updated 5/11/2015 12:09:51 PM ET 2015-05-11T16:09:51

Date: May 8, 2015
Guest: Donte Stallworth, Randal Hill, Alex Garland, John Stanton, Roger
Simon, Francesca Chambers, Roger Simon, Francesca Chambers

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: W to call the shots for Jeb. The decider is

Let`s play HARDBALL.

Good evening. I`m Chris Matthews in Washington.

Ghastly news tonight. If you held hope that Jeb Bush was not like his
brother, that he was not a leader who would take us down another rabbit
hole like Iraq, give it up. I mean, really give it up.

Jeb just told a group that W would be his go-to guy on the Middle
East, that the man who called himself "the decider" will once again be back
in action, that the people who brought us the most ridiculous foreign
policy decision in modern history, that Ted Kennedy called the most
important thing he ever voted against, is coming back to the political

Jeb says if you want to figure out his thinking on war in the Islamic
world, think W. Why did he do it? Because being a hawk is the one thing
that unites Republican presidential candidates these days? Because he`s
not getting any traction on Common Core and thinking positive about illegal

Whatever the reason, the idea that we could get another president
along the lines of W is frightening. Does this mean Dick Cheney`s got his
bags packed and is heading back into the war room?

I`m joined right now by MSNBC political analyst David Corn of "Mother
Jones" and Jonathan Capehart of "The Washington Post."

You`re chuckling, David, because you and I can`t believe the poetry of
this. As I said, Jeb Bush has just named his brother, former president
George W. Bush, as his lead thinker on foreign policy when it comes to

And as "The Washington Post" pointed out, quote, "Embracing George W.
Bush as a foreign policy confidant is a risky and unexpected move. While
the former president`s approval ratings have improved since he left office
in 2009, his foreign policy legacy, particularly the long war in Iraq,
remains deeply unpopular."

It got that right. According to a CBS/"New York Times" poll conducted
last year, 75 percent of the American people, three quarters of us, say
that the Iraq war wasn`t worth it.

By the way, Bush dropped this bombshell at a Tuesday night fund-raiser
with Republican mega-donor Paul Singer (ph). Up until now, George -- or
rather Jeb Bush had been trying to distance himself from his family. He`s
been careful to emphasize that he`s his own man ever since he first
expressed an interest in running for president. Here he was.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What impact does having a father and a brother who
have served as president weigh on your decision to potentially run?

JEB BUSH (R), FMR. FLORIDA GOVERNOR: If I was to go beyond the
consideration of running, I would have to deal with this and turn this --
this fact into an opportunity to share who I am. It doesn`t bother me a
bit to be proud of them and love them, but I know for a fact that if I`m
going to be successful going beyond the consideration, then I`m going to
have to do it on my own.


MATTHEWS: So David Corn, that idea is dead now. He wants to be W on
Israel and the Middle East. What`d he do it, political, ideological,
desperation? What would you call it.

mistake. I think it`s inexplicable. It`s like saying if you`re -- if he`s
elected, he`ll appoint Bernie Madoff to run the SEC.

And it`s not just, you know, George W. that he`s talked about advising
him. In February, shortly after that speech you just showed, he released a
list of his foreign policy advisers -- 17 out of the 21 served in the
George W. Bush administration and helped give us the Iraq war, including
your favorite, Paul Wolfowitz.


CORN: And so he`s not showing any distance on the Iraq war. And even
-- you know, even on that list, conspicuous is absence was people -- were
people like Condi Rice, who might have been a little bit more skeptical.

So here we have Jeb Bush -- you know, I don`t think it was purposeful,
but I think it`s -- the fact is there that he`s tied to these people and to
his brother, who gave us one of the biggest foreign policy mistakes of all

And listen, you know, whether Hillary`s campaign does it or not,
there`ll be super-PACs out there that will spend a lot of money, whatever
George W.`s approval ratings are at the time, reminding people about this
war, and also about the economic crash that happened on his watch.

MATTHEWS: Sure. Hey, Jonathan...


MATTHEWS: ... you know, I know the country -- people are very pro-
Israeli generally in this country, and that`s a part of our culture. But
there`s something different going on now. People may be hawkish in general
terms now, some people. Like, Let`s really show those people. But nobody
wants a war again.

Nobody wants to go in there on the ground, like W did so stupidly.
And Cheney pushed him -- and by the way, my favorite or -- you mean
sarcastically favorite is Dick Cheney and always will be, OK, of all the
hawkish guys out there.

Jonathan, why would he say, I want to do again -- or listen to a guy
who got us into that rabbit hole, that hopeless situation in Iraq that
we`re never quite able to get out of?

CAPEHART: Yes, I -- I -- I`m not sure. After saying that he`s going
to be his own man and that we have to judge him on his own merits, I`m not
sure why he would do, it or what benefit it would gain him.

Look, it makes sense when you think about it, why he would turn to
his brother for advice because his brother has actually sat in the Oval
Office, has had to make decisions about, you know, war and peace, about how
to deal with other nations...

MATTHEWS: Yes, but he made the wrong ones!

CAPEHART: No, no, no! He made -- I know. I get that. I get that.
He made the wrong decisions. He made the wrong decisions. That`s correct.

CORN: He`s a negative example.

CAPEHART: Yes, he`s a negative example. But again, it`s someone who
has experience in the job. But the problem that he has is the country
still remembers that war and hates that war, whether they`re Democrats or

Republicans still do not like George W. Bush all that much, not so
because so much of -- because of the warm, because of what they view as the
profligate spending during his administration, when they wanted a
conservative who was going to get into the White House and cut, cut, cut.
Instead, the deficit grew under...


CAPEHART: ... exploded under President Bush. And so Jeb Bush is in a
"damned if you do, damned if you don`t" situation here.

MATTHEWS: Well, the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire paint two
different pictures of Jeb Bush`s candidacy right now. A Quinnipiac
University poll of Iowa Republicans this week found that Jeb Bush had
slipped into seventh place, with support from just 5 percent of likely
caucus-goers. That`s way at the bottom.

And a new WMUR poll shows Jeb Bush just narrowly leading the pack up
in New Hampshire with 15 percent, which is not very good if you consider
the fact -- go back to you, David -- that -- you know, that President
Reagan went up there, I mean, Bill Clinton went up there. Leaders tend to
win in New Hampshire.

CORN: Right.

MATTHEWS: And the fact is that he`s been around a long time, Jeb
Bush. The fact that he`s barely ahead up there and way in the back in Iowa
means he`s got to push a couple buttons now. Looks like he`s pushing the
hawk button.

CORN: Well, you know, I don`t think that`s going to win him votes.
There are other hawks in the race, whether it`s Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz in a
way. And I think he has -- you know, he`s hitting this early ceiling. If
you talk to people who do focus groups of Republican voters, a lot of them
say, We just don`t want another Bush.

I`m not even sure it`s because of the war. They just don`t think that
fondly of the last one and they want something new. So I think wrapping
his arms around George W. Bush isn`t going to gain him ground in New
Hampshire or Iowa. I think it was a mistake. I think he made a very, very
big mistake, as he has done on occasions.

He`s -- you know, he`s been OK as a campaigner the past few months,
but when his book came out a year-and-a-half ago and he tried to talk about
immigration, Jeb Bush made many mistakes. So I think he just kind of, you
know, lost it the other night.

MATTHEWS: You know, clearly, it may just be a case of pandering. It
was before a Jewish group, and I think it was probably a bunch of hawks in
the room, I assume, from the way he addressed them in this regard.

And I`m just wondering because, like a lot of voters -- I mean,
progressives might even agree with this, or moderate progressives, it`s
nice to know that when there`s a general election that you can imagine
voting for either of the two candidates.

But here Jeb is signing up now, saying, I`m not anywhere near the
middle, like you thought I was. I`m not something like a thoughtful
Republican who thought we`ve made some mistakes in the past, even my
brother made them, but I`m just signing on. I`m just signing onto the
mistakes of the past, so how can you even think of voting for me? That`s
what it`s doing to me, Jonathan.

CAPEHART: But you know what -- what -- the venue where -- where Jeb
Bush said this is what I find interesting. He said this at a fund-raiser,
a private event where people who were at the event told someone in the
press. If he had done this in a foreign policy speech, if he had done this
during an interview, say on HARDBALL, then I think it would have a much
more explosive effect.

He could effectively come back out and say, Well, no, no, no, no, I`m
my own man. And you know, the more David talks about this, I actually
maybe think that David`s right, that this was a mistake, or Jeb Bush was
hoping that this wouldn`t get out.

MATTHEWS: Yes, he was Working a particular audience, which
politicians do, by the way.


MATTHEWS: ... 47 percent. You know, they...

CORN: I remember that!

MATTHEWS: Or Obama going out to San Francisco with a very wealthy
crowd up on Nob Hill, talking about people who cling to their guns and
religion. He didn`t -- he thought that was an elite cultural, secular
crowd. The wonderful about social media -- social media, David, is that
you can`t keep secrets.

CORN: Well, you can`t. And you know, the fact that he said this is
out, that the Bush campaign is not denying he said it because they know he
said it. And I think there are a lot of other ways to pander to a group of
rich donors on the issue of Israel other than saying, George W. Bush is my
number one adviser because I`m not even sure that crowd is going to like


MATTHEWS: By the way, I would think that group would believe in
intelligence and sophistication, and they- (INAUDIBLE) I want some more
thinking, hard-headed thinking like we got from W! I mean, give me a
break! I don`t care how hawkish you are, you don`t think W knew what was
going on.

Anyway, "The Washington Post" reported this week that Bush advisers
are taking a long view of the upcoming campaign, hoping to bank enough
money to outlast his rivals through a potentially long primary season.

And late last year, Bush himself famously said he`d be willing to lose
the primary to win the general. Here he is.


BUSH: I kind of know how a Republican can win, whether it`s me or
somebody else, and it has to be much more uplifting, much more positive,
much more willing to -- you know, to be practical now in Washington world
(ph), lose the primary to win the general without violating your


MATTHEWS: Well, it looks like he gave up on that theory, Jonathan.


MATTHEWS: It looks like now he wants to win the primaries. He`s
willing to say what the audience wants to hear, and he`s not going to push
Common Core or "I have an Hispanic family and I`m kindly disposed to
immigrants" because that`s not selling with the people that are putting the
money up.

CAPEHART: Well, and he`s already on record as being nicey-nicey on
those two issues.


CAPEHART: I think about what happened when Governor Pence did what he
did on that so-called religious freedom law that he signed, the furor over
that. Jeb Bush was the first one to jump on board that, and then when
Governor Pence changed his mind, he had -- he had to backtrack.

So Governor Bush, I think, has decided, you know, I`ve gone against
the party on two things, I can`t go against the party and the base on
anything else after that. It`s great for them to -- to try to play long
ball and try to have it be a marathon here, but in a campaign, a Republican
campaign where all of these candidates are going to have a billionaire
adopter, if he doesn`t get a billionaire adopter, it doesn`t -- it doesn`t
matter what...


CAPEHART: ... happens in Iowa and New Hampshire or South Carolina.

CORN: That`s the key thing. That`s the key thing. Everybody --
well, maybe not everybody, but at least 10 candidates or so will all have
enough money to stay in the hunt, whether they win or lose these primaries
and caucuses...

CAPEHART: Right, whether they deserve to be in the race or not.

CORN: ... for a long time.

MATTHEWS: Well, I`m glad to see that prostitution is still legal in
Nevada, anyway.


MATTHEWS: Thank you, guys. And that`s where they go for the big
money. Thank you, David Corn, and thank you, Jonathan Capehart.


MATTHEWS: Coming up, "deflate-gate." Tom Brady commits the PR
equivalent of intentional grounding. He dodges questions about that NFL
report that found the Patriots probably cheated and he probably knew about
it. And now the league is considering what, if anything, to punish the guy
with, and see if they do it.

Plus, the growing fear of homegrown terrorists. The Pentagon`s
concerned enough that they`re upping the security level at military bases
right now across the country.

And President Obama goes to Nike headquarters to tell skeptical
Democrats to just do it, pass the trade bill, and that so many in the party
are fighting him on this.

Finally, "Let Me Finish" with a day that should be called Mom`s Day.
Mom`s Day.

This is HARDBALL, the place for politics.


MATTHEWS: New Hampshire is a presidential battleground state, and new
polling suggests it`s going to stay that way for 2016. Let`s check the
HARDBALL "Scoreboard."

According to the -- sorry...


MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL. Well, the saga of Tom Brady and
"deflate-gate" continues. The NFL is expected to announce any day now
what, if any, punishment the star quarterback and his team`s going to get.

An NFL commission report this week found it more probable than not, of
course, that two employees of the team purposefully deflated balls to give
Brady an edge, and that he likely knew about the scheme.

Well, last night, in a pre-scheduled appearance at Salem State
University up in Massachusetts before a very, very friendly home crowd,
Brady was asked about the report. His response, I`d say, was the PR
equivalent of an intentional grounding.


TOM BRADY, PATRIOTS QUARTERBACK: I don`t have really any reaction,
Tim (ph). Our owner commented on it yesterday, and it`s only been 30 hours
so I haven`t had much time to digest it fully. But when I do, I`ll be sure
to let you know how I feel about it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you that slow a reader?


BRADY: Well, my athletic career has been better than my academic
career so -- usually, I`m used to reading X`s and O`s. This was a little
bit longer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When do you plan to address this publicly?

BRADY: Hopefully, soon. Hopefully, soon. There`s still a process
that`s going forth right now, and you know, I`m involved in that process.
So whenever it happens, it happens. And I`ll certainly want to be very
comfortable in how I feel about the statements that I make.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Has this, however, detracted from your joy of
winning the Super Bowl?

BRADY: Absolutely not!


MATTHEWS: Well, anyway, joining me right now are two former NFL
players with their own views on the report. Donte Stallworth`s a former
wide receiver for the Washington Redskins, Philadelphia Eagles -- that`s
how it`s pronounced -- and New England Patriots, where he played with Tom
Brady. And Randal Hill is a former wide receiver for the Miami Dolphins,
Arizona Cardinals and New Orleans Saints. Thank you all, gentlemen.

I don`t know what you thought -- you guys know more about the game
than I do, but what do you think about the PR of this guy? He has an
interview last night, they never ask him the question, they never ask him
the simple question, Did you know about them fixing the balls?

What do you think of the whole interview process last night? What was
that about?

already intentional that they had -- that Jim was going -- not going to
delve too much into the controversy of the balls, but Tom Brady, I think,
was prepared to answer as far as he went. I didn`t -- I don`t think...


MATTHEWS: What`d he say?

STALLWORTH: I don`t think...


MATTHEWS: ... an intentional grounding. I don`t think he even tried
to answer.


MATTHEWS: What do you think he said? Can you remember a word he
said? I can`t.

STALLWORTH: Well, I just -- I just remember the fans and the crowd.
They were...

MATTHEWS: Yes, they were cheering him on. I mean, he`s their
favorite -- he`s their Easter Bunny up there.

What do you think, Randal?


MATTHEWS: First, let`s skip to the chase here. Do you know anything
about this kind of stuff going on? Did ever hear about quarterbacks?
Because apparently, the fumble rate -- somebody e-mailed me on this thing -
- the fumble rate for the Patriots is practically the best in the -- I
mean, the least fumbles. So handling a ball that`s not fully inflated,
apparently -- apparently -- is easier than a fully -- than a fully inflated
ball. It`s softer, easier to grab hold of, so it`s helped them in a number
of ways, apparently. Your thoughts.

RANDAL HILL, FORMER NFL PLAYER: Well, when you talk about, you know,
the surface area of a football -- and if you take your hand and try to put
it against a wall and try to grip the wall, and take your same hand and put
it on your leg and try to grip your leg, you`re going to get a better grip.
It`s just the nature of the beast.

But I played with one of the greatest pure passers in the league, Dan
Marino, and I`m sure he didn`t do anything like that. But you know, times
have changed. And you know, it`s the nature of the beast. And I think the
NFL -- you know, they`ll handle it the best way they know how and they will
protect that shield (ph) and they`ll make sure that this integrity check
will come to pass.

MATTHEWS: What do you think? Do you think, Randal, there`s going to
be a hit for this guy, a couple games suspended, that kind of thing, or you
think they`re going to -- what else can they do, actually, go after draft
picks, which probably drives the teams crazier? What do you think is the
stronger punishment, three or four games off, they whittle it down to one
or two, or do they go after draft picks?

HILL: Well, I think that what they will do is, they will go after
draft picks.

They may even go after a two- or three-game suspension, and also get
maybe into the owner`s pocket, because you`re -- now you`re talking about
institutional control, which we have all heard that as it relates to the

So I think all are on the table. And what happened last year,with all
the off-season and on-field and off-the-field antics of players, they are
not going to let that happen this year.


HILL: It`s not going to let it happen.

MATTHEWS: Yes. And it`s a weird thing. It`s an awful thing, because
we`re guys talking about this, but the idea of even comparing this to a guy
beating up his girlfriend in an elevator, in human terms, deflating a ball
is nothing compared to that.

HILL: Right.

MATTHEWS: But in football scoring terms, it`s one of those asterisk
things. This affects the game.


And that`s one thing that the NFL is always -- especially with Roger
Goodell coming in as the new commissioner, he`s always tried to lay down
the law. One of the things he`s big on is the integrity of the game and
protecting the shield.

But when you look at all the instances, I mean, at end of the day, the
actual fine for these issues would be a $25,000 fine.


STALLWORTH: But I think all eyes will be on the NFL to see what type
of discipline they do hand down to Tom Brady and/or the Patriots and even
possibly the two assistants.

MATTHEWS: Anyway, the scandal has hit Brady hard, of course, but you
couldn`t tell last night. This is the funny part.

He received a hero`s welcome from up there in Boston or up there in
Salem, packed at that event at Salem State University. Let`s watch the
reaction to this hero of theirs.



TOM BRADY, NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS: This is like a Patriot pep rally.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tom, it looks like you picked a pretty friendly
place to reappear.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I love you, Tom Brady!

BRADY: I love you, too.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Ted Wells report was just released.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your reaction, Tom, to the Ted Wells




MATTHEWS: Who cares? I mean, this is like a -- I would call that
softball up there.


MATTHEWS: The topic was about a softball and -- let me get back with
you, Randal. This audience approval number was pretty high last night.

It`s in New England. I went to school up there at Holy Cross. It`s a
New England thing. They -- I don`t want to get into knocking anybody, but
there`s something about New England. They will get behind a team. They
really behind it. This is a regional, cultural thing with the people up
there. It`s like the Red Sox fever thing, you know, which is hard to
understand unless you live up there.


HILL: Well, let`s straighten it out.

First off, you said Boston. It`s really Boston. You got to say it

MATTHEWS: Boston, all right, all right. Thank you.

HILL: But, no, they are absolutely fanatical fans, and rightfully so,
because their team has fared well over the past decade or two.

But, with that being said, you know, you have to now look at what`s
going on behind the scenes. And, again, the NFL is going to look at what
has happened in the past, this past year, with players not acting right,
players not performing right, players acting bad off the field. So they
are not going to let that transition on to field antics such as deflating
balls and/or having balls deflated.

MATTHEWS: OK. Well, let`s do some real damage here. Who has the
best future, Russell Wilson or Tom Brady?

HILL: Oh, Russell Wilson.

STALLWORTH: The best future.


MATTHEWS: Oh, you were fast off the line there.

What do you think? Because I`m looking at Wilson.

STALLWORTH: If you`re talking about on the field, I would say Russell
Wilson. He`s about...


STALLWORTH: ... younger than Brady.

MATTHEWS: I`m watching -- I`m watching that guy. He`s going to be

Anyway, thank you, guys, Donte Stallworth and Randal Hill.

You were so fast on that one, Randal. Thank you.


HILL: Thank you.

MATTHEWS: Up next -- up next, the knew sci-fi movie "Ex Machina"
could be the sleeper hit of the summer. It`s about artificial
intelligence. I saw some of it. It is something. It happens when
technology gets ahead of humanity`s ability to control it. Remember

Anyway, the film`s director will be here with us when HARDBALL


MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.

Well, there`s a new movie out that is already being hailed as this
summer`s sleeper hit. It`s a work of science fiction called "Ex Machina."
It`s the story of what happens when the eccentric founder of a massive
technology firm invites a young computer programmer to test his latest
innovation, an extremely lifelike robot called Ava.

It shows how developing technology can outpace humanity`s ability to
not only understand it, but to control it. The film is being praised by
critics as one of the most realistic depictions of artificial intelligence
that we have seen from Hollywood in years, and here`s a clip.





UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR: Do you have a name?


UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR: I`m pleased to meet you, Ava.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTRESS: I`m pleased to meet you, too.


MATTHEWS: Well, the film opened last month in just four theaters, but
the response has been so positive that it`s getting a wider release on
2,000 screens starting today.

I`m joined right now by the film`s director and writer, Alex Garland.

Alex Garland, why do these robotic women always have these wonderful
Teri Garr sexy voices? Is this something that comes with the science?
They`re always amazingly seductive in their voices. Your thoughts?

ALEX GARLAND, DIRECTOR, "EX MACHINA": Really? Do you remember Hal in

MATTHEWS: No, he didn`t.


MATTHEWS: He said, I`m scared, Dave.


This one does, largely because of Alicia Vikander, the actress that
plays her. I think she`s responsible for the voice.

MATTHEWS: So what is this about? Is it about what we have thought
about ever since the beginning of movies, which was Frankensteins, man`s
ability to create or recreate or resurrect getting out of hand, and finding
ourselves at war with our own creation, whether it`s HAL 9000 or it`s
"Blade Runner"?

GARLAND: Well, actually, I didn`t really approach it as a cautionary
tail in that Frankenstein-type way.

I actually thought about it as -- as feeling there was a lot of
anxiety about artificial intelligence floating about, a lot of concern. It
comes from the tech world, but it comes more broadly, you know, from
scientist Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, and so on, have been talking about it
a lot recently.

And I just didn`t feel that way. I felt more interested in A.I.,
almost sort of optimistic about it really. And so I thought I would try to
make a film that was kind of a pro A.I. film, instead of one that`s anxious
about them.

MATTHEWS: What`s the difference between a robot and that kind of
artificial intelligence where you think you`re talking to a person?

GARLAND: Well, yes.

I mean, it has to be said we have got plenty of artificial
intelligence around at the moment. Siri on your cell phone is artificial
intelligence. And you get them in cars that can park themselves and planes
that can fly themselves, and so on and so forth.

This is talking about something slightly different, which is a self-
aware machine, a machine that has consciousness, which is what we have got.


GARLAND: A chess computer doesn`t know it`s a chess computer. It
doesn`t know it`s playing chess, but you know you`re a human and I know I`m
a human.

And that`s sort of -- that`s something really distinct and it`s
something that we haven`t yet managed to achieve, but, if we do, it`s going
to have huge consequences for humans. And it`s something which is quite
possible, so it`s something that we have got to think about.

MATTHEWS: You know, it`s interesting about this subject, that in
"Blade Runner," the people who were replicants were afraid of being
detected because they were being destroyed.

What`s the conscience, what is the fear of an artificial intelligence?
Are they afraid of being turned offer, or do they have a life, a will? Is
that the same as us?

GARLAND: Yes. Yes, exactly. It would be a fear of death, really,
which is the same as us.

But actually the real fear, I think, is not from them to us, not least
because they don`t exist yet. It`s from us to them.


GARLAND: I think humans tend to perceive A.I.s as being a kind of a
rival to them.


GARLAND: We create these stories about them enslaving us, you know,
Terminator, Skynet taking over everything, and we feel threatened by them,
and I think part of the film is to say you don`t have to feel threatened by
them. They are actually -- if you did make a machine that was sentient,
then, in many respects, in important ways, that machine would really be
like us, because sentience is what we really value in each other.


GARLAND: It`s what human rights are based on.

MATTHEWS: Well, we have spent years still worried about the HAL 9000
trying to kill us.


MATTHEWS: And now we have got something new to worry about perhaps.

But this movie is getting great raves. Congratulations, as a creator,
because you really are the creator here.

GARLAND: Thank you.

MATTHEWS: The movie is called "Ex Machina."

And thank you, Alex Garland, for coming to talk about it.


MATTHEWS: Up next: Military bases are on heightened alert across the
country right now, this weekend, all because of the threat of homegrown
terrorists. And we have got a bit of the personality of that guy down in
Texas right before he was killed, what he was up to. We will show you that

You`re watching HARDBALL, the place for politics.


Here`s what`s happening.

President Obama is in Watertown, South Dakota, where he gave a
commencement address a short time ago. With this trip, he`s visited his
50th state, something only three other presidents have done.

Employers were hiring last month. The economy created 223,000 jobs in
April. The unemployment rate fell to 5.4 percent.

And four people are dead following a plane crash in Georgia. The
plane went down on Interstate 285. Nobody on the ground was hurt -- back

MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.

All U.S. military installations are an increased level of alert
tonight, this Friday night, following an FBI director report, James Comey`s
revelation that the FBI is investigating hundreds of potential homegrown
extremists right now, with cases open in every one of the 50 states.

He says the threat is growing. Comey warns -- quote -- "Hundreds,
maybe thousands of people in the U.S. are following jihadist social media,"
and he adds -- quote -- "It`s like the devil sitting on their shoulder
saying kill, kill, kill."

Well, defense officials say there`s no specific threat against the
military right now, but noted that ISIS consistently encourages its
followers to attack people in uniform and that the U.S. military -- quote -
- "shares the same concern about the potential threat posed by homegrown
violent extremists."

Well, ISIS is claiming responsibility, we all know, for Sunday`s
failed attack in Texas on an exhibit featuring caricatures of the Prophet
Mohammed. Homegrown jihadists Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi were killed
during by police during that attack after law enforcement had been alerted
of Simpson`s interest in the event by the FBI.

Comey warned: "I know there are other Elton Simpsons out there."

Well, Here`s Elton Simpson himself talking about Islam back in 2007 in
a video that`s been put out by his mosque in Phoenix.


ELTON SIMPSON, GUNMAN: When you come together and you pray five times
a day with the brothers, and you`re reminded about the hereafter, it
provides for you a form of weaponry to go out into the real world and use
that weaponry to shield you against the tricks of the (INAUDIBLE).


MATTHEWS: Well, ISIS called Simpson and Soofi soldiers for the
caliphate and promised more brazen attacks on America in the future.

Joining me right now for the roundtable is Politico`s chief political
columnist Roger Simon, a great writer, "The Daily Mail"`s Francesca
Chambers, and BuzzFeed`s Washington bureau chief, Jon Stewart.

Thank you all.

I mean, this kind of amorphous warning, it does me no good, because it
says somebody may be listening to this Tokyo Rose sort of argument, this
propaganda, and they may act on it. We don`t know if there is anybody or
who they are, but somebody is going to do something maybe because they have
been encouraged to do it. So keep -- like you go on the Amtrak, and they
say, if you see something, say something.

What good is this? I don`t get it. What does high alert mean here,
this Bravo alert, second-level alert?

Comey`s statement seems to be way out of line.


MATTHEWS: Is it a CYA? Is it just to say, I did it?

SIMON: I don`t know why he`s doing it.

If you really thought were you under threat, would you announce it, or
would you just wait for the people to show up and arrest them?


SIMON: Why is this a global story? Why is he announcing it?

MATTHEWS: Well, Francesca, I`m wondering, when does it stop? Because
he`s saying in that statement, they have consistently said go attack the
military. What`s new, pussycat? What`s new tonight? What`s going to be
new tomorrow night and the next night? Should we all walk around like
this? Then terrorism wins.

FRANCESCA CHAMBERS, "THE DAILY MAIL": Well, they said that this was
probably the new normal.

MATTHEWS: What is it? What is the new normal?

CHAMBERS: Well, the new normal, basically the Bravo level,

MATTHEWS: But it`s not Charlie and it`s not Delta.


CHAMBERS: The Bravo level is -- Alpha used to be the new normal. The
Bravo level is potential the new normal.

MATTHEWS: Do you think it`s going to stick for a while? We will be
on this kind of alert?

CHAMBERS: I do think it`s going to stick -- I do think it`s going to
stick for a while.

But the other thing is, you have to look at what the Bravo level does
as well. And to me, it seems like basic common sense, that they should be
checking cars that come into military bases to make sure that they don`t
have explosives. It seems like basic...

MATTHEWS: Don`t they always do that?

CHAMBERS: They are going to be doing stricter checks of the cars.


MATTHEWS: They do that when you go to Arlington Cemetery, I think.
And they check a lot of stuff.


CHAMBERS: But they`re also -- and they`re also going to be making
sure that military personnel are who they say that they are when they come
to the bases.

It just seems to me that a lot of these things they are going to be
doing are, again, basic commonsense things that they ought to be doing on
military bases already.



MATTHEWS: Well, tell me about this whole thing. Where are we at on
this war on terror, which is probably a metaphor to begin with, war on
terror, because we`re not shooting at -- rifles at guys? We`re shooting at
the idea that somebody might be infected by an ideology that might act on
it who yesterday was just studying math, and tomorrow is a jihadist.

They`re not a people.

STANTON: Well, this is...

MATTHEWS: This is a mentality.

STANTON: This is I think the first -- we as a country had had to deal
with the propaganda being sort of turned back on us. I mean, if you look
at our wars against people that was -- you know, Tokyo rose and thing likes
that, but they didn`t have the huge impact inside the United States. They
may have had an effect on soldiers in the theater but not here.


STANTON: We`ve done this for years, you know, Voice of America and
other kinds of efforts, and this is first time because of the Internet that
we as a society are starting to have to deal with people using propaganda
against our people, and I think it`s -- it`s a question that we have not
really dealt with in this country at all, and I don`t know whether there is
an easy answer to that.

MATTHEWS: Well, let me ask you this, because you`re on to this a free
society. Do we do counterpropaganda? Is that even constitutional? You
know, for years, any broadcaster, any program produced by the United States
information agency for overseas use wasn`t permitted under law to be shown
in this country, because you`re not to propagandize. The government
certainly can`t do it. How do I do it?

STANTON: Well, that`s -- I mean, that`s the big question, right? I
mean, how do you try to control that content that`s out there. I think
that, you know, Twitter does a pretty good job of trying to kill off
Twitter accounts, but reality is they kill one and the guy just goes and
opens up another one.


STANTON: And I think as a society, I don`t know that we`re in a place
where we`re going to say --

MATTHEWS: Do we want our country, Roger, to tell us what not to pay
attention to? This guy is an African-American guy, Elton Simpson, who
converted to Islam. I assume there was a staging, apparently. He became a
Muslim, and at some point, he became radicalized.

ROGER SIMON, POLITICO: Well, I mean, the story has implications
regarding social media because apparently he became radicalized, at least
partially, because of what he read and saw on social media, and then he
sees that there`s going to be this competition in Garland, Texas.

MATTHEWS: A mock drawing.

SIMON: Yes, drawing pictures and that`s on to social media. And then
he announces foolishly perhaps for him on social media that he and his pal
are going to Garland, Texas.

MATTHEWS: Why did he do that?

SIMON: I don`t know. The FBI monitors that. They tell everyone that
they monitor that and so they send out a picture to the police around
Garland, Texas, saying this guy may be heading your way. He was and he got
shot. He presumably shot somebody first, or shot at somebody first.

MATTHEWS: So a local policeman did it. That was the only defense we
had in the end was a local policeman.

social media, because he was on a watch list before to this. You know,
there are plenty of these guys who are on a watch list, and I think that`s
where a lot of the outrage about the Garland --

MATTHEWS: But how do you run down every guy on a watch list because
if you can`t prosecute and they are free to move where they want.


MATTHEWS: How do you catch them?

CHAMBERS: Well, that is exactly what they have been struggling with.

MATTHEWS: We`re a free country.

CHAMBERS: You know, a lot of the lone wolf attacks, that`s exactly
what the federal government is struggling with is how do you -- you catch
them. A lot of the times some trying to fly over to join ISIS, though,
they get them at the airport.


CHAMBERS: Yes, how do you get them before they get to the airport,
you know?

MATTHEWS: It`s a free country. It`s not 1984, you know? It was all

STANTON: The government can`t step in and say, well -- we think that
you may actually decide this time. Said it five times, let`s say, you`re
going to commit some kind of act, this time we think you`re going to do it.
So, now, we`re going to put in jail before you do it.

MATTHEWS: It`s like the Tom Cruise movie, "Minority Report" because
they might get you for what you might do in the future because they could
project it. Great. We don`t live there.

Anyway, thank you. We`ll be right back. The roundtable is sticking
with us.

And up next, President Obama tells Democrats to just do it. He`s out
at Nike headquarters urging passage of the big trade deal. Normally you
think of Nike as a company that shifts jobs overseas. He`s making a
different point.

And this is HARDBALL, the place for politics.


MATTHEWS: Well, today marks the 70th anniversary of VE Day, the day
allies won victory over the axis powers in Europe during World War II. And
today in Washington, dozens of World War II era fighter planes took to the
skies over the National Mall. There they are up there. They flew in
sequence formations representing the war`s pivotal battles. Hundreds of
World War II veterans actually were there on hand for the flyover.

On this day 70 years ago, these were the triumphant words of Sir
Winston Churchill as he celebrated the Nazi surrender.


WINSTON CHURCHILL: This is your victory. It is victory of the cause
of freedom in every land. In all our long history, we have never seen a
greater day than this.



MATTHEWS: Well, it got to them and still gets to me.

We`ll be right back after this.



Mark may have mentioned, mike announced with the Trans Pacific Partnership,
it will make new investments in advanced manufacturing, not overseas but
right here in the United States and far more Nike products would be made in
the USA. And that means thousands of new jobs in manufacturing and
engineering and design at Nike facilities across the country and potential
tens of thousands of new jobs along Nike`s supply chain here at home.
That`s what trade can do.


MATTHEWS: We`re back with the roundtable, Roger, Francesca and John.

That was President Obama out there at Nike headquarters in Beaverton,
Oregon, where he was rallying authority behind the fast track authority
needs to negotiate a trade deal with 11 Asian Pacific countries, known as
the Trans Pacific Partnership or TPP.

The president has three words for Congress where the legislation is
currently being debated -- just do it.

But most of the opposition and the trade deal itself is primarily
coming from his usual allies, especially the labor unions. He took aim at
them today out in Oregon.


OBAMA: There have been a bunch of critics about trade deals generally
and the Trans Pacific Partnership. And what`s interesting is, typically,
they are my friends coming from my party. On every progressive issue, they
are right there with me. And then on this one, they are like whooping on

I don`t have any other rationale for doing what I do, than I think
it`s the best thing for the American people. And on this issue, on trade,
I actually think some of my dearest friends are wrong. They`re just wrong.
Critics warn that parts of this deal would undermine American regulation,
food safety, worker safety, even financial regulations.

This is -- they`re making this stuff up. This is just not true.


MATTHEWS: Roger, when I hear the president, I think of Woodrow Wilson
sawing the League of Nations. I mean, there are parts of the Democratic
Party, whether you go to the Western states like Washington state, Oregon
with Ron Wyden, or Virginia, when they`re doing well in high-tech, but a
lot of the industrial part of the country, the Democratic base in the
Midwest, the Rust Belt, they`re fighting them.

SIMON: And you can see why. You can be a good Democrat and still be
against the president of this issue.

The president says that, you know, if we do this deal, the workers in
south Vietnam are going to get more money, they`re going to have improved
working conditions, and they`re going to be able to unionize. I think he`s
probably one of the most intelligent presidents we`ve ever had.

But I think he`s forgotten that it`s a communist country there.
They`re not going to do these things. Communists aren`t for unions. They
pay their workers 56 cents an hour for a reason. They don`t want the
playing field level. You pay your workers 56 cents an hour. We`ll compete
against the United States all day and all night for that.

MATTHEWS: Yes, well, we`re going to have a debate on this, because a
number of Democrats, including some smart ones, Cantwell, Murray, people
like that, are for this thing, probably Warner, probably Kaine. There are
a number of them that are for this. Because you have people like Sherrod
Brown, it`s like the life-threatening part of their life.

CHAMBERS: Elizabeth Warren.

MATTHEWS: Well, I don`t know what she`s doing exactly here. What is
she -- is this just rallying the left, or is it -- Massachusetts doesn`t do
bad -- Massachusetts is not an anti-trading state. It`s a high-tech state

CHAMBERS: But I don`t think it`s about that. I think a lot of it has
to do --

MATTHEWS: It`s not about the self-interest of the state you

CHAMBERS: I think a lot of it has to do with politics and the
secretiveness of this deal that he`s negotiating. You know --

MATTHEWS: Secret? Every member of the Senate is allowed to read it
anytime they want.

CHAMBERS: I think they`re worried that there`s going to be a lot of
secret provisions that lobbyists could go ahead and stick in there. I
think they`re worried --

MATTHEWS: Wait a minute. Every day, they get to look at it that day.
If there`s any change at any given time, they get to look at it. They get
to see it with a staffer.

CHAMBERS: I think they`re worried he is going to make an agreement
and not only sell the farm, but sell the cattle.

MATTHEWS: Why would he do that?

CHAMBERS: Why would he do that?

MATTHEWS: Why do they mistrust the guy they`ve been following for six

CHAMBERS: Because they really -- the administration really, really
wants to make a deal and I think they`re worried that he is going to give
up too much to make this deal. And I think that`s why a lot of Democrats
are sitting on the fence --

MATTHEWS: John, let`s talk turkey here. The labor unions in this
country are not powerful in general elections, but they can mess with you.
If you mess with them, they`ll mess with you.

AFSCME is federal public employees at the state and local levels.
What they`ve got to do with trade issues. I mean, it`s SEIU. A lot of
these unions aren`t directly involved with trade. Manufacturing certainly
is. I think it`s a solidarity issue with labor, which is fair enough.
They`ve said, this is our fight, stick with us on this, whether you`re SAG
or AFTRA, SAG, just be us.

This is like card check. We`ve got to win this one. I think it`s

STANTON: It is politics, to a certain degree. But also, it`s not
just the labor union, it`s also environmental groups, human rights
organizations, and they look at previous trade deals, including those done
under the Clinton administration and they say, you promised this was going
to be the most progressive trade agreement ever, and you`re going to create
all these protections and in the end, we didn`t get anything. And I think
that they --

MATTHEWS: So, where do we go on trade? I know what you`re saying
here. I hear the politics. You`re all right. You`re definitely painting
the picture the way it is. He`s in the corner on this.

But we started to trade in the `60s and `70s. And people said, send
those Toyotas back to Japan. Send the Hyundais back to Tokyo, I mean, to

The fact is, most Americans get up and they like to be able to choose
what kind of car they want to buy. They like the fact there`s competition,
that you can buy a German car, or a Japanese car, a Korean car, or a really
good American car now, thanks to the competition.

Everybody knows that the Ford car is so much better than it was
because of competition.

The clothes we buy, the opportunities -- so there is a piece of this
we don`t get into. Who`s fighting for the consumer out the there?

STANTON: You hit it with the fact that the labor unions are not most
people, right? But they are very loud. It was the Democratic Party and
the base for primary votes, especially for House members. They`re very,
very --

MATTHEWS: John, you remember when cars lasted about 2 1/2 years?

I have a car now that I think, it`s got a few dents in it, but I feel
guilty if I sell it, because it`s been so good. I haven`t had to take it
to the shop. You know, ever! That`s brand-new. That`s something I didn`t
grow up with.

We grew up with cars that were big fins, big fins, they lasted a year
and a half, two years.

Anyway, thank you, Roger Simon. Francesca Chambers, thank you for
coming on.

CHAMBERS: Thank you.

MATTHEWS: And, John Stanton, as always.

When we return, let me finish with the day that should be called Mom`s
Day. You`re watching HARDBALL, the place for politics.


MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with what we`re celebrating this

Kathleen and I have been together since 1978, which is incredibly
almost four decades. What we`ve done professionally is, of course, small
potatoes, compared to raising three children and now having two grandchild
to boot. That`s Michael, Thomas, Caroline, our daughter-in-law, Sarah,
Julie, and Brendon. Six charming young people who see us as parents and
grandparents, especially Julia and Brendon, who will spend their lives
thinking of us as grandparents, pure and simple. That`s all we are to

Don`t you remember how hard it was to really imagine your grand pop
and grand mom as your parent`s parents? It certainly was for me. To me,
grand mom and grand pop and other grand mom were simply that, people born
to be grandparents and that`s all there was to it.

So on Sunday, we honor the person who our children look to, always
have, always will, as their mom. The person they go to in the world in a
totally different way they do anyone else -- the one who cares about them
totally and without condition, who is the human definition, wherever she
is, of home. That`s an incredible role to play in this role, as incredible
as being the person who gives birth to you. And it`s that role that`s the
one that comes to be after your born that we honor this Sunday. The mother
who is mom.

That`s HARDBALL, softball, for now. Thanks for being with us.

"ALL IN WITH CHRIS HAYES" starts right now.


Copyright 2015 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.>