Skip navigation

All In With Chris Hayes, Friday, November 21st, 2014

Read the transcript from the Friday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

Show: ALL IN with CHRIS HAYES
Date: November 21, 2014

Guest: Francis Slay, Mo Brooks, Jose Antonio Vargas, Edward Luce, Charles
Dance, Mark Strong



(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

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

MICHAEL BROWN, SR., MICHAEL BROWN, JR.`S FATHER: We live here
together. This is our home. We are stronger and united.

HAYES: There will be a grand jury decision in the Michael Brown case,
quote, "very shortly", so says the mayor of St. Louis who joins me
exclusively tonight.

Then --

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Pass a bill.

HAYES: The president stays on offense in Nevada as one Republican
suggests the president belongs in jail.

REP. MO BROOKS (R), ALABAMA: Barack Obama has such an established
track record of ignoring the law or violating the law.

HAYES: Tonight, my interview with Congressman Mo Brooks.

And activist Jose Antonio Vargas will be here to respond.

BILL O`REILLY, FOX NEWS: And you don`t have any entitlement to be
here, not through any fault of your own.

JOSE ANTONIO VARGAS, ACTIVIST: By the way --

HAYES: Plus, why was a liberal politician forced to resign for this
seemingly innocuous tweet?

And my exclusive interview with Tyrion Lannister.

TYRION LANNISTER: This is how you want to speak to me?

HAYES: ALL IN starts right now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HAYES: Good evening from New York. I`m Chris Hayes.

President Obama has a message for protesters in Ferguson, Missouri, as
an announcement by the grand jury in the police shooting of Michael Brown
appears to be imminent.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: I think, first and foremost, keep protests peaceful. This is
a country that allows everybody to express their views, allows them to
peacefully assemble, to protest actions that they think are unjust. But
using any event as an excuse for violence is contrary to rule of law and
contrary to who we are.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Officials at the highest levels of government in St. Louis,
Missouri, are preparing.

Just hours ago, St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay and county executive
Charlie Dooley all stressing they did not know when a grand jury decision
would be announced, were fully preparing the public, police and protesters
for a decision that could arrive very soon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAYOR FRANCIS SLAY, ST. LOUIS, MO: We do not know when the decisions
are coming out, but we expect it will be coming very shortly and we want to
give you our thoughts as we go forward. We have been criticized by some
for sitting down with the protest leaders. The protest leaders have been
criticized for sitting down with us. We did so because in similar
situations in other cities, things ended up very, very badly. We do not
want that for our city or our region.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Mayor Slay will join me in just a moment.

Meanwhile, the office of St. Louis County prosecutor Robert McCulloch
is making preparations for a press conference tied to the grand jury`s
decision of whether or not to indict Officer Darren Wilson. A spokesman
saying, quote, "We are in the process of setting up the press conference to
announce the decision on Darren Wilson case. The date, time and location
hasn`t been decided, as of yet. The grand jury is still in session."

The school system is readying itself for an announcement. In a letter
of parents of children in the Jennings school district obtained by NBC
News, superintendent Dr. Tiffany Anderson writes, quote, "Due to the
potential Ferguson unrest, our Thanksgiving holiday break will be extended
to include Monday and Tuesday, November 24th and 25th, 2014."

Michael Brown`s father, Michael Brown, Sr., has released a video
message urging calm.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: I thank you for lifting your voices to end racial profiling
and police intimidation. But hurting others or destroying property is not
the answer. No matter what the jury decides, I do not want my son`s death
to be in vain. I want it to lead to incredible change, positive change,
change that makes the St. Louis region better for everyone.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: And Attorney General Eric Holder has released a video message
emphasizing the Justice Department`s new guide for police departments on
maintaining order during events protected by the First Amendment and also
lauding the nation`s great history of peaceful protest.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIC HOLDER, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Peaceful protest has been a
hallmark, a legacy of past movements for change. From patriotic women who
demanded access to the franchise to the civil rights pioneers who marched
for equal rights and equal justice.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Multiple news outlets, including "The New York Times", are now
reporting that Officer Darren Wilson, the man who shot and killed the
unarmed Michael Brown, will not return to the Ferguson Police Department,
even if he is not indicted in the Michael Brown case. But according to
"The Times", lawyers for Officer Wilson and Ferguson City officials have
been unable to agree on how or when he should leave the police department.

Joining me now is the mayor of St. Louis, Francis Slay.

Mayor, thank you for joining me.

There`s a lot of people who`ve been watching this process unfold. And
when you and Mr. Dooley come before the microphone and say, we don`t know
when and if this is going to happen just don`t believe you. They think
basically the fix is in, that officialdom in St. Louis and St. Louis County
knows and has known all along. And this is, everybody kind of winking and
nodding. What do you say to those people?

SLAY: Well, I can assure you the fix is not in. But we do know that
the grand jury is deliberating and that there is a decision that will be
coming out imminently, whenever that may be, certainly in the coming days.
So, we want to make sure that we let people know what we know when we know
it. And that`s the purpose of the press conference today was to we give
our thoughts as we go into a much anticipated decision by the grand jury.

HAYES: One of the points of contention as I understand it in
negotiations and conversations between some of the organizers of protests
and police is the issue of how police present themselves, what gear they`re
wearing, tactical equipment, whether they`re sort of dressed in SWAT team
gear or whether they`re in regular police uniforms.

What is your policy and posture in terms of how the police are going
to present themselves when they are monitoring what are planned to be
peaceful protests?

SLAY: Our police officers are going to be generally wearing their
normal uniforms, unless circumstances would dictate otherwise. They will
dress, and we`re not taking anything off the table in that regard. But
they will dress in a way that`s necessary under the circumstances to
protect themselves and to protect others. But not -- they`re not going to
be dressing in order to entice the protesters or to intimidate the
protesters. It`s for their protection.

HAYES: You are the mayor of St. Louis. You have no municipal control
over any of what is unfolding here.

SLAY: That`s right.

HAYES: But there was a shooting in St. Louis of Vonderrit Myers, and
there was a lot of protest in the neighborhood of Shaw, and there are plans
for protests of Shaw.

Are you expecting a lot of people in St. Louis proper?

SLAY: Well, we know -- we don`t know what to expect, but we know that
we have to be ready for widespread, you know, possibly widespread unrest in
the city of St. Louis. So, we`re just going to be prepared for whatever.
We really have no reason to expect anything in particular, but we know what
we`ve seen in the past. We also know that there are some safe houses that
are in the neighborhood of the shooting where Vonderrit Myers was shot.
And so, we expect that there may be some protesting there, as well.

HAYES: One of the things that ignited the most exclusive parts of the
protest in Ferguson wasn`t just the initial shooting and killing of Michael
Brown but actual police response. That`s what I think made this into such
a national story. It was what precipitated the arrival of a lot of
national press.

What have you been telling your police chief and your police officers
about not repeating the same mistakes, I think, that were made by the
Ferguson police and the St. Louis County police?

SLAY: Well, you know, first of all, again, that was not our police
department, as you mentioned. But one of things that we want to reinforce
with our officers, these are lessons learned. I can tell you that law
enforcement all over the region and I hope all over the nation learned a
lot by the aftermath of what happened in Ferguson and how it was handled,
and not only in terms of, you know, they addressed the initial shooting and
right at the scene while Michael Brown`s body was laying in the street for
a number of hours, but also how it was handled after that and dealing with
protesters and releasing information.

I mean, these are all things that I think law enforcement learned a
lot. There`s a lot of lessons learned. So, that`s one of the things we`re
talking a lot to our officers about.

We feel like we`ve got a great police department, one of the best in
the country. They`re very, very well-trained and have -- some a level of
sensitivity. I think it`s important in any situation that, you know, the
death of a young man in this kind of situation. So -- but having said
that, these are things that, you know, we`re constantly re-enforcing with
our police department.

Our -- what I was telling our police department is that, you know
what, their job is to make sure they keep everybody safe, including the
police, not only themselves, but, also, including protesters and make sure
that, you know, everyone can go home -- protesters and police and people
that aren`t even involved in that and be safe doing that.

Also, we`re trying to make sure that we protect property and
businesses. And ultimately, our goal is that we make something good come
out of this tragedy by helping to heal the region, to address racial
disparities and to make the St. Louis and the St. Louis region a better
place -- a fair and more just place for everybody.

HAYES: We`ll see if that develops. Mayor Francis Slay, thank you.

Joining me now, Trymaine Lee, national reporter for MSNBC, who has
been covering the events of Ferguson since Michael Brown`s death.

Trymaine, what`s the mood there?

TRYMAINE LEE, MSNBC NATIONAL REPORTER: I`ll tell you what, Chris, it
seems like a lifetime ago we were out here in this very spot along
Florissant Avenue. There`s so much fiery, fervent energy. Now, you don`t
see that energy and you don`t feel that energy now.

And when you talk to folks, it`s not just anger. But it`s also a real
worry and fear and concern, that when they ultimately -- regardless of what
the decision is and what the grand jury decides, eventually, folks come out
here in the street and they will be met with maximum resistance by the
police and law enforcement. There`s a real concern there.

And so, while it`s not as angry and fiery as folks have been, you
know, folks are gearing up. But again, they`re gearing up comes a lot of
worry and concern.

HAYES: What does that gearing up look like? We talked to a protest
movement who`s been conducting non-violent direct action training. There`s
been a lot of that.

There`s also I think folks, and one of the things you and I saw first
hand, we were down there in August, is there`s just a lot of organic
frustration and anger. People homemade signs, coming out, walking down the
block from their place of their home, or their place of work.

Do you anticipate a lot of that kind of protests if there`s an
announcement of no indictment whenever that is announced?

LEE: See, that`s the big question. We know those who kind of formed
organically and have different groups. Millennial Activist United, and
Hands Up United and Don`t Shoot Coalition and on and on, those folks are
the ones who have been training, those are the ones who have been
practicing this nonviolent civil disobedience and how to respond.

Now, in the summer, when that young man`s body was out there for 4 1/2
hours and everyone poured out from the neighborhood and immediately,
organically angry, I`m not sure if we`ll have that in this case. It`s
already kind of a presumption that there will be no indictment.

So how much has that kind of bled the anger that we saw the first
time? We don`t know yet. Folks again are gearing up to hit the streets.
They`re planning safe houses and getting medics and counselors and
everything in order. But the big question mark is, will the people in the
community those that have fuelled this machine in the very beginning, will
they come out in response?

HAYES: You just said something I think that`s key. This is a
reporting question about what people`s perception is, not about what
actually is happening. As you have interviewed people around there, are
you finding people that expect Darren Wilson to be indicted?

LEE: No, not one. Now, there are a couple who are still holding on
to hope, but almost to a person, everyone you speak with, they just don`t
expect it. Now, some of that from the very beginning didn`t expect it
because they don`t trust the system. They don`t trust Bob McCulloch. They
don`t trust law enforcement. They don`t trust the system here at all.

So, some people, a number of them, never believed he would be indicted
anyway. A police officer -- a white police officer shooting a young black
man here, they didn`t have any hope at all. And then, we had all of those
leaks and all the kind of fumbling from local law enforcement and their
rollout of information, but still, there are some that still believe
there`s still hope. I mean, the grand jury, they`re deliberating now.
We`re still hearing testimony and evidence late until last week.

So, there`s -- until we have a decision and the prosecutor Bob
McCulloch said, until you hear something from our office, don`t believe it.
And so, that`s kind of where we are now.

HAYES: And yet at the same time, as far as I can tell, and there`s
been such a rumor mill around this decision for weeks now, I`ve been
hearing people say oh, it`s going to happen tomorrow, it`s going to happen
in three days. Some other cable news networks have run breaking news
banner saying it could happen on Friday. That is looking like not the
case.

What do we know now? I mean, what we know is that there are concrete
preparations. We are getting e-mails from Bob McCulloch`s office planning
the press conference, which would seem to indicate that it is in fact
imminent.

LEE: All indications point that it`s imminent. But what does
imminent mean? Does imminent mean Sunday as has been widely speculated?

Again, the jury kind of, you know, it`s at their whim right now. I
mean, they`re deliberating. It will be up to them to decide when it`s
time. What we don`t know is there`s been so much speculation and rumor,
and a lot of that has fueled anxiety.

As you mentioned, I`ve had elected officials saying, hey, it`s
happening on Thursday. A community folks saying, hey, a friend of mine
that works in the post office or the fire department, they say it`s coming
down. So, it`s still this whirlwind.

HAYES: Yes.

LEE: But one thing is clear, we are getting close. We are getting
close. It`s upon us.

HAYES: Trymaine Lee, thank you very much.

LEE: Thank you.

HAYES: A Republican congressman says President Obama`s executive
action on immigration could make him guilty of a felony and result in
impeachment or prison time. I`ll talk to that congressman ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: A Friday night news dump to bring you now, which I think
warrants a big breaking news banner.

After two years, an investigation by the House Intelligence Committee,
which is, I would remind you, controlled by Republicans, has found the CIA
and the military responded properly to the 2012 attack in Benghazi.
According to the "Associated Press", quote, "The investigation determined
there was no intelligence failure, no delay in sending a CIA rescue team,
no missed opportunity for a military rescue and no evidence the CIA was
covertly shipping arms from Libya to Syria."

The investigation also found no wrongdoing by any Obama administration
appointees. Did you get that? Did you hear that?

It took two years for this Republican-controlled committee to figure
out what six other investigations by other congressional committees and a
State Department panel have already figured out.

So, you can see why the committee released this news late on Friday
into the evening. They were hoping you wouldn`t be paying attention. I,
personally, can`t wait for all the breathless coverage that we`ll see of
this in the conservative media.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: What we have to do is be honest, that tracking down, rounding
up and deporting millions of people is not realistic. That`s not who we
are. Most undocumented immigrants are good, decent people. They have been
here for a long time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: President Obama made his case for executive actions on
immigration today at Del Sol High School in Las Vegas, the same school
where he headlined principles for comprehensive immigration reform almost
two years ago. And where first visited in 2008 as a presidential
candidate.

The school is 63 percent Hispanic and in attendance were some of the
people who will be directly affected by the president`s decision to protect
up to 5 million people from deportation. Including Astrid Silva, a DREAMer
whose story the president told his primetime address last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ASTRID SILVA, DREAMER ACTIVIST: When I found out I was undocumented,
it shattered my life. Like many young people, I dreamt of graduating
college and hugging my parents after I got my diploma. I dreamt of my dad
walking me down the aisle -- simple dreams that any American girl
visualizes -- which is why I started fighting for immigration reform in
2009.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: On his way to Las Vegas onboard Air Force One, President Obama
signed two presidential memos enacting parts of his immigration plan. And
now that he`s rolled out those executive actions, Republicans are somewhat
predictably apoplectic, as they vowed they would be.

In a statement this morning, House Speaker John Boehner laid their
objections.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: The president has
taken actions that he himself has said are those of a king or an emperor,
not an American president. With this action, the president has chosen to
deliberately sabotage any chance of enacting bipartisan reforms that he
claims to seek. And as I told the president yesterday, he`s damaging the
presidency itself.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Today, House Republicans filed a long-promised lawsuit over
the administration`s decision to delay the employer mandate under
Obamacare, another example they say of this president`s executive
overreach.

But that won`t be enough to satisfy GOP lawmakers, seeking to block
President Obama`s unilateral moves on immigration, or at least to punish
him for taking action. Some members of the party want the response to go
much further.

One of the most out spoken among them, Alabama Congressman Mo Brooks
who recently suggested the president`s actions might constitute a felony.
He told "Slate", quote, "At some point, you`ll have to evaluate whether the
president`s conduct aids or abets, encourages or entices foreigners to
unlawfully cross into the United States of America. That has a five-year
in-jail penalty associated with."

And, Congressman Mo Brooks joins me now.

Congressman, do you think what the president has done is criminal?

BROOKS: I don`t know. I`m going to reserve judgment on that. I`m
not done a factual analysis. I haven`t seen any law enforcement report,
and I think the jury is still out.

I do think that at some point, too, we need to conduct an
investigation to determine whether the president is violating that federal
statute that says, as you accurately quoted, you cannot aid or abet,
encourage or induce foreign citizens to illegally enter the United States.

Now, if you look at example at DACA a couple of years ago, back then,
the illegal children problem was 6,000. Now, it`s 90,000. Did the
president`s action result in an inducement or enticement of those kids to
come to the United States of America?

HAYES: Right. We saw that --

(CROSSTALK)

BROOKS: At some point, we may examine that. But right now, I don`t
see -- right now, I don`t see any move in the United States Congress to
initiate impeachment actions of any kind.

HAYES: When President Reagan granted deferred action from 200,000
people from El Salvador who come here illegally, was he breaking the law in
the same way?

BROOKS: I have not examined the facts of those circumstances, so I
can`t --

(CROSSTALK)

HAYES: That would seem to be enticing people to come illegally if you
grant deferred action to come, wouldn`t that?

BROOKS: Again, I had not examined what Bill Clinton did. This is a
very serious manner --

(CROSSTALK)

HAYES: I`m sorry. President Ronald Reagan. President Ronald Reagan,
sir?

BROOKS: I think the individual facts there important, the mental
intent of the actor. That case, Bill Clinton, now Barack Obama, those
factors are important. Causation is very important. So, there are a lot
of things you have to look at before you can pass judgment.

Now, it`s one thing to say that there`s a possibility of something.
It`s another thing to say that there`s probability of something. And I`ve
never used the word "probability".

HAYES: Let me ask you this, you saw that young woman, Astrid Silva.
She`s going to qualify under part of the deferred that president talked
about last night. Should we deport her?

BROOKS: Well, I think it`s very sad that she`s in the circumstance
she`s in because whatever adults put her in that position.

I`m one of those -- I`m going to back up for a second. The position
that people hold on illegal aliens, quite frankly, comes down to whether
you focus on the illegal alien and the circumstances that they face, and
certainly, there`s compassion for the circumstances they face, not only
those that are already in America but also from the countries from which
they fled.

But you also have to look at the impact on American citizens.

HAYES: Right.

BROOKS: The jobs lost by American citizens.

HAYES: But before you get to that, sir --

BROOKS: And sometimes if you`re in a judicial-type setting, you have
to make difficult decisions --

HAYES: That`s right.

BROOKS: -- in the name of justice in order to protect folks. And I`m
focused on protecting American citizens from job losses and wage
suppression.

HAYES: The question on the table right now and the data on wage
suppression is incredibly murky. It doesn`t suggest that factor is very
big, and there`s lots of estimates, including by the CBO, the comprehensive
immigration reform would create jobs, reduce the deficit. That said,
should we deport Astrid Silva?

BROOKS: No, no, that`s not accurate. But go ahead.

HAYES: Sir, that`s the question. Should we deport Astrid Silva?

(CROSSTALK)

BROOKS: No, you just raised two important points, OK?

HAYES: No, no, I -- sir?

BROOKS: The economy overall may grow as you`ve just -- you`re the one
that it up now, Chris.

(CROSSTALK)

HAYES: I have a question for you, because the issue on the table is
the president has announced there`s a certain category of people who will
not be deported. You and other people think that`s wrong, and I respect
that and I think, sir, genuinely, you`re one of the most honest voices on
immigration in the Republican Party. So, the question to me seems to be,
if the president is saying this is a category of people we should not
deport, my question to you is, is that a category of people we should
deport?

BROOKS: If I have to make a decision between Americans getting jobs
or illegal aliens getting jobs, I`m going to side with Americans 100
percent of the time.

HAYES: So, we should deport these people.

BROOKS: And in this case, I`m one of those that believes that we need
to enforce our laws or else we have no immigration laws and we have open
borders. And that`s the cascading effect of what the president wants to
do. Last night, he, in effect, adopted an open borders policy, amnesty for
everybody except for terrorists that we can discern and criminals that we
can discern.

And I think that long term has a dangerous, adverse effect on
Americans and lawful Americans who are seeking jobs and seeking wages to
support their families.

HAYES: Sir, that -- I understand where you`re coming from on that. I
respectfully disagree. But let me ask you this -- in terms of enforcing
the law, and this seems to be the knob of the issue, there`s about 11.2
million unauthorized immigrants in this country. How many should we be
deporting? Because enforcing the law would mean deporting 11.2 million,
all of them are unauthorized under our immigration law. You and I agree on
that.

If we enforce the law, we would deport all 11.2 million. Is that your
position?

BROOKS: There may be circumstances in which that is the position of
United States of America, I`m willing to compromise if we get a president
who will enforce immigration laws going forward and who will secure our
border. But right now, we don`t have that --

HAYES: But, sir, if you`re willing to compromise --

(CROSSTALK)

BROOKS: And we had a policy that was enunciated last night that is
going to encourage tens of millions of foreigners to unlawfully cross our
borders --

HAYES: Congressman --

BROOKS: -- again, adversely affecting the economy and the financial
outlook of American citizens. And I was elected to represent American
citizens. And that`s what I`m going to do.

HAYES: Net migration is down, by the way. It`s below zero right now.
But I would ask is this --

(CROSSTALK)

BROOKS: Wait, that`s another false -- wait a minute, that`s another
data point that you tossed out that I think is very contestable.

HAYES: It`s not --

BROOKS: It`s hard to argue that immigration, illegally, is down, when
we have just seen 90,000 or so illegal alien children surge across our
border.

HAYES: They didn`t just surge across the border. Sir --

BROOKS: And two years ago, it`s just 6,000.

HAYES: They didn`t surge across the border. They showed up and
turned themselves to border guards. That`s quite a different thing.

BROOKS: No, I would disagree. I think they surged across the border.
When you had 6,000 two years ago, and because of the president`s conduct
and enticement, you`re now have around 90,000, 80,000 to 10,000, depending
on what the actual numbers are.

HAYES: I want to go back --

BROOKS: That is not good for our society.

Now, let me emphasize something about this. The president wanted us
and Congress to give him $40,000 for each one of those kids. Now, that`s
very kind to those kids, but that`s $40,000 that could have been used for
American children or the children of lawful immigrants. And those are the
kind of decisions we have to make.

HAYES: Final question here -- you said you`d be willing to
compromise. But it just seems to me that there`s real tension. If you
genuinely believe the immigration laws of this country need to be enforced,
how is their compromise? What you`re saying is, you`re willing to
unlawfully not enforce the laws on some percentage of those 11 million, or
you`re willing to grant amnesty to some of those 11 million? Don`t you by
your own principles as a man committed to enforcing the immigration laws in
this country must see to it that all 11 million of those people who have
come here against the laws of this country are, in fact, deported?

BROOKS: The compromise comes in the context of compassion in certain
circumstance that is just apply provided --

HAYES: Compassion sounds like lawlessness sir.

(CROSSTALK)

BROOKS: Provided we have a president that will enforce our laws.
Wait a minute, Chris, let me -- that`s a good question, but we don`t have
time in this segment to cover all the nuances of that. But let me
emphasize something, about America`s legal immigration, we are far and away
the most compassionate nation on Earth in terms of allowing foreigners to
come into our country. And we give more citizenships -- our highest honor
-- to foreigners, legally, than any other nation on Earth and almost as
many citizenships as the rest of the world combined.

So, don`t think for a moment that our lawful immigration policies are
somehow unfair, or cruel or inhumane when they are far and away the most
compassionate on the planet.

HAYES: I would disagree with that respectfully, but thank you very
much for your time, sir, tonight.

BROOKS: Those are factual data. Pull it up. That`s factual data.
Pull it up on how many we allow in.

HAYES: I genuinely appreciated --

BROOKS: How many can get citizenships, too.

HAYES: I genuinely appreciate it. Congressman Mo Brooks of Alabama -
-

BROOKS: Thank you, Chris.

HAYES: -- thank you, sir. Thank you very much.

All right. What you saw just there is one side of this immigration
debate. The other side comes from those who found out last night that in
the words of the president, they, quote, "can come out of the shadows and
get right with the law".

One of those people, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Jose Antonio
Vargas, and he will be my guest, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL O`REILLY, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Here`s the deal on it, Jose, it is a
compassionate move, but it may not be a just move. Because you and the
other people here illegally don`t deserve to be here, that`s harsh. It`s
harsh.

JOSE ANTONIO VARGAS: I don`t..

O`REILLY: You don`t -- you don`t have an entitlement to be here. Not
through any fault of your own, but you don`t.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: Bill O`Reilly told Jose Antonio Vargas last night that since
he`s
undocumented immigrant he does not deserve to be in the country, which is a
slightly different take than O`Reilly had when he talked to Jose Antonio
Vargas about immigration just a couple of years ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

O`REILLY: You want to become an American citizen. You think the
government should allow you to do that, because you came here because you
were dragged here, you were sent here.

VARGAS: Well, my mother wanted to give me a better life.

O`REILLY: All right, now, I agree with you. I think there should be
a
pathway for you.

VARGAS: Well, thank you by the way for that.

O`REILLY: If you were 32, Jose, and you sneak across the border, no.
I`m telling you, no.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HAYES: King O`Reilly says no.

Joining me now is Jose Antonio Vargas. Because of President Obama`s
executive action, he can now have temporary status and a work permit. The
action will allow him to visit his mother in the Philippines. He has not
seen her for 21
years.

So how are you feeling today, Jose?

VARGAS: I have to tell you, Chris. So when I was on Bill O`Reilly
last night, I just -- I had just called my mom from the Fox News green room
hearing
Laura Ingraham in the make-up room talk about the fact that why don`t we --
I think she said something like, we should take care of our people first.
She was talking about people like me and she said that.

And so last night, when Bill O`Reilly said that I don`t deserve, I`m
not entitled to, I frankly was -- I was too -- I was still so caught up in
my mom and just the idea that I haven`t seen this woman since I was 12.
And now, because of what the president did, I`m actually planning in my
head what I would actually say to her.

How do I hug her? How do I kiss her. How do I -- and then when Bill
O`Reilly says you don`t deserve -- and this feeling of entitlement, as you
know -- because Chris, you and I have talked about this, I`ve done maybe 44
states. I`ve traveled to 44 states, 350 events in the past three years.
There have been some Americans who have said to me you haven`t earned it
yet. You haven`t earned to be an American yet. And usually, I would say
to them, well, have you earned it? What have you done to earn it?

And sometimes they say, well I`m born here. Oh, so it`s like a
lottery. So, you`re born here, so therefore you`ve earned it.

So this is the point that I really want to make, especially after
listening to Congressman Brooks, I am so happy that he came on air. I want
to know how many
Republicans in congress share his views. That, I think, you and I both
probably would want to know.

But here`s the point, undocumented people in this country pay taxes,
pay billions of dollars into Social Security. This is where we live. This
is where we go to school. This is where we go to church. These are our
homes. These are our families. It is not us that is politicizing this
issue. It is people in congress, particularly Republicans, who are
politicizing this issue.

And if Mo Brooks and the Republican congress want to defund and
delegitimize what the president just did, I will be representing myself and
say I dare you. Go try to defund this. Try to take this away. And look
what happens in every city and every state in this country and what`s going
to happen.

HAYS: And this is the last thing I would say, Jose. What I find
maddening about this debate is, if you think the president`s wrong and you
think the laws need to be enforced, then look in your eyes and look in
Astrid Silva`s eyes and look in all of these people`s eyes and say sorry,
we`re going to deport you. We want to deport you. We are a party that
believes in deportation. We`re going to appropriate the money to deport.
We`re going to run on deportation.

But they won`t say it.

VARGAS: They won`t -- Chris, and here`s another thing that`s really,
really important. I was just in a room, a packed room of people listening
to President Obama, it was really quiet emotional looking at the mother of
Christina Jimenez, who you have had on the show, I`m sure, and --
(inaudible) and their mothers who are covered by this. And all I say is
this, I actually think undocumented people like us show Americans what it
is to be an American, because it`s a fight. You actually have to fight for
it. It`s not something that just falls in your lap.

We know America more than anybody could possibly know because we have
to fight for it. So I dare anybody take that away from us.

HAYES: Jose Antonio Vargas, thank you very much. I really appreciate
it.

VARGAS: Thank you for having me.

HAYES: OK.

Why is this photo -- look at it -- that photo, just that, causing a
giant political scandal in Britain that has led to a member of parliament
resigning.

Plus, I`ll talk to Charles Dance who plays Tiwan Lannister (ph) on
Game of Thrones about his new movie. That`s all ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: Four years ago, a group called Teaparty.org sent out a
fundraising email featuring this Photoshopped image of President Obama with
a pencil mustache and flamboyant hat.

Now, anyone who understands the racialized stereotypes of African-
American men as pimps, and of pimps dressing flamboyantly looks at this Tea
Party picture
and instantly recognizes it as blatantly cringe inducingly racist and
offensive.
And it`s the reason Talking Points Memo wrote an entire piece about the
controversy.

But here`s the thing, if you didn`t know that context, if you didn`t
know the particularities of the racial stereotype at issue, the picture
would just read as something goofy or silly. You know, the president
Photoshopped into a wacky costume.

Everything about the political meaning of that image is embedded in
the surrounding cultural context. It is not there visually.

Which brings me to a very different image that to these American eyes
is utterly banal, utterly non-controversial, utterly meaningless. It`s
this. It`s a picture of someone`s house with a van parked outside and
three flags that I knew had something to do with England hanging on the
front of the house.

Now, that picture was tweeted out with no more context than image from
hashtag #rochester, again, which struck me as absolutely normal.

But that image, that tweet, that is now the biggest political
controversy in Britain today. It made the front page of the papers. The
member of parliament who tweeted it out has lost her job, she`s resigned
from Labour`s shadow cabinet. She`s also apologized. And her former boss,
the head of the Labour Party is in full damage control mode saying he was
furious at the disrespectful tweet.

Why? Why is one photo of a house, a van and some flags such a
political scandal? I`m going to try to find out next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: My big question tonight, why is this tweet, which I thought
looked completely harmless when I first saw it responsible for the biggest
political scandal in Britain today? And here to help figure it out, Edward
Luce, chief U.S. commentator for the UK`s Financial Times.

All right, Edward, there are three ingredients in this photo. There
is the van, there are the flags and there`s Rochester. So let`s -- can we
start with
the white van? What is the significance of the white van?

EDWARD LUCE, FINANCIAL TIMES: The white van is very typical symbol of
what the white working class would drive in the outer suburbs of London.
This is a house about 30, 40 miles from London. Think a pick-up truck.
And it`s instantly recognizable. Of course, all politics is local. In
Britain, that would be instantly recognizable as the kind of vehicle driven
by that kind of demographic.

HAYES: So what`s fascinating to me is I didn`t even realize that like
white van man was a real thing. This is the Wikipedia entry about this,
"white van man is a stereotype found in the UK of the driving of smaller-
sized commercial vans, perceived as selfish, inconsiderate, mostly working
class and aggressive.

All right, so you`ve got the white van. And then what is the
significance of those three St. George`s Crosses flags flying on the house?

LUCE: Well, as you know, Chris, the St. George`s Flag is the flag of
England, the Union Jack is the flag of Britain. Now, the right wing
parties, the far right parties in Britain have traditionally -- and far
right groups, skinhead groups in the past, have traditionally used the St.
George`s flag as a symbol, as a political symbol. So it is associated,
unfairly for those of us who think it represents something else, it is
associated with the far right in Britain.

I would like to say think of the Confederate Flag, but that wouldn`t
be a fair analogy.

HAYES: So, well, so you`ve got this -- you basically got a picture of
a white van in a flag which basically is the instant stereotype for someone
in
Britain seeing this is, this is a right wing working class voter of an
certain kind
of set of stereotypical features that we can instantly kind of caricature
and then the images being tweeted by who such that people think this was
snobby or offensive on the part of the person that tweeted it.

LUCE: Well, the images tweeted by a Labour member of parliament on
the day that there`s a special election, a bi-election, in that district,
in that constituency of Rochester, where the conservative member of
parliament had defected to the UK Independence Party which is an anti-
Europe, anti-immigrant party, think Tea Party is the closest analogy. And
all she needed to do was tweet that picture to cause a Twitter storm,
because it looked like she was this e elitist, out of touch, center-left,
urban liberal coming in to town and taking a picture -- maybe think of a
double wide trailer, somewhere near Scranton.

HAYES: All right, so this is our best analog is imagine if Elizabeth
Warren campaigning in eastern Kentucky for Alison Lundergan Grimes, took a
picture of a trailer with a pick-up truck with Gadston flags on it, the Tea
Party flag, and said, hashtag #imagefromeasternkentucky and people would --
is that about right? Is that like -- are we there the ballpark?

LUCE: That is about right. I had a more tortured one in my head,
which is Debbie Wasserman Schultz somewhere near Scranton, but with pretty
similar images. And I think you chose a better flag than the Confederate.
But that`s about right, yes.

HAYES: Edward Luce, thank you for explaining that. I really
appreciate it.

LUCE: Thank you for having me.

HAYES: All right, I`m going to talk to actors Charles Dance who plays
Tiwan Lannister (ph) in Game of Thrones, and Mark Strong about The
Imitation Game, a
fascinating new film they`re starring in next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HAYES: There`s a strong case to be made the most consequences Genius
of the 20th Century wasn`t Thomas Edison or Albert Einstein, but rather
Alan Turing. Turing is the man basically invented modern computer science.
And if that was his only contribution to society, he would be an absolute
giant.

But laying the groundwork for modern computing was just one of
Turing`s many extraordinary accomplishments. Perhaps no more important
than the code breaking work he did during World War II.

See, Turing played a pivotal role in cracking the supposedly
impenetrable Enigma code which was used by the Germans during that war.
And it saved countless lives in the process.

According to the BBC, none other than Winston Churchill credited
Turing himself, the man, with making the single biggest contribution to
allied victory in the war again Nazi Germany.

But Alan Turing was not celebrated for his work during his lifetime.
Instead, he was punished by the very government he helped to save. In
1952, Turing was prosecuted for homosexual acts, which were a criminal
offense in the UK at the time. He was sentenced to chemical castration by
a series of injections of female hormones. And two years later, Turing is
believed to have committed suicide by biting into an apple that was laced
with cyanide, though some maintain his death was an accident.

In 2009, after a public campaign brought attention to Turing`s
mistreatment by the government, then British Prime Minister Gordon Brown
made an official public apology for the appalling way Turing was treated.

And late last year, Turing was granted a posthumous royal pardon from
the Queen of England herself.

The life of Alan Turing makes for an utterly fascinating story. And
now, a new called The Imitation Game has set out to tell it. It stars
Benjamin Cumberbatch of Sherlock fame as Turing.

And I sat down with two of the actors who play major roles in the film
Charles Dance and Mark Strong to ask about the movie and the man at the
center.

I opened by asking Dance who Game of Thrones fans may know as Tiwan
Lannister (ph) what he knew about Turing before getting involved with the
film.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHARLES DANCE, ACTOR: I was only vaguely familiar. I really didn`t
know much about Alan Turing at all. What aroused my curiosity was when it
was announced on the floor of the House of Commons that Alan Turing had
been granted a royal pardon. I thought what`s he been pardoned for? And
then, you know, finding out his role in cracking the enigma code and
basically inventing almost probably the world`s first computer.

But this whole business of a pardon I found somewhat ironic because I
think, really, the family of Alan Turing should be -- well, the government
should be asking Alan Turing`s family to pardon them for treating him so
appallingly, you know.

Anyway -- so then when this script came along, and I was asked to be a
part of it. I very much wanted to do it, one, because the script was very,
very good, but because it told me a lot more about Alan Turing and I
thought a lot of people also should know a lot more about Alan Turing.

HAYES: Well, that`s what`s amazing about the movie is that at one
level, I can`t believe no one`s made it before because the sheer drama of
the story. And at the same time I`m amazement it got made now, because
Turing is I think an unfairly more obscure figure than he probably should
be given what he did.

MARK STRONG, ACTOR: Well, what it`s a testament to the secret
service, really, that he remained kind of unknown to so many people for so
long. I wasn`t really aware of Alan Turing, to be honest. I mean, I knew
he had some vague
connection to the enigma code, but that really was about it.

Why it`s made now is I think a book came out that was used to create
the foundation of the story in the film. And it`s just -- I don`t know,
it`s amazing that it`s only -- it`s not even a year since he was pardoned
and yet all of this
stuff happened in the war. I mean, he was responsible for saving millions
of lives, shortening the war by probably a couple of years.

HAYES: I mean, literally, millions -- I mean, when the code was
broken, it
completely altered the trajectory. I mean, the British and the allies
suddenly had access to essentially they could read the e-mails of the time,
of the Germans saying we`re going to bomb this place at this time.

STRONG: Which gave rise to a really interesting part of the film,
which is that once they cracked the code, they had to decide who to save
and who to sacrifice, because if you just solved every problem or made
people aware that the
Germans were about to attack them, it would be very obvious to the Germans
that the code had been cracked.

So he then, for the last couple of years of the war, essentially had
to play god and decide mathematically which was his choice who to save and
who to sacrifice. It`s very difficult.

HAYES: There`s two sort of aspects to the drama here. There`s the
drama of the war and the stakes of that. And also this kind of David and
Goliath, man versus the institution, right.. Here is this sort of
eccentric genius brought into the bowels of the national security apparatus
and he kind of fights them. And then there`s of course the fact that he`s
trying to crack secrets while he himself as this man with these dangerous
secrets.

And I want to play this scene that gives a sense of just how
impossible or how difficult it was to kind of corral this man into the
institution he`s working in. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Churchill has put Alan in charge.

UNDENTIFIED MALE: This is a terrible idea.

BENEDICT CUMBERBATCH, ACTOR: So I can give these men orders now?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I hate to say it, but, yes.

CUMBERBATCH: Excellent.

Keith and Charles, you`re both fired.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Excuse me.

CUMBERBATCH: You`re mediocre linguists and positively poor
codebreakers.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Alan, you can`t just fire Keith and Charles.

CUMBERBATCH: He just said I could.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, I did no such thing, but Churchill did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Go to hell.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HAYES: He writes to Churchill. And Churchill writes back and says
it`s yours.

STRONG: Yes. Yes.

HAYES: And part of this here is that here you have a man who -- even
though he was gay at the time, he was not out because he couldn`t really
properly be out
at the time. But he also wasn`t hiding himself. I mean, this was someone
of a certain kind of self possession, right, that he was able to boss
people around, impose his will and if not for that, the code wouldn`t have
been broken.

DANCE: Sure. I mean, I think you know people of that degree of
intelligence
to know -- they rarely have too many inhibitions, actually. Do you know
what I mean?

HAYES: Yes. Absolutely.

DANCE: And he was a perfect example of that.

HAYES: You got to talk to the family, you told me, meet the family.

STRONG: Yeah.

They came to premiere in London. And it was really fascinating. They
were very proud of him. And they were proud of this portrayal of him.

I often wonder about the disconnect between fiction and reality. They
saw in this film an opportunity for people to understand quite how
important he was. And so that can only be a good thing

HAYES: The film is called The Imitation Game.

Thank you very much, gentleman. I really appreciate it.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HAYES: All right, earlier you may have noticed I had referred to
Benedict Cumberbatch as Benjamin Cumberbatch, which is of course wrong. My
only excuse is it`s been a very long week.

That is All In for this evening.

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