury on charges of reckless or negligent injury to a child for
beating his 4-year-old son. The teen did so at a press conference in front
of a banner with teen`s sponsor Radisson`s corporate logo prominently
displayed for all to see.

Just hours after that press conference, KHOU T.V. in Houston reported on an
earlier allegation of child abuse in which Peterson was accused of abusing
another one of his other sons who is also 4 years old at the time. After
that report aired, Radisson became the first sponsor to take decisive
action.

They released a statement late last night at recent part, "Radisson takes
this matter very seriously, particularly in light to our long-standing
commitment to the protection of children. We are closely following the
situation and effectively immediately, Radisson is suspending its limited
sponsorship of the Minnesota Vikings."

Today, we begin to see a domino effect. AP reporter twitted out that Nike
stores in the twin cities have pulled all Adrian Peterson merch from
shelves. And, just a few hours ago, McDonalds issued a statement saying in
part, "Domestic violence and abuse are unacceptable behaviors like many we
have questioned surrounding these involving situations and we have
communicated our concerns to League.

Campbell`s soup, which has used several NFL players in their commercials
for chunky soup issued a statement today, quote, "Domestic violence is
abhorrent. We are watching developments closely and looked forward to the
findings of the independent investigation underway."

But, perhaps the most worrisome for the NFL was the statement today from
Anheuser-Busch, which recently inked a six-year sponsorship deal with the
NFL worth $1.2 billion. Quote, "We are disappointed and increasingly
concerned by the recent incidents that have overshadowed this NFL season.
We are not yet satisfied with the League`s handling of behaviors."

It is not just key advertisers who are speaking out about what is happening
off the field in the NFL. Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton specifically
addressing the Adrian Peterson case today said he believes, quote, "The
team should suspend Mr. Peterson until the accusations of child abuse have
been resolved by the criminal justice system."

Minnesota Senator Al Franken said in a statement, "The Vikings are wrong to
reinstate Adrian Peterson and that he should not play until courts weigh
in. Then there was New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, who has New York Times
reports today, introduced a bill that would disallow major professional
sports league, mostly in the NFL, from creating status as tax exempt non-
profits.

Despite the scandals, despite the sponsors taking notice, despite the
unconvincing response by Commissioner Roger Goodell, there is one thing
about the NFL that has not changed. Mike Pesca and Tara Dowdell and I will
discuss what that is and why it matters, ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: We are back. And, joining me now Political Consultant, Tara
Dowdell and Mike Pesca, host of Slate Daily Podcast, "The Gist,"
contributor to NPR and Slate`s great sportscast podcast, "Hang Up And
Listen."

So, the one thing that has not changed, just to keep all of this in
perspective. Top T.V. ratings in the U.S. last week. Top 3 rated things
on U.S. television. Number 1, Sunday night football. Number 2, Thursday
night football. Number three, Monday night football.

MIKE PESCA, HOST OF "THE GIST": Well, of course. And, the games are
great, too.

HAYES: They have been great games.

PESCA: And, that is what the NFL knows. And, they have not even been
characterized by like horrible hits that we cannot watch. Brandon
Marshall`s catches and Terrance Brown`s running, and that is what makes it
such a conundrum.

HAYES: Right. And, the fear that you have to have if you are the NFL,
until today, the kind of line they have been holding on the sponsor level.

PESCA: Yes.

TARA DOWDELL, POLITICAL CONSULTANT: Right.

HAYES: But, today, I felt like that was a big development. You have
sponsors dropping in the team basis and then you have got national
sponsors. If you are -- you know, you are a political consultant. You
advise candidates. Roger Goodell finds himself in the kind of media
attention that the candidate does.

DOWDELL: Yes.

HAYES: And, everything he does has been reactive. He now has real
problems.

DOWDELL: He has serious problems, because there is two ways in this
country to impact changed behavior. Number 1 is by laws or number 2 is by
hitting people in their wallet. And, right now the big concern for Goodell
is that his wallet might be affected.

And, so, even with his legislation with Mayor -- Senator Booker, I should
say now -- Senator Booker and Senator Cantwell, two separate pieces of
legislation, if they make it too expensive for the NFL to stay and continue
doing what they are doing, that is when you have a problem.

HAYES: Yes. We should say that the withdrawing of a nonprofit tax status,
which we should be clear here, the league itself, the individual teams are
for profit enterprises. The league itself is nonprofit.

PESCA: Yes.

HAYES: It is tax exempt, which itself is somewhat questionable compared
with the guy makes $44 million a year.

PESCA: It is the only reason we know that because they are nonprofit.

HAYES: That is right.

DOWDELL: Right. Right.

PESCA: Let us say $10 million and I did -- I still have a light on for
moral persuasion as a way to change something, but I guess that does not
work anymore.

HAYES: No, no. It is just laws or money.

PESCA: I will say this about the sponsors, though. And, I talked to and
this was not even this year. This was about the over letter of concussions
and the shield being tarnished. And, I said to him, you know, would a
company like Anheuser-Busch or would a big car company ever really pull up
stakes because they need the NFL very much. And, what he said was, "Do you
know what I am going to do next time they sit down for negotiation --

HAYES: Who said this? Who said this?

PESCA: This was a guy who used to be in the position to be a major ad
buyer for a major company.

HAYES: OK.

PESCA: I cannot name which one.

HAYES: Right.

PESCA: But, it is huge company that advertises on NFL --

HAYES: And, that was involved in exactly this kinds of --

PESCA: Exactly. And, he said, next time they sit down at the table, they
will say and not just as a tactic, "Look, we paid $1.2 billion over six
years." But, that was before all of this come to light. Maybe our next
contract will be $1.1. At least they will enter with that salvo. However,
beer companies need men who do not switch off the T.V., who gives them that
more than anything. It is the NFL.

HAYES: But, here is what struck me today about this Anheuser-Busch. It
was a kind of a remarkable statement. We are disappointed and then the
adverb, hammer, they dropped on Roger Goodell. "We are disappointed and
increasingly concerned." Like, that is Roger, get your act together and
make this go away now. I mean this is Anheuser-Busch saying this. They
made a public statement. It is not a phone calling saying, "Roger,
remember us? We just paid you $1.2 billion."

PESCA: It is not one of those platitudinous reassurance of course. We
decry this but the NFL has always been stood for virtues.

DOWDELL: Right.

PESCA: Right, it is a little bit pointed than maybe I even expected.

HAYES: Yes.

DOWDELL: And, for them to go public with it, as you stated, that was
really important. It shows you that the sponsors are now starting to feel
pressure themselves. They want to distance themselves from what is
happening in the NFL, because let us look at Anheuser-Busch. And, you
know, they have women in things on T.V. So, I mean, we are not talking
about a paradigm of moral virtue here.

HAYES: And, let us also talk about the fact that no one -- there is no
profile encouragement in any of this, right? Everybody is making these
calculations about where is this in the new cycle and how do we sort of
mitigate our risk. I also want to bring up this case. Something is
important.

We were having this conversation about the NFL. The NFL is an institution
that got all sorts of problems. It started about domestic violence and Ray
Rice and knocking out his fianc‚ in the video. I am going to play you a
911 tape of an alleged domestic dispute. I want you to listen to it. And,
then I am going the tell you who the alleged abuser is. Take a listen.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE 911 OPERATOR: What is going on?

KELLY FULLER, CALLER: It is domestic --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE 911 OPERATOR: Excuse me.

FULLER: A domestic dispute.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE 911 OPERATOR: OK with yourself and who else?

FULLER: I am calling. I need help.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE 911 OPERATOR: What is your name?

FULLER: Kelly Fuller.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE 911 OPERATOR: OK. Do you need an ambulance?

FULLER: Yes, please.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE 911 OPERATOR: Kelly? Kelly? OK. She needs an
ambulance. I am sending the police. They are in a domestic fight now at
the Ritz-Carlton.

FULLER: Please help me. He is beating on me.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

HAYES: It is Kelly Fuller. "Please help me. He is beating me at the
Atlanta Ritz-Carlton." And, the "He" in that is U.S. District Judge Mark
Fuller. Mark Fuller, who is a sitting member of the U.S. district -- of
the U.S. Court constitutionally enshrined with lifetime tenure. This is --
So, let us not mistake here that this is a Ray Rice problem, that this is a
Baltimore Ravens` problem, that this is an NFL problem. This is going on
across -- also, I think it is an important reminder here that folks not
allow themselves to feel, like, "Oh, it is the NFL." Mike.

PESCA: Sports is often a lagging indicator of societal opinion. But,
sometimes they can be a leading indicator, as well. And, what we are doing
now is focusing attention that needs to be focused. The NFL, especially
their board was behind the times. Now they are getting right on the issue.

I will say that when the NFL defends itself and says things like I do not
think our players abuse at a higher rate. I do not think that is good
enough, given how many resources they have, they should be abusing at a
much lesser rate. But that said, I think it is all clich‚ or not a useful
conversation.

HAYES: Right.

DOWDELL: Right. And, I think it is important that we are calling the
attention of federal judge and we need to shine the light on him just like
everyone.

HAYES: We are going to follow this Mark Fuller case more. The details are
really remarkable. I was reporting it a little bit today. He is still a
judge, throwing a salary. He has no case load. Mark Fuller, Alabama
District Court Judge. Tara Dowdell and Mike Pesca, my guests, thank you.
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