All In With Chris Hayes, Tuesday, November 8th, 2014
Read the transcript from the Tuesday show
ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES
November 18, 2014
Guest: Josh Barro, Sarah Lacy, Annie Lowrey, Osagyefo Sekou, Barbara
Boxer, Bernie Sanders, Ilana Schor, Ayman Mohyeldin
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC ANCHOR: The first round of the battle that`s going
to go many, many rounds. But it`s better to win the first one. It`s
always better to win the first one.
That`s HARDBALL for now. Thanks for all you watching us. Thanks for being
"ALL IN" with Chris Hayes starts right now.
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC ANCHOR: Tonight on ALL IN.
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R), SENATE MINORITY LEADER: Unfortunately, we came
up one vote short on the Keystone Pipeline today.
HAYES: Pipeline blocked. A big win for climate hawks as Keystone
proponents fall short in the Senate, while the Speaker of the House warned
the president not to block the bill.
REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R), HOUSE SPEAKER: It would be equivalent of calling
the American people stupid.
HAYES: Then bloodshed in Jerusalem.
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Too many Israelis have died,
too many Palestinians have died.
HAYES: Four rabbis including three Americans, killed inside a Synagogue.
Plus, protesters bracing for a decision in the grand jury in Ferguson.
And digging up dirt. An executive at UBER suggests hiring a team to dig
into the personal lives of his media critics. And one reporter in
SARAH LACY, PANDODAILY TECHNICAL BLOG EDITOR: The culture of this company
is so rotten. An executive was bragging about to a journalist at dinner.
They don`t even think there`s anything wrong with it.
HAYES: That reporter joins me live tonight.
"ALL IN" starts right now.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My name is Keystone.
HAYES: Good evening from New York. I`m Chris Hayes.
The Keystone XL Pipeline vote failed tonight. A few hours ago the count of
59 to 41, the Senate failed to overcome a filibuster on a bill to direct
the president to green light the pipeline. They needed 60 votes to
With 14 Democrats voting for the bill to move forward, along with the
entire Republican caucus. And no single senator has been more instrumental
in getting those Democratic votes than incumbent Senator Mary Landrieu of
Louisiana, who`s made the pipeline a personal crusade leading up to her
December run-off election.
Tonight after falling one vote short, she says she will continue her fight
to get the pipeline built.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D), LOUISIANA: It`s been on my agenda. And it`s
staying on my agenda. And I`m going to do everything I can to help America
become energy independent. For jobs, for economic opportunity, for
independence, for energy independence, this fight was worth having.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Over the past six years, the project that`s designed to carry up to
830,000 barrels of carbon intensive crude oil per day from the oil sands in
Alberta, Canada, down to the Gulf Coast, has become the single most famous
piece of oil infrastructure in the country, possibly the world.
And thanks to a year`s long campaign on the part of fossil fuel companies,
conservatives, Republicans and some Democrats, they`ll hear a common
refrain from the supporters, lower oil prices and jobs from the Keystone XL
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MITT ROMNEY (R), FORMER PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: I will build that pipeline
if I have to myself.
REP. PAUL RYAN (R), WISCONSIN: Day one, stop the war on coal, approve the
BOEHNER: This is a vote to lower energy costs and create more American
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s going to help keep energy prices low.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thousands of jobs could be created right here.
MCCONNELL: Employ literally thousands of people.
LANDRIEU: And creating thousands of temporary and millions of permanent
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thousands of jobs for people all across this country.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s a win-win for the American people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: A project that would create lower gas prices and create jobs would
seem to be a political no brainer. But the State Department`s review of
the project found it would create over 42,000 jobs throughout the United
States, defining each of those jobs as one position that is filled for one
Those are in fact temporary jobs and that amount of job creation is about a
fifth of the total jobs created in the U.S. just last month alone. And
once the pipeline enter service, quote, "It would need only 35 permanent
As for lowering oil prices, there is no direct link between oil production
in North America and gas prices. In fact building the pipeline could raise
gas prices. A 2011 study out of Cornell found, quote, "Consumers in the
Midwest could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and
The president himself made the case pretty well last week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: I have to constantly push back against this idea that somehow the
Keystone Pipeline is either this massive jobs bill for the United States or
is somehow lowering gas prices. Understand what this project is. It is
providing the ability of Canada to pump their oil, send it through our land
down to the Gulf, where it would be sold everywhere else.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: The biggest beneficiaries of the pipeline would in fact the fossil
fuel companies increasingly spooked by plummeting oil prices and yet the
issue has become a very important symbol for both its advocates and
opponents. Republicans are framing the president`s opposition of the
project as a betrayal of the American people who support the construction
of the Keystone XL Pipeline, although in declining numbers. Fifty-nine
percent of people support the bill in the pipeline, while just 31 percent
Today, House Speaker John Boehner attempted to warn the president of a
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BOEHNER: Let`s be clear about this. A Keystone Pipeline veto would send
the signal that this president has no interest in listening to the American
people. Vetoing an overwhelmingly popular bill would be a clear indication
that he doesn`t care about the American people`s priorities. It would be
equivalent of calling the American people stupid.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Opponents of the pipeline argue that it is sheer madness to
facilitate the development of new sources of more carbon intensive oil like
those in the tar sands when we already know we can only burn about a fifth
of all the known reserves from existing sources and hope to keep the planet
from heating more than two degrees.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: The Keystone XL Pipeline would move us
exactly in the wrong direction.
SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D), CALIFORNIA: I call this the XL, the extra lethal
SEN. TOM HARKIN (D), IOWA: Every dollar that we spend today on developing
and using more fossil fuels is another dollar spent in digging the graves
of our grandchildren. I don`t want to dig that grave anymore.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Tonight is the first, the pipeline couldn`t get the votes they
needed, but things will be very different come January of next year.
Joining me now is Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat from California. She`s
chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee. And she voted against
the pipeline today.
Senator, when you woke up this morning, did you know what the vote count
BOXER: I knew that it was about 59 votes that they had and they needed an
additional vote. And I was the manager, as you know, of the -- of the no
side. But it was such a difficult situation because we all know that Mary
Landrieu is my friend and my colleague. We just disagree on this, which I
think and I`ve said -- I`ve said it on the floor. The Democratic Party, we
don`t marched lock steps like Republicans do.
We have people firmly against these tar sands coming out of the ground and
we have people firmly for them coming out of the ground. And I -- it`s
just tough when you go up against a colleague but that`s the way it goes.
HAYES: So can you explain this to me as an outside observer watching this
go down? Mary Landrieu is facing a run-off, it`s going to be difficult --
a difficult race. This is an issue that she has championed.
HAYES: It was the Democrats who controlled this body still in the Senate
and brought this to a vote. What is the point of going through this
exercise if she still falls far -- fall short of the vote threshold? It
seems like a strange bit of kabuki theater.
BOXER: I don`t agree with you at all. I think it was a great debate. I
think it`s debate that has to be held because Mitch McConnell already
announced this is going to be the first thing he takes up. We had the time
to lay out our case for this, against this. I was very proud of the
debate. I was proud that we stopped this thing because it`s not in the
best interest of the American people.
I think it was an important debate for the Obama Administration to see how
we laid out what happens with this tar sands oil, the filthiest oil on the
planet, how it affects the health of our people when you refine it, how
it`s the hardest kind of oil to clean up when it`s filth. It`s really
So I think that the debate was important. I think it was not known whether
she would get the 60 or not. And frankly, I was willing to have this vote
before, he wanted to have a vote in addition to this on Jeanne Shaheen`s
bill on energy efficiency and the Republicans said no. And so we took it
up now. And I don`t think it was kabuki theater in any way, shape or form
because honest to God, you asked me, did I know whether she had 60? I did
HAYES: Senator Barbara Boxer, thank you so much for your time. We really
HAYES: Joining me now, Senator Bernie Sanders, independent from Vermont, a
member of the Energy and National Resources Committee. He was a no vote,
Senator, the writing seems to be on the wall even though your side was
triumphant today. The new Congress has a lot more Republicans if they keep
enough Democratic votes, which it seems they will. It looks like this
might be passed and Mitch McConnell`s vowing to bring it up first thing.
SANDERS: Well, I think you`re right. I think it would be brought up. I
think they have the votes to pass it and it`s absolutely imperative that
the president veto it. And if he does veto it, I think we have the votes
to sustain that veto.
Look, Chris. At the end of the day, the scientific community is very
clear. We have got to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel,
move to energy efficiency, move to sustainable energy. The idea of
encouraging and accelerating the production of some of the dirtiest oil on
the planet is totally insane. It is exactly what we should not be doing.
I`m glad it was defeated today. And I will do everything that I can to
urge the president to veto this when it is likely passed in the next
HAYES: You know, you cite the scientific consensus on global warming
climate change. It`s interesting to me. Mitch McConnell, Senate minority
leader, soon to be majority leader, when asked about climate change likes
to say he`s not a scientist and sort of punt on it. But he had this to say
about the Keystone XL Pipeline today citing scientist. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCCONNELL: Those who took a serious look at the science and the potential
benefits reached the conclusion long ago. They understand that the whole
drama over Keystone has been as protracted as it is unnecessary. We hope
to turn the page on all of that today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: So I learned from Senator McConnell today, you can in fact cite
scientist even if you are in fact not one yourself.
SANDERS: You know Chris, obviously, given my political views, I have
strong disagreements with the Republicans on almost every issue. But I
have to tell you, in all honesty, their refusal to accept what the
scientific community is saying about climate change is an international
embarrassment. It is extremely dangerous when you reject sciences -- when
you reject science. So I hope that the American people began to stand up
on this issue. The man that we move to energy efficiency and sustainable
energy and urge the president to stand for and veto this.
HAYES: Are you surprised by the political salience this issue has taken
on? I mean, what we`re talking about is building a pipeline. It`s going
to bring oil from Canada down to some refineries in the Gulf. They`ll ship
it out. It`s not -- nor it`s some huge job boom. And yet it has become
this kind of totemic issue. I mean, you`ve got Mitt Romney talking about
HAYES: Every ad run about it.
SANDERS: Yes. Because it is -- it is an absolutely symbolic issue, quiet
like health care is. The Affordable Care Act, Obama`s legislation, is a
modest piece of legislation originated in Republican think tanks. But it
says that the federal government should do something on health care, the
Republican hate it.
What is this is about is to say damn it, no matter what, we are going to be
and remain dependent on fossil fuels.
SANDERS: We don`t want sustainable energy. That`s what this is about.
HAYES: Senator Bernie Sanders, thank you very much.
Joining me now, Ilana Schor, she`s energy reporter for "Politico", she
wrote up the bill for "Political Today."
Ilana, same question for you, you`ve been covering this. I am more over at
the fact that the Keystone XL Pipeline, which is, looked on a one way, a
relatively obscure possible infrastructure project that would extend an
existing pipeline has become this central, political battle. How did that
ILANA SCHOR, ENERGY REPORTER, POLITICO: Well, put simply, Chris,
environmentalist kind of adopted Keystone as the symbol because it`s very
easy to organize around.
SCHOR: EPA carbon rules are kind a clunky, their wonky, it tough to drive
people into the street over that. But Keystone, a piece of steel,
something you can picture, you can visualize farmers having to deal with
it. It`s much more vocative and emotional for environmentalist. And they
have done a lot of work to elevate it as a symbol.
Obama, on the other hand, has given every indication he thinks this is a
tempest in a teapot.
SCHOR: He`s also focused on his EPA climate agenda and increasingly his
global climate agenda.
HAYES: So that`s the interesting thing. The White House has been
incredibly cagey about this -- this whole thing. The White House today
said they did not support the bill, but then Josh Ernest said if they
actually passed, we`ll deal with it then.
From you reporting, do you have a sense of where the White House is on
this? Because as Bernie Sanders just said, they`re going to have a bill,
most likely, in the first week or so of the next Congress.
SCHOR: It`s a good question. This is a pretty delicate political time for
the White House. The last thing they would want to do is give away the
bargaining chip that Keystone might be with the Republican majority next
year by signaling that they would accept it, given Landrieu`s advocacy for
it this week.
On the other hand, you also saw Obama last week go to Beijing and ink this
major climate deal. So he`s also increasingly showing signals that he
might reject the thing outright.
The bottom line is showing too many of their cards this week were cagey.
HAYES: And you get a sense also that it may be possibly used as a chip in
future deals. Because Republicans wanted so much. Climate activists, as
you said, have elevated -- they made it an issue, they`ve extended this as
further than anyone I think thought they could. What do you make of the
argument, well, if this doesn`t get built here, it`s just going to get
built in Canada.
SCHOR: You mentioned the plummeting oil prices, I believe, and it`s
important to look at oil right now. It`s around $75 a barrel. When the
State Department did its environmental review of this pipeline, it pointed
to $65 to $75 as a sort of danger zone if you will that blocking Keystone
would start to have a significant impact on how much of the oil sands is
So in a way, we`re dealing with policy wise, Chris, a whole new world on
Keystone relative to, say, January or earlier this year when oil was around
HAYES: Yes. And the key thing here of course is that the State
Department`s analysis, a lot of the analysis is that it`s not a climate
threat because it`s going to come out of the ground anyway. What you`re
saying, and this is important, is if oil falls enough that`s not a foregone
conclusion because it becomes uneconomic to pay the amount of money it
takes to get it out of the ground if you`re not getting enough for it.
SCHOR: It`s actually less getting it out of the ground than it is
transporting it by rail.
HAYES: Getting it out, right.
SCHOR: Which is more expensive.
HAYES: That`s right.
SCHOR: And frankly more polluting than the pipeline. But that`s where the
squeeze is happening for the oil industry up there.
HAYES: Ilana Schor, thank you very much.
All right. Another thing other than the Keystone XL Pipeline that is loved
by Republican politicians. It`s also the darling of Silicon Valley hated
by competitors, regulators, and a whole lot of the other folks. The most
controversial tech startup in the America and it is a midst of its big
first scandal. We`ll talk about it ahead.
HAYES: Why is the former adviser to President Obama working for a tech
startup car-for-hire company? I`ll tell you ahead.
HAYES: Tensions in Jerusalem are extremely high tonight after a brutal
attack on a Synagogue left four rabbis, including three American citizens
and an Israeli police officer dead.
Two Palestinian men armed with meat cleavers and a gun stormed an ultra
Orthodox compound in West Jerusalem during morning prayers today, killing
the four rabbis and wounding several others. The police officer who was
critically wounded while responding to the attack later succumbed to his
injuries at the hospital.
The attackers have been identified as two cousins from East Jerusalem.
They were both shot dead on the scene by police. They`re believed to have
ties to the armed wing of the Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine. A Marxist-Leninist gorilla group most famous for a series of
plane hijackings in the 1970s.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed a harsh response to the
attack ordering the demolition of the two assailant`s homes. He also
blamed Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas for inciting terror
against Jews in Israel. That assertion was later contradicted by the head
of Shin Bet, Israel Internal Security Agency.
We`re told that Parliamentary Committee today, quote, "Abbas is not
interested in terror and is not inciting to terror. He`s not even doing so
behind closed doors."
For his part, Abbas condemned today`s attack, the first time he`s done so
directly, I mean the latest round of violence and at civilian in Israel.
Thousands of mourners attended funerals for the four rabbis who were all
laid to rest in Jerusalem earlier today. Meanwhile, an estimated 300
right-wing activists staged a protest near the entrance of the city calling
for revenge and chanting anti-Arab slogans.
And clashes broke out in East Jerusalem and the West Bank between
Palestinian demonstrators and Israeli security forces. The attack today
comes amid a deepening cycle of provocations, violence and reprisals in
Jerusalem sending in part for a long standing dispute over the holy site.
Know to Jews as the Temple Mount entering Muslim`s Noble sanctuary. The
site`s deep significance to both sides carries explosive potential it was
Ariel Sharon`s visit to the Temple Mountain in 2000 had set off the second
And -- today`s bloody attack on a synagogue, fears of another even darker
and more chaotic round of violence in the heart of Jerusalem are growing.
Joining me now, NBC News foreign correspondent Ayman Mohyeldin.
Ayman, what do we know about the attack today?
AYMAN MOHYELDIN, NBC NEWS FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT: Well, as we mentioned, we
know that it was carried out like two Palestinian men residents of east
Jerusalem. It was carried out by at least from what we understand right
now, without any specific organization behind it, even though they are
affiliated with the PFLP, as you mentioned. It does not seem that the
organization had given any specific order for this attack to be carried
But early in the hours of the morning, as -- as all those rabbis and
students were in worship and in prayer, they entered this facility and
began attacking the individuals there. Police obviously ran to the scene
and responded to that. And there was a shootout between the individuals,
the two men and the police leading to the injured and then ultimate death
of that second police officer.
HAYES: We have seen for those follow the region closely, as obviously, you
do and I do -- not as a first time reporter. We`ve seen tensions in
Jerusalem just get more and more up froth. There`s been a series of
violent attacks. There have been IDF shootings and in some cases killings
in the West Bank and near Jerusalem of Palestinians protesters.
There was an assassination attempt on a right-wing rabbi who is calling for
Jews to be able to access the Temple Mount and the custody of that site has
emerged as a kind a key incendiary in this entire debate.
MOHYELDIN: Here`s one thing I can assure you, which is that nothing in the
Middle East particularly in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict happens in a
MOHYELDIN: It does not happen randomly.
MOHYELDIN: There is always a story behind the story. And in this case
it`s no different. Over the past to six, seven months, these tensions have
been rising by a series of few different measures. The political decisions
being taken by Israel to restrict access to this holy site for Muslims, the
legislation introduced in the Israeli parliament that is trying to grant
Jewish worshippers the right to enter this noble sanctuary in the Temple
But at the same time, there have been these attacks by Palestinians against
Israeli civilians in various parts of Jerusalem particularly --
HAYES: And they`ve had a kind of lone wolf quality to them. There was a
car attack, they`re just -- this is not suicide bombings like we saw in the
second intifada. They have a kind of different character in some ways
similar to the very bloody attack --
MOHYELDIN: Right. And I understand why that`s so important, is because
pretty much all political organizations, Palestinian political
organizations in Jerusalem have been decimated. Meaning most of the
Palestinian individuals who live in East Jerusalem, although they may be
affiliated with organizations, there really is no presence for Hamas,
there`s no presence for PFLP. Israel really controls East Jerusalem very
These individuals are responding in a way that they see as a response to
the provocations as they see it from the Israeli side.
HAYES: There have been a -- when back in October, when the Netanyahu
government announced 2500 new settlement developments in Jerusalem, that
earned a stern rebuke from the U.S. State Department. Relationships
between the U.S. and the Netanyahu government have been very bad. And
probably hit their lowest point over the last several weeks. Today,
obviously, in the wake of this horrible attack, you saw solidarity from
President Obama and John Kerry.
What are we going to see happen next?
MOHYELDIN: Well, when it comes to violence and the killing of innocent
Israelis, there`s no doubt that the U.S. is always going to stand firmly
with Israel. It has repeatedly said that Israel`s security for it is a red
line, is a priority. There`s no doubt about that. The U.S. and Israel
have disagreed over the past six months on a whole host of issues. They
disagree about the Iran nuclear talks. They`re also disagreeing adamantly
about the building of settlements.
The U.S. still has repeatedly said Israel`s political decisions are raising
tensions. They constantly -- the U.S. has come out and said it is a major
issue of concern for the U.S. government that Israel continues to build
these settlements and they do not help established a Palestinian state or
HAYES: This point you make is so key, I think, for people to understand.
The West Bank is under punitive control of the Palestinian Authority. And
East Jerusalem is under Israeli control. It is a kind of -- it`s not a no-
man`s land because under Israeli control. But there is no sort of
constituent of Palestinian Authority in East Jerusalem.
MOHYELDIN: There is none. Yes.
HAYES: And you don`t have the kind of organization -- you have Hamas in
Gaza, obviously, the Palestinian Authority in West Bank. That`s part of
why East Jerusalem is so volatile, it`s so close to the holy sites. It
doesn`t have that kind of infrastructure underneath it.
MOHYELDIN: Listen. And the Israeli human rights organization, not
Palestinian ones, Israeli ones, have a long list of documentation of the
discrimination Palestinians face in East Jerusalem.
MOHYELDIN: Not only are they denied full citizenship rights, they`re
deprived of some of their basic fundamental rights. But as you mentioned,
there is no presence of Palestinian political parties or any
representation. And that is why many say that when Israel takes some of
these decisions, what we are seeing as a consequence are these individual
lone wolf attacks that are very deadly and have tremendous amount of impact
across the region.
HAYES: Ayman Mohyeldin, thank you.
Civil rights icon is calling for, quote, "massive protests in Ferguson" if
the officer who shot an unarmed 18-year-old man is indicted. That story is
HAYES: Conservatives could be attacking the Affordable Care Act for
failing to accomplished one of its main goals, covering the uninsured. But
they can`t do that because the number of Americans without health insurance
has gone down about 25 percent in the last year. And almost six in the 10
of the people buying plans for the exchanges were previously uninsured.
Last night, I started the show with an eight minute commentary about the
Affordable Care Act and those who are hoping to use the videotaped comments
of an outside consultant on the creation of the ACA to destroy it once and
One of the great paradoxes to me about the Affordable Care Act is that the
law is unpopular and yet for all its complexity, the law is working much
better than certainly I thought it would and better than a lot of people
thought it would.
It`s an improbable success story. And after last night`s monologue, I got
a lot of responses on social media that gave me some insight into the
source of that paradox. For example, someone asked me you said 7 out of 10
people like Obamacare, but Gallop shows approval at just 37 percent. It`s
a key discrepancy. Because that 7 out of 10 figure shows the satisfaction
of people who are newly insured through the exchanges. 7 out of 10 people
who have Obamacare rate their coverage as excellent or good, that`s about
10.3 million people in America, which is a tiny
percentage of the overall health insurance market.
The overall approval rating, 37 percent, that is what people generally
think of the Affordable Care Act.
And that`s a clue into the paradox. The people directly experiencing the
biggest part of Obamacare in their day-to-day life, approve of the law by
twice as much of those in the broader population.
Now, health care as a whole accounts for one-sixth of the American economy.
And people are understandably nervous and touchy about how health care
interacts with their lives. And to reduce political opposition, the
Affordable Care Act, back when it was being crafted, was written to disrupt
as little of that big thing, the American health care economy, as possible.
But because of that, people now associate the entirety of American health
care with Obamacare. The Affordable Care Act has taken ownership in the
public perception of everything, including every bad thing in everyone`s
The law didn`t fix it all, lord knows. Problems with health insurance
companies, or providers or doctors that all existed before Obamacare, well
a lot of those still remain after Obamacare.
But now, in a lot of people`s minds, and not ridiculously so, Obamacare is
to blame. And if there`s one chart that puts this into relief, it`s this
one. It shows who benefits the most from Obamacare. The Affordable Care
income. Quite simply, iIt helps the people in the bottom 20 percent of the
distribution the most. And those are the least powerful people in our
society. They have the least political power. And so if you create a law
that`s really great for them and other people don`t see the benefits as
tangibly, even though many of the protections apply to everyone, well, no
wonder it`s not popular, no wonder conservatives hate it.
It still doesn`t mean it was the wrong thing to do. Something can be
unpopular, but also right and good.
HAYES: Civil rights icon Congressman John Lewis says that a miscarriage of
justice in Ferguson could result in massive nonviolent protests all over
Lewis made those comments in a radio interview today as a St. Louis County
grand jury continues to consider whether or not to indict Ferguson Police
Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of unarmed 18-year-old Michael
Lewis recalled his own experiences of the 1965 voting rights march where he
was savagely beaten by state troopers in Selma, Alabama.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JOHN LEWIS, (D) GEORGIA: Selma was the turning point. And I think
what happened in Ferguson will be the turning point. I think people are
waiting, they`re watching and we`re going to see, I think, within the next
few days, what happens. And there could be massive, non-violent protests
all over America.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Ahead of the grand jury`s decision, officials are attempting to
tensions with ceremonial gestures. This afternoon, Missouri Governor Jay
Nixon swore in 16 members of the newly-created Ferguson commission. Nixon
formed the commission to addressed the social and economic conditions
highlighted by protests over Brown`s death this summer.
Nixon also defended his decision to declare a state of emergency and
activate the national guard in advance of a grand jury announcement.
(BEGIN VDEO CLIP)
JAY NIXON, GOVERNOR OF MISSOURI: I`m not preparing for war. I`m preparing
for peace, I`m preparing for order and peace. And our goal here is to have
peace, to maintain peace.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Meanwhile, a coalition of community groups and the three largest
police departments in the St. Louis area have agreed to about a dozen rules
of engagement to follow during the upcoming planned protests. As the
Washington Post reports, protesters have agreed to peaceful demonstrations
if police don`t interfere while police agreed to respect demonstrator`s
right to assemble as long as there is no violence.
The two sides have yet to come an agreement on several points, however,
including according to one coalition leader, the group`s request police be
dressed in minimal gear and that tear gas tactical vehicles and rubber
bullets not be used.
You don`t approach peaceful protesters in your communities as if they`re
enemy combatants and expect that not to be a problem remarked the group`s
Protesters are determined, redoubling their efforts by training people in
non-violent, direct action and scoffing at their portrayal. One St. Louis
telling the Huffington Poost that many locals have an over-the-top fear
about what will happen once the grand jury does make a decision.
Have you looked at the comments on any of the newspapers? People think the
protesters are here to kill babies and eat virgins and do whatever.
Joining me now from St. Louis is Reverend Osagyefo Sekou, a trainer/
organizer working with Ferguson action.
Reverend, when we show those pictures of folks in training, what exactly
are you all doing? What does the training consist of and what are you
REV. OSAGYEFO SEKOU, FERGUSON ACTION: Well, you know, we are in the state
of waiting for this grand jury decision. As a result of that, we have
begun to train people over the past several months within the rich
tradition of nonviolent civil obedience. It is the tradition that gave us
-- me -- the right to vote, that gave women the right to vote, that gave us
the eight hour workday.
And so non-violent civil obedience is as American as apple pie.
And we`re training folks how to engage in protests, how to protect
themselves on the street. One of the ways which we create disruption in a
and that we are guided by deep, abiding love.
Also, folks who have been trained, some 500 and more will be trained, have
learned about their legal rights and that there will be legal observers
And, then, unfortunately, we`ve had to have medics train people how to deal
with tear gas and pepper spray and other forms of police provocation and
chemical weapons that have been, in the past, deployed among on Americans
engaging in their first amendment rights.
HAYES: Reverend, we`ve seen this kind of very tense waiting period. And
we`ve seen a variety of announcements by officials in the area from the
governor, there`s -- the declaration of the state of emergency. There were
conferences talking about preparations. How do you and the folks that
you`re organizing with view those announcements, particularly the state of
SEKOU: Well, it seems the case, contrary to Governor Nixon`s statements
today, that they are preparing for war, that they have stockpiled some
quarter millions dollars in military-style weaponry to be deployed on
American citizens, while we are working for justice, they have acquired a
particular curious piece of weaponry called the hornet`s nest, which will
deploy rubber bullets and a chemical agent upon detonation in a crowd.
And so the state of emergency seems to point toward a governor who has
forgotten that we are part of a rich democratic tradition and that it
points to the case that perhaps Missouri has become the post-modern
And these announcements are nothing in compared to the announcement that
really needs to be made, that there will be an indictment of Darren Wilson,
that there will be a demilitarization of the police and that there will be
a respect for first amendment rights.
HAYES: Reverend, quickly, what do you say to someone like Governor Nixon
who says look, I`m not on the grand jury, or Mayor Slay in St. Louis, I
can`t control the outcome of that process all I can control is that we keep
order after it happens.
SEKOU: Well, Governor Nixon could have controlled the assigning of a
special prosecutor to handle this case in an independent fashion, given the
inability of the current prosecutor to bring charges against police who
have shot unarmed folks.
And Mayor Slay has the capacity to control and restrain a police force that
tends to beat its batons on the ground and to spray pepper spray nonviolent
And so we have no option now, but to continue to be int he streets
regardless of what the outcome of the grand jury`s decision is. And
continue to be in the street supporting young people, remembering their
humanity and standing in this rich tradition of nonviolent civil
HAYES: Reverend Osagyefo Sekou, thank you, sir.
SEKOU: Thank you dear brother.
HAYES: All right. I`m definitely one to totally geek out over charts and
graphs and big data sets, but looking at something that came to my today
called Rides of Glory made my skin crawl and I will explain ahead.
HAYES: So the odds that you have not heard of Travis Kalanick, but he is
the 130th richest person in America, according to Forbes, and a celebrity
among tech geeks rivals that of Facebook`s Mark Zuckerberg and Google`s
Kalanick is the CEO and co-founder of one of the most controversial, most
loved and most hated tech start-ups in America. Uber, the smart phone-
based car service now available in more 200 cities worldwide and valued at
more than $18 billion.
Now Uber lets you summon a car and driver using a fairly simple app on your
phone, eliminating the need to hail a cab from the street or call a car
The company launched just four years ago and has quickly becoming the
darling of those who fetishize the idea of the tech industry disrupting the
old ways of doing business. Uber has been embraced by the Republican Party
as a beacon of free market innovation with the potential to defeat the bad,
old, overrated industries of the past, in this case the taxi industry,
which Uber has openly been at war with.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRAVIS KALANICK, CEO, UBER: We`re in this political campaign and the
candidate is Uber and the opponent is an (EXPLETIVE DELETED) named taxi.
He`s not a very nice character. People don`t like what he does. But he`s
so woven into the political fabric and machinery that lots of people owe
him favors and he keeps paying so the political machinery likes him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HAYES: Now, there is something genuinely appealing about Uber. The app
itself is both legitimately useful and very easy top use and the larger
idea it represents that it`s possible to improve basic everyday life
functions by using technology to overthrow a set of entrenched industries,
well that`s a powerful one.
But Uber, more than any other company, has also come to deflect the dark
side of disruption. Its leaders, including Travis Kalanick perceived as
marauding overly aggressive bros who play rough and tumble not just with
regulators and industry, but also with the company`s competitors.
Uber has been accused of booking and then canceling thousands of fake rides
from rivals and reportedly armed teams of independent contractors with
burner phones and credit cards to secretly recruit away their drivers.
The company hired former Obama operative David Plouffe to help improve its
image, but that image took another major hit last night when BuzzFeed
posted a blockbuster piece detailing how an Uber senior vice president
named ML Michael "suggested the company should consider hiring a team of
opposition researchers to dig up dirt on its critics in the media."
In remarks he thought were off the record, Michael reportedly discussed
spending a million dollars to look into journalist`s personal lives.
Uber and its executives, including Michael, apologized after the story ran
with CEO Kalanick tweeting the comments were terrible and do not represent
But they weren`t the only problem. Remember, Uber has data on the comings
and goings of all its customers and BuzzFeed reported that an Uber managed
"accessed the profile of a BuzzFeed reporer without permission to make
points in the course of a discussion of Uber policies."
And if you want to know just how revealing that data that Uber has can be,
just look at Uber`s blog. The company shares data about what it interprets
as its customer`s one-night stands, or as Uber calls it, rides of glory.
And putting that aside, remember the Uber exec who wanted to expose
critic`s personal lives? Well, he was focused on one in particular, her
name is Sarah Lacy of the website Pando Daily and she is with us tonight.
And she`s going to talk about all of this when we come back.
HAYES: So joining me now is the aforementioned Sarah Lacey, founder and
editor-in-chief of Pando Daily where she responded yesterday to the Uber
scandal; Annie Lowry, contributing editor online columnist for New York
Magazine. She`s also been covering Uber; and Josh Barro, a man who likes
to tweet out his problems with car services. He`s an MSNBC contributor,
national correspondent for the Upshot New York Times.
Sarah, I`ll begin with you.
So, not only were they just sort of brainstorming -- was this guy
brainstorming about possibly going after you, but, I mean, in an oddly
personal fashion. What`s your response?
SARAH LACY, PANDODAILY: Well, it`s pretty horrifying. I mean, look, I`ve
been a reporter in Silicon Valley for 15 years. And if you called any
investor, CEO here, they can tell you all the ways things I`ve written have
pissed them off. I`ve had people who vowed never to speak to me again.
I`ve had people who have publicly trashed me many times.
I`ve never, myself, nor heard of a company valued at tens of billions of
dollars, proposing a million dollar plan to destroy someone`s family and go
through their kids and their family at any cost, really, and leave it in a
way where their fingerprints wouldn`t have been all over it.
And I think what was really horrifying about this to me was,you know,
Travis Kalanick has talked about how he has an area in his office called
the war room where they plot things. And this wasn`t something that was
being discussed in the war room that someone felt a crisis of confidence on
came forward. This is what executives bragged about at a dinner with
people like Arianna Huffington and
Michael Wolf and Henry Blodget and they thought this was socially
acceptable. And this was in -- during Uber`s charm offensive when they
were trying to convince the media of actually how they`re good guys.
Now, if this is what Uber thinks is socially acceptable to discuss with
journalists and part of the charm offense, what`s going on in the war room?
HAYES: And Annie, you wrote a piece today about just how long can they
kind of get -- I mean, obviously, the company has been massively successful
from a lot of perspectives, but they have some real reputational issues. I
think they`re seen as kind of pirates, in a weird way, that they kind of
want to sort of conquer everyone in their way. And at a certain point
you`d think that`s going to come to bite them? But then again, you know
they can point at their valuation and their growth and say who cares if
people like us?
ANNIE LOWREY, NEW YORK MAGAZINE: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, this is not --
ymaybe this is the worst scandal, but it`s certainly not the first, it`s
the first time that Uber has been accused of being bullying and they`ve had
issues with sexism, with bad business practices, with sabotaging their
rivals. And where I think that they`re actually kind of vulnerable is in
some cities, Uber is offering
an identical services to some of its competitors -- on price, on
convenience, on how fast you can get a car, Lyft is in many cases you know
just as good as Uber is.
So there`s nothing really keeping drivers or people from going to
competitors. I think the issue is if their reputational image becomes so
bad, if people are so concerned about the use of their data, or around
their issues with
women, or around name your issue that you`re concerned about with Uber,
whether they`ll leave.
Now, again, there`s nothing in the numbers to suggest that this is
happening, but I think that they really at this point really have pretty
bad issues with their reputation and their business practices.
LACY: If I could just jump in.
HAYES: Yeah, sure.
LACY: I think there is one number that shows that this is hurting their
business, and that`s that they`re willing to spend a million dollars to go
after me. I mean, we are not as big as BuzzFeed. We are not as big as a
lot of publications, but an article I wrote had such an impact on the
company -- and I`ve known Travis Kalanick for many years since before he
started Uber, this is a man who has tweeted before that on bad days he just
looks at his income statement.
If this was not hurting the company, he would not be trying to destroy my
HAYES: Josh, the reputational battle here starts in this kind of war with
the local taxi cartels, in which case -- and they were able to sort of show
themselves I think as a fairly sympathetic in a lot of those. In a lot of
places people don`t like the local taxi cartel or they feel like it`s a
But it seems like they`ve applied that same kind of conquor all mentality
to the way they deal with everyone in this case, it seems the press or
maybe even sometimes their customers.
JOSH BARRO, NEW YORK TIMES: Right. I think they`ve decided so far that
bad press doesn`t really matter for them. I mean, you look at those taxi
cartel fights, one of the things that has helped Uber most in the national
media is that Taxis in Washington, D.C. are awful. And so people in
HAYES: And the Beltway media hates the taxis in D.C. -- I can attest to
this -- and they love Uber.
BARRO: Yeah, they use Uber all the time and it makes them feel good about
Now, the -- I think individuals who might have their information tracker a
more sympathetic adversary for Uber than the taxi industry is. And so they
need to be careful and as Annie describes there are basically similar
competitor services that are available.
But I think you know when you talk about concerns about privacy, I think
people tend to talk a lot about how they`re concerned about privacy and
then not shift their consumer behavior based on it
I mean, Microsoft has had this long ad campaign against Google saying Goole
is doing nasty things with your information, Microsoft products will be
more respectful of that. It doesn`t seem to have been successful so far in
drawing people away from Gmail and other Google services.
I mean, and -- Google has a CEO who has said, well, if you`re so concerned
about your privacy, maybe you shouldn`t be doing things that you don`t want
people to know about.
HAYES: Right. Right. But Sarah, the issue here is that Google didn`t
have a blog post about rides of glory, right? I mean, that...
LACY: Well, and you`re not getting into Google`s search engine and
trusting it with your safety late at night. You`re not putting your
children into Google`s -- I mean, look, I agree with you it`s sad and it`s
disturbing that, you know, a lot of times companies just get away with bad
behavior because we love the convenience of them and think a bad thing
won`t happen to us, but you know we -- ne of the reasons Uber is out to
get us is because we`ve investigated drivers who have had charged with
assault had criminal records that should have been caught in their
background checks and simply weren`t.
When we`ve called up Uber and asked them about women who say they were
assaulted in Ubers, they`ve said to us, well they were dressed
provocatively, or they were drinking too much.
This is a scary culture. And it`s not a scary culture where it`s a place
where I`m sharing my photos or going to look up where the address of a
restaurant I want to go tonight, this is a car that I`m trusting with my
I think -- you guys may be well right, it may be that people still prize
that convenience over that sense of security, but I think where you`re
putting your body and your loved ones in the real world, if people are
going to change over security, it`s going to be this one.
HAYES: And Annie, that was your point today about the sort of unique
nature of this.
And part of what has made Uber so beloved among a lot of tech people is the
way that it sort of uses an app to change something in the real world.
We`re talking about real cars and really moving around.
LOWREY: Yeah, absolutely. And it`s benefited from this network affect. I
has the most drivers, it has the most riders. But on the same -- at the
same time, there`s a lot of drivers who drive for both Uber and Lyft. I`m
not sure that there`s very much keeping people with Uber aside from the
convenience and this
sort of past dependence.
So I do think that that`s an issue for them going forward. If people just
decide to use Lyft and there were dozens of people on Twitter at least
today, saying that they were going to do just that.
HAYES: Sarah Lacy, Annie Lowrey, and Josh Barro, thank you all. We did
invite Uber onto the show tonight. They did not accept.
That is ALL IN for this evening. The Rachel Maddow show starts right now.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
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.