tv All In With Chris Hayes MSNBC June 3, 2015 12:00am-1:01am PDT
list of positions people are supposed to take. well, if the republican party loses next year, it will be for a simple reason. it has too many americans to agree to be simple minded. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. all-in with chris hayes starts right now. >> tonight on "all in," it's down to the point where we can always give each other species. >> it's a small world examine small field. >> tonight as republicans descend on disney. >> jeb bush may be in real trouble. and why the draft elizabeth warren campaign is calling it quits. plus, espn's jeremy schaap has the shocking resignation of fifa's president. and a look at the private conversations, of caitlyn's jenner's transformation. >> she's cute.
>> how old is she? >> how old is she? >> if i'm not mistaken, caitlyn jenner is the father. >> "all in" starts right now. >> good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. there is one state jeb bush absolutely must win. it's his home state, florida, but that for jeb bush is no sure thing. bush took part in a cattle call, a republican candidate today in the state he used to govern, an event convened by the current florida governor at rick scott at, yes, walt disney world in florida. jeb bush's lead has evaporated among his support of registered republican leaning voters to just 10% in the new survey. bush is now effectively die with at least six of his competitors, including marco rubio who spoke to scott summit over video in washington where he was voting on patriotic act provisions, as well.
scott walker said today he plans to fight for florida despite bush and rubio's status as favorite sons. also speaking of the summit, chris christie, rick perry and mike huckabee, perhaps the most memorable moment belonged to louisiana governor bobby jindal who took a much deserved swipe at the uniformity of gop candidate speeches. >> if you pay really close attention, you listen to all those speeches, you learn some something things. you learn for example that every one of those 15 guys are against isis and they're against abortion. you might also learn that they are for ronald reagan and they are for america. >> joining me now from orlando where he covered today's today is steve kornacki. did you learn this is things, steve? were you shocked to find those positions emanating from that stage? >> yeah, you heard a few of those things today, shockingly. but it was interesting. you talk about a jeb bush there,
he was the final speaker today to come in person. it felt very much like a homecoming for him, this crowd here, this was a -- how do us, a rick scott organized event. the crowd was made up of rick scott's top supporters from the business community in florida. these are people in many cases who jeb bush has a history with that goes back a decade or two, maybe even longer. so there seemed to be more excitement when he came into the room. i saw bush speak before. i thought he seemed more relaxed, maybe more candidate. this is more of the candidate he would like to be out on the stump. in that sense, this was probably a good day for jeb bush. he probably got the best reception of any candidate there, but that comes with two catches, the first catch being marco rubio who would have a claim to the loyalties of a lot of people, mark rubio wasn't able to come in person because of that patriot act in d.c. so you can't really match them up side by side. the second thing is, you say florida is a must-win state for jeb bush and that's going to be true next year, but in order for
it to be a must-win state, to get to that point in the campaign, he's going to have to win something before that. he's going to have to break through in new hampshire, in negative, in south carolina, in all of those early states. and you can throw iowa into that mix, too, and some of the others that will come before florida. if you look at all of them right now, there is nothing on paper that you look at and say, boy, jeb bush is really the strong favorite there right now. jeb bush is in great position to win there. so it certainly is possible that we'll get to florida next year. it's possible at least that jeb bush won't be much of a factor at all. >> well, there's two things to note here. one is the named florida first strategy used by current -- sorry about that. used by current rudy giuliani who banked on florida in the primaries and never quite made it through. that is the problem for jeb bush. he has to win those ones early up. the other thing is the news out of nevada today. you explain that in the significance for bush in that respect. >> yeah, exactly. and i think the first thing you see in giuliani a danger for bush because a lot of people
remember that as rudy giuliani made this horrible miscalculation. he said i'm going to win in florida. it's not really what happened. what happened was he got pushed back because in every state he kept losing too much grouped. he eventually said i can't win iowa. i'm not going to win new hampshire. so he finally just kind of got forced back into florida and that's the risk for jeb bush here. because you can start to see those pieces likely did with rudy giuliani lining up. so you start in iowa, a caucus state. it was a very hostile to jeb bush, very difficult to see there. then you move to new hampshire. a little bit more friendly. he's not breaking 20% in the polls right now. certainly no guarantee there. then you move to nevada. in nevada, the bush people were banking on getting that switched from a caucus, a caucus which would be heavy on activists, maybe a little bit more rand paul friendly, ted cruz or whoever. they thought they were going to get that switch to a primary. the up shot of it is it will not be switched to a primary.
we're going to have a wider caucus. you see to south carolina, south carolina a state that has been very good to the bush family before, but two things are happening there right now that are troubling for jeb bush. number one, marco rubio has made significant inroads with the republican establishment in south carolina. second, lindsey graham, south carolina senator, just got in the race. and not much people think lindsey graham has a shot at winning the nomination, but to the extent he's a factor in south carolina, he will probably be bealing off bush voters. >> i'm shorting jeb bush stock now thanks to the steve kornacki slate now. on the other side of the aisle, there are currently three democrats fighting for their nomination, hillary clinton, martin o'malley and bernie sanders. but taunting the contest for months has been progressive hero elizabeth warren who the group
run warren run has been trying to get into the race for six months. today, the organizers finally threw in the towel, suspending the run warren run campaign while still declaring victory. i know what you're asking. why give up? did anyone actually ask warren if she wanted to run? anyone? >> are you going to run for president? >> i'm not running for president. >> there's nothing that could change your mind? >> david, like i said, i'm not running for president. i'm not running for president. >> so there's no way you're going to run in 2016? >> i'm not running for president. you can ask it lots of different ways. >> why don't you want to run for president? >> i'm not running for president. i am not running for president. no means no. >> just a minor tiny question here. are you going to run for president? >> i am not running for president. >> that's an affirmative out there. no? >> i am not running for president. >> but you have also said about 19 times that you are not running for president.
>> i am not running for president. >> but if hillary didn't run, you might give it a shot. >> i'm not running for president. >> okay. again with executive director, civic action, created the run warren run campaign. anna, you and i go way, away, way back. >> we do. >> we met each other when we were teenagers. and i love and respect the work that you do there. i never got the strategy here. >> no. >> i'm serious. explain it to me. obviously, i understand grassroots enthusiasm for elizabeth warren. i think she's been a remarkable senator in a million ways. she's strategically brilliant. but it always seemed like she actually didn't want to run. and you can't get someone to run for president if they don't want to run for president. >> so the proof is in the pudding here. so we're wrapping our campaign. we have not gotten senator warren to change her mind, knowing that was always the
understanding, that we would have to encourage her to change her mind, jump into the race as a reluctant politician, as a reluctant candidate. that was always the understanding. but we've seen such an amazing impact through our members work on this campaign with our partners at democracy for america. we have changed the political conversation in this country. we have set the table for the 2016 election. we have showed there is a powerful, hungry movement out there that wants to see economic inequality be at the center of the presidential race. to want to talk about corporate interests in washington and is showing not that that there's a movement, but that that movement is a powerful political force. so i think the proof is in the pudding. we didn't achieve our top objective. i'm sad about that, i'll be frank. but i think you've seen the impact that our members have had just by running this effort together. >> so it seems to me that there's a few things that have run together in terms of shaping the issues space in the emerging democratic primary. part of it is activation around warren, the interest in her .her
message, bernie sanderss getting into the race, that, you know, rivals elizabeth warren, he's been in the senate a lot longer, he's been talking about these issues for the duration of his entire career and i think you have a clinton campaign that is kind of in the early stages jetison the dlv kind of tacked to the center less than that had been learned in the 1990s. is that how you're viewing this race right now? >> i mean, i think you're certainly seeing every single declared candidate out there has been responding to the vibrant movement that's calling for, you know, bold policies to address the crisis around economic inequality that we face right now. so that is roll. we've seen there is a hunger in the democratic base and beyond the democratic base for bold policy proposals and that's affecting not just on the democratic side, that's affecting the rhetoric that republicans are using. so this has been, i think, powerful in setting the table for the kind of conversations we're going to be having, that these candidates will hold them
accountable to. >> i think the big question is the primary. the 2008 primary, the penalize debate lent people to make commitments, to bid against each other in certain ways and the quin of the degree of competition, real competition we see. in this primary, don't you think that's going to affect how much force this has going forward? >> yeah. i mean, i think it's possibly about the real question we've shown there's a hunger out there for the elizabeth warren policy agenda on the economy. are we going to break up the big banks, are we going to expand social security? what are we going to do, you know, just in general, for low income people in this country. but there's an ascendance broader progress i have movement. it's calling for real reform on the criminal justice system in this country, the climate movement, so there is an ascendant progressive movement in this country. we've shown it's politically powerful and it's going to
determine the rest of the presidential election conversation. mark my words. >> anna, thank you. >> thank you. with the presidential candidates now scrambling to attract billionaire donors, americans are showing unprecedented levels of disgust with the avalanche of money that has come in the political system. new polling from the new york and cbs news say 84% of americans say money has too much influence in elections, fundamentally change or the system needs to be rebuilt say 85%. there's almost complete anonymity across the spectrum. the current system is almost irredeemably corrupt. but there is little expectations for change. more than half of those surveys said they were pessimistic that campaign finance rules would ever be improved. i've got to say, nick, the numbers are striking.
the country is a polarized place. 85 -- particularly should it be completely rebuilt? which is the language that suggests to someone who is kind of half listening, like we want to see something radical and 85% of the people are saying, yeah, let's do something radical to the system. >> and it suggests there is a small group of people composed mostly of supreme court justices and legal scholars who had this one set of ideas about money and speech. that is totally at odds with the views of most of the country. and, of course, there's a countermajoritytarium of rules. but it's weird to see them@add to the group of the minorities that the wealthiest people are the most powerful ken people in the country. >> and i think there is such a gap between particularly what has grown out of holding citizens united which hasn't made its way back up to the court as the level of citizens united. there's still a lot of questions that you cover every day. that is part of what is weird
about the current system, right? wouldn't you agree? >> absolutely. >> it's really unclear what the rules of the road are. you've got to -- you've got an sec that essentially is defunct. it's in this dead lock. it can do very little. you've got some lower court rulings and then you've got this crazy -- that everyone is operating in. >> basically, it's a regulatory failure. it still comes from the fact that there's a central holding and citizens united. and there is just no way, shape or form in which the reality matches the rhetoric in that decision and it's creating a whole new form of politics in this country and the country hates it. >> the country does hate it. but here is the problem. friends with larry lustig, he's worked with him before. he's been working a lot on money, corruption and politics. the problem is the polling can be a mild wide. when you ask americans what are
the most important policies for americans? it's very, very low on the list. when you ask thats an open-ended question or i want you to rank, we've got terrorism, poverty, climate change here. it ends up very low. that seems to be the problem that reformers have. >> look, i mean, if i'm unemployed or my kid can't get a job or i'm trying to pay college bills, i'm not going to say it's the most important issue. politics works in two ways, right? you listen to constituents, you listen to people or you leave them. and this poll suggests that there is an opening for somebody that says i'm going to make it an issue, i'm going to push it, i'm going to immobilize. there's an enormous amount of cynicism when i speak to people in the polls. why would you look at something this has no change of winning? if you're a campaign reform person and you listened to barack obama in 2007, you probably thought here is a guy that will come in and change things.
passes a lobbying reform and does nothing else for his presidency. >> and then the court comes in and creates a constitutional interpretation that makes reform that much more difficult from that perspective. >> so recent entry has not been kind to people who want this. even when they find people who will support it. >> my feeling on this? the worse, the better. the history of money in politics is huge waves of money followed by tremendous scandal and reform and we will see, mark my words right here on this television, we will see scandal in this cycle. >> thank you, chris. up next, how the head of the most powerful sports organization in the world went from being untouchable to stepping down in just a week. plus, as the senate passes a patriot act fix over the objections of the senate majority leader. and a new fleet of fbi spy planes gathering data over american cities. that story, straight ahead. ♪ one, two, three o'clock. four o'clock pop. ♪ five, six, seven o'clock. eight o'clock pop. ♪ ♪ nine, ten eleven o'clock ♪ ♪ twelve o'clock pop ♪
♪ we're gonna pop around the clock tonight. ♪ pop in new tide pods plus febreze a 4 in 1 detergent. now with 24-hour freshness. my cut hurt. mine hurt more. mine stopped hurting faster! neosporin plus pain relief starts relieving pain faster and kills more types of infectious bacteria. when you pick any 3 participating products get a free all better bag. available at walmart.
massachusetts state police arrested a man this evening in relation to an ongoing terrorism investigation in boston in which another suspect was shot and killed by police. senior law enforcement officials with direct knowledge of the investigation tells nbc news the second individual is in the process of being booked and fingerprinted. his identity will be released once he has been processed. the man was arrested as law enforcement officials followed up on a terror investigation involving osama raheeen. he was shot and killed by police today after brandishing a large knife at an fbi agent and a boston police detective as they attempted to interview him. rahnne had been under investigation for weeks. authorities had no warrant for his arrest but wanted to
a week ago, the most powerful sports organization in the world, but tonight in an absolutely stunning turn of events, sepp blatter is stepping down as president of fifa. just four days after he was elected to a fifth term and just six days after the justice department handed down a 47-count indictment against 14 people associated with fifa, including nine fifa officials, alleging widespread corruption in the organization. it was unclear last week whether that organization stretched all the way to the top. tonight, we found that it does as sepp blatter stepped down today saying the organization needs a profound restructuring and that he was resigning his position. law enforcement confirmed that he was the focus of a federal investigation.
joining me now, jeremy sapp from espn. jeremy, when i had you on the program last week, i felt that basically the implied was that blatter is not going anywhere, he probably will escape this. the guy is the terminator. look. look what happened. amazing. >> it is. i don't think anyone who would tell you right now that they saw this coming would be telling the truth, chris. in fact, the last line of the show we did about blatter said the most powerful man in sports answers to no one. well, it turned out i was wrong. and i think many people were wrong because it seems that he's answering, in a sense, to the federal authorities in the u.s., to the federal authorities in switzerland, the circle was coming closer and certainly the people around him were immeshed in this and up to their eyeballs
in this and i would have to imagine -- although we can't say this for a fact, but it was that mounting pressure that led to the extraordinary events of today. >> well, it certainly looks that way. the "new york times" reporting today that he, too, is a target of federal investigators and, obviously, they're the ones. american investigators and swiss investigators that have plead these collars. you've got to think that's front of mind. >> sure. we said three weeks ago on espn, we reported on e-60 that because of that federal investigation, he had decided that it would be unwise to set foot on u.s. soil. so, you know, it's not a surprise in the big picture, that the federal investigation would be leading to his doorstep. but it seemed that he thought he would be able in some way to ride this out. it seemed that way as recently, of course, as last friday when he was overwhelmingly re-elected to a fifth term. >> so i want to talk about that.
i used to cover chicago politics. and in chicago, the mayor got to appoint city council members who resigned. so one of the things, one of the great traditions of chicago politics is if you want to retire or resign, you run for re-election anyway and the reason is so you can get re-elected and then, you know, six months in say i'm resigning and mayor daly gets to say who is going to be your successor because he wants to hand-pick everyone. is that basically what blatter did by running for re-election on friday? >> i don't think so. i really don't. i think that he -- first of all, he was running for re-election all along. i think he was certainly not anticipating that press conference in brooklyn wednesday, 48 hours before his re-election or the arrests in zurich 48 hours before that congress was called. i think it really was a question of the heat just getting turned up all the way.
i think he's going to be very busy defending himself against whatever kind of investigations are going on. we heard from the federal authorities last week in the u.s. that this is just the beginning of their investigation. we heard that they are expecting perhaps another round of indictments. the feds say that he is not at this point a suspect criminally, but he has a status. i think the word in german is [speaking german]. i think that means he is somewhere between a witness and a suspect. so who knows what accept bratter's personal lawyers, what the fifa lawyers have been telling him over the last 48 hours. but i doubt that he came to this decision independent of whatever they might have had to say. >> okay. finally on the question of the 2022 world cup in qatar, you've done incredible reporting on just the sheer human misery and
the toll being extracted on workers essentially working in slave conditions to construct the stadiums in qatar there. i mean, that seems to me, if you were betting on the stock of qatar world cup 2022, that stock took a nose dive today, don't you think? >> well, i think that's very much the case. and greg dike, who runs the english football association said that if he were running qatar 2022nd wouldn't be sleeping very well tonight, or words to that effect. but remember, it is a very, very long process. to actually move that world cup out of qatar, we're talking about a revote. there are provisions for a revote under the fifa charter. but you would have to assume that somebody would be running against them, that somebody would defeat them if there were a revote and qatar would run again, there is no guarantee they wouldn't win again. the procedures have changed. it's not just the executive revote. it's a body of about 24 people
typically, although sometimes some people get suspended and at this point the executive committee is a few men short because of arrests. the vote is moving to the full 209-member congress. and remember, i'm not sure the countries that wanted that 2022 world cup who lost it would be interested in getting a world cup that has been tainted now. >> yeah. >> they might see it as damaged goods. the countries that are interested, i can, would rather probably wait for the 2026 bidding which is to take place in 2017, chris. >> jeremy schaap, one of my favorite persons of interest from espn, thank you, jeremy. >> thank you, chris. up next, majority leader mitch mcconnell takes to the senator floor to preserve the patriotic act in its entirety. his fellow senator, barbara boxer, tells me what she thinks about his behavior. >> this is a lose-lose for him in every way you think think of. what he did is do what children do, change the subject, stamp your feet and attack somebody
majority leader mitch mcconnell who failure tirelessly against the bill. mcconnell accused 23 senate republicans of essentially aiding the enemies of the united states. >> as the "associated press" declared today, the end of section 215 program is a, quote -- this is the headline in the "ap" today, a resounding victory for edward snowden. a resounding victory for edward snowden. it is also a resounding victory for those who currently plotted against our homeland. >> just moments after she voted yes on the freeway come of usa act i asked senator barbara boxer for her reaction to the majority leader's stunning insistence that his fellow congress members delivered a victory to terrorists. >> does he really think john boehner is plotting against the u.s.? okay. fine. what is he talking about? it's a very strong act and all
we did was fix the problem of the bulk collection. i don't know what he's talking about. he went off on some anti-obama rant for just -- it seemed like hours -- it was minutes. just to what end, i don't quite know. i think he's upset that he lost and he didn't save face. he tried to pass some amendments which would have made the reforms less important. and he lost on that. and so this is a lose-lose for him in every way you could think of. so what he did was do what children do, change the subject, stamp your feet and attack somebody else. it was really quite a performance. >> the nsa phone record collection program may be in the spotlight rye rite now, but the nsa is one of many agencies in the surveillance game. a report on the fbi's shockingly low tech operations next. so why pause to take a pill? and why stop what you're doing to
find a bathroom? with cialis for daily use, you don't have to plan around either. it's the only daily tablet approved to treat erectile dysfunction so you can be ready anytime the moment is right. plus cialis treats the frustrating urinary symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently, day or night. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision or any symptoms of an allergic reaction stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. why pause the moment? ask your doctor about cialis for daily use. for a free 30-tablet trial go to cialis.com
when i went to baltimore to cover the protests after the death of freddie gray, there was a rumor going around among many of the activists and residents i talked to that a low-flying surveillance plane had been spotted circling the sky above the crowd. on may 2nd, a resident who goes by the twitter handle scan baltimore tweeted anyone know who has been flying the light plane in the circles above the city the last few nights? one of his followers tweeted back this image of the plain's flight path over the unrest. then "the washington post" uncovered evidence that two planes had been circling the area, a small cessna jet and a slightly larger cessna. the post traced them back to the federal bureau of investigation which eventually confirmed it provided aircraft to the baltimore police department for the purpose of, quote, providing aerial imagery of possible criminal activity. now with a report by the associated press allegations the fbi's use of aerial surveillance goes by far beyond the baltimore
protests. according to the "ap," the fbi has a whole fleet of spy planes registered to companies and collecting cell phone data over american cities. i'm joined now by eric tucker. eric, first of all, what are these planes doing? >> according to the fbi, they are taking their use for predicated for specific targeted investigations for individuals on the ground when they're believing there is criminal activity going on and they are capturing image, oftentimes working in tandems with ground surveillance to work together for a particular ongoing specific investigation. >> so important point here is that according to the fbi, these are the results of targeted specific warrants, targeted to individuals which are not both
collection. they're not as far as we know doing a dragnet. >> correct. this investigation according to the fbi, this is designed in particular for individuals. that said, there are situations, they say they are rare in which they can attach specific outside equipment that scoops up cell phone information. it mimics a cell phone tower and can indicate and locate a specific individual. >> so they can goc up there, they have technology that pretends to be essentially a cell phone tower and from that they can listen to calls, they can get cell phone data from the people they're target on the ground? is that right? >> no. they can get location data. and i would say, according to the fbi, that this is a very rarely used -- they have indicated in very rare circumstances.
they cite a particular hostage case in which they've used it. the primary purpose, they say, is for targeted predicated investigations. i would say also one other thing that they say they used them for is when there's a request from local law enforcement, as was the case in baltimore when there's reason to believe that there is crime that is specifically currently unfolding on the ground. they can lend that assistance there. >> here is a key point. doj policy guidance on unmanned aircraft systems, these are drones, department personnel may never used unmanned aircraft systems protected by the first amendment or the law. exercise of other rights secured by the constitution and laws of it is united states. does that apply to these flights? which is to say can the fbi send one of these cessnas up to monitor or surveil people participating in first amended protected protests? >> no. and they say that's not the point. so -- and the wish baltimore became kind of a distinction. the way they described the purpose in baltimore was for --
because there was rioting on the ground, there were cars being burned, there were fights, there were assaults, so their explanation is that that was not designed for first amendment monitoring but was, in fact, because the baltimore police, the baltimore fbi believed there were crimes ongoing on the ground. >> eric tucker, thank you. >> thank you. still ahead, the reaction in public and private to the intersection of caitlyn jenner in "vanity fair." the upshot
of the "new york times" showed the rise of women serving in congress. check this out. this is the percentage of women in the house and senate broken down by party with republicans in red, democrats in blue, and from the 1920s through 1990, women in the two parties tracked closely. watch what happens after 1990. an explosive rise in democratic women in congress while republican women level off around 10%. why aren't there more republican women in congress? i put that question to senator barbara boxer earlier today. you can see her answer on her
fayette county facebook page. are while you're there, you know what i want you to do. niversary dinner, darlin' can this much love be cleaned by a little bit of dawn ultra? oh yeah. one bottle has the grease cleaning power of two bottles of this bargain brand. a drop of dawn and grease is gone. and when you bundle your home and auto insurance through progressive, you'll save a bundle! [ laughs ] jamie. right. make a bad bundle joke a buck goes in the jar. i guess that's just how the cookie bundles. now, you're gonna have two bundles of joy! i'm not pregnant. i'm gonna go. [ tapping, cash register dings ] there you go. [ buzzing ] bundle bee coming! it was worth it! saving you a bundle when you bundle -- now, that's progressive. here's a little healthy advice. take care of what makes you, you. right down to your skin. aveeno® daily moisturizing lotion with 5 vital nutrients
at bars in living rooms and kitchen tables people have been talking about caitlyn jenner, whose appearance on "vanity fair" at 65 caitlyn jenner is the oldest woman to appear on that cover solo. the tenor of the public conversation so far has largely been, i would say, encouraging. media outlets have done a pretty decent job of adhering to glad standards and using pronouns, some stupid bigoted comments appear to be the exception. there are other conversations happening outside the public eye that may have a different tenor. one public conversation in particular might shed light on how people are talking about caitlyn jenner publicly. even though this was happening a lot on the radio, it captured to sports hosts and it sounded like
it was happening in private. >> the rangers didn't miss -- >> they probably missed him. >> it's that everybody is dealing with injuries. and a lot of -- is this real? i'm looking at the cover of "vanity fair." >> who is on the cover of "vanity fair"? >> uh, that would be caitlyn jenner. >> oh, yeah. okay. yeah, no, she's pretty good. she's pretty good. she's pretty good. father is a little messed up, but she's pretty good. >> joe. >> she's cute. how old is she? >> if i'm not mistaken, caitlyn jenner is the father. >> oh, what? oh, that's bruce? come on. i thought that was one of his daughters. >> no, that's him. he changed his name. that's why i'm saying call me caitlyn. >> oh, my god. doesn't he have two daughters? i thought that was one of the daughters names. >> no, his daughters are younger. that's bruce jenner.
tolerance, defeating hoe mow phobia, a winning persona." also michelle is joining us. you and i are going to have an interview about your book when it's on book stands. here is my feeling about the reaction of caitlyn jenner. i have been encouraged largely by the perception. i think there's rules that you use the pronoun a person wants to use. yet i can't help but feel that there's a gap between that and what is happening, for instance, in, like -- in your neck of the woods. seriously, right? >> the locker room. >> in locker rooms, right? what is locker room conversation and the world in sports, obviously. >> the clip. the clip that you showed is kind of closer to what kind of is really happening in sort of a lot of houses, particularly in
the locker room for my generation who grew up covering caitlyn when he was bruce, when she was bruce. it's quite a big transformation, but they're the new rules here. these are the new rules. she is caitlyn. transgender is the law -- not the law of the land, but it's the rule. >> the way you're talking about this is talking about, like, someone who showed up one day and like the king issued a new decree and you're just like well, that's the -- >> this is a new team. >> i feel like people's receptions are i got the rules about not being a jerk in this whole thing. obviously god bless people -- >> as opposed to -- it's not -- this is different. >> i think what you're saying -- >> no, i agree. why they worry is that that -- that people learn how to act a certain way, because i think,
again, we should all be kind to one another, but that the media ends up sort of coating actual, like -- the actual feelings people are having which are much more complicated. >> well, look. i do a talk radio show and i'm listening to people all day and, yeah, a lot of people are awkward, they don't get the wording, and we allow for that. it has to be an education. but i think what you're getting to is we're all leading. i think the media, the way they've handled it, we're leading this discussion. people can have their moments, but somebody has to lead the discussion and this has been great. i think we've seen that kind of leadership on how you talk about this and people will get it as it goes on. just as they've learned about how to talk about gay people and lesbian people and hopefully african-americans and others. >> i think that what is maybe the disjunction that you're sensing is that on the one hand, i think most people want to be respectful with their pronounces, they don't want to be bigoted.
i don't know what everybody's identify of gender of what it means to be a man or a woman has changed as quickly as the language. >> this is the key to me. understanding sex and gender as distinct things, as conceptually distinct, right? that sex is a set of physical attributes, gender is a sort of identity, a self-conception. that is a radical restructuring of the way most people think about this. let's just be clear about that. now, i happen to think it's correct and i endorse it and i agree with it. but that's my point is that -- >> but it's seems like overnight -- >> but it's like do people understand what is being said here conceptually? what we're saying conceptually is profound. >> i absolutely do not think that people -- you know, when the producer called me and they said, i've got to be honest with you, identify not really got my mind around this yet. but you're right, you don't want to be -- not so much a jerk.
this is 2015. i've been in the room as the only african-american and come through the same kind of things. people say awkward things. >> they stumble or -- >> and your response is okay. let's get on with the discussion. so i can't make -- i can't sit up here and say, you know, i'm really -- this is -- i'm fluent in this. this is -- i mean, now, in my family, this to me takes it to a whole other level. this does not mean just straight or gay, this is a whole conception of how you see yourself as a human being. >> a complicated issue about gender. but i do think it breaks down in -- by age. it breaks down according to different regions of the country. i think people have more of an understanding and i think, again, it's part of that education when you talk to young people about it. they have more of an understanding of gender as fluid. it's not necessarily about your biology. >> do you think it's true? >> i think it is. i think they're getting it. >> well, yeah, among young
people i've had this conversation. i've written about this. there's some conflicts especially within feminism over these issues. a lot of the feminism, the abortions funds no longer want to use the word woman in relation to aboard because it excludes transmen. >> because when we're talking about reproduct i have -- the physical attribute that's allow one to give birth, right? that is part of the category that is sex, right? that's a physical category. that's not gender. >> right. so there's been this kind of move to remove the word "woman" from a lot of language around abortion funds and there's a lot of ways feminisms -- not only second voice feminists who say -- if you take women out of this, and you kind of take an understanding of patriarchy out of this, there's conceptual murk to clear away. but among younger people, it almost seems amazing to them the need to have gender neutral
language. >> i think that we have to really be clear about that. i think in an ideal world, but the clip that you just played, i think that that might be a little more part of the norm than we might like. >> clear about life or trans folk necessary this country. they face tremendous amounts of discrimination, tremendous amounts of violence, unbelievable examine shocking amounts of violence. and i thought laverne cox, who is an actress on "orange is the new black," she made this point. when she did this "time" magazine cover, people called her drop dead gorgeous. she said there are many trans folks because of genetics and their lack of material access will not be able to embody these standards, meaning the sort of classical feminine standard.
laverne cox is on the cover. so is caitlyn jenner. caitlyn jenner looks like a million bucks, literally looks like a million bucks. she looks incredible because she's on the cover of a glossy magazine where everyone looks incredible because they've all in a hollywood cocoon of some kind. they're living on the streets where there is violence, where they are clocked, where they are harassed. >> and let's just say, where they stick out. this is also an important point. the very fact that you could look at that cover like those people did and say oh, that's a woman. there's lots of people who have a heavy eye and they don't conform. >> also, there's a backlash to the larger lgbt quality. there's a backlash to marriage equality. it's playing out on the streets. we've seen gay bashing explode in new york and washington state, both places after marriage equality. the people experiencing that are the more marginalized, which are transgender women of color in particular on the streets.
so we have to be aware of that. >> but i think there is a connect -- i mean, i don't think these exist in entirely separate realms. for example, you have to know these clerical bathroom bills. >> some states to keep transpeople out of bathrooms. >> mike huckabee has talked about them. mike huckabee said a very dumb thing about this today. talking about the state is going to make your 7-year-old girl go into a bathroom with a 42-year-old man. >> in as much as caitlyn jenner, laverne cox, as much as they can normalize what has been considered a very exotic issue just a decade ago, in as much as they can make people comfortable enough to feel like these bills are ridiculous, i think it can end up having a huge impact on people on the ground. >> i 100% agree that there is a sort of trickle down cascade effect that is largely incredibly positive. that's in some ways a take away. >> and it is our responsibility in the media to not be jerks. >> yeah. and let me just pick up -- i
don't think those guys were being jerks. i actually think that was a total -- i want to make sure, this is not about those guys being jerks. i think they had an honest moment. >> and even those guys were kind of like, okay, it's caitlyn. >> i enjoyed that. thank you. that's all for this evening. the rachel maddow show starts right now. good evening, rachel. >> good evening. joining us this hour, bernie sanders is here for the interview tonight. he's going to be here with us live in just a moment. i'm very excited about that. we've got a big show tonight. the front-runner for the democratic presidential nomination, the woman who is such a front-runner in many people's eye webs she is the party's productive nominee, former secretary of state hillary clinton, she is on her way to texas for a two-day texas trip that starts tomorrow. yes, i said texas. texas is not, you know, changing their