>> turns out name recognition is worth something in this town. >> it is a part of it. steve kornacki, thank you for joining us, chris hayes is up next. >> good-bye, voting rights. let's play "hardball." good evening, i'm chris matthews up in new york. me start with this. a happy day for reince priebus. today the united states supreme court lopped off the head of the voting rights act that removed a key weapon used to stop states from suppressing african-americans and other voters they don't like showing up at the polls. what a joy this must be to the republican national headquarters where reince priebus holds sway and opens the door for far more voter suppression by republican-dominated state legislatures. in 2011, 41 states all but nine

engage fundamental some form of restriction. think about what reince priebus and his gang of suppressionists will be able to do now that the voting rights act isn't in their way. joining me to talk about it, ryan hey goode and civil rights leader julian bond. mr. bond, i don't know what you make of it. but this seems to be a 5-4 decision by a republican dominated supreme court that didn't like the voting rights act period and got rid of its teeth and its head and its eyes. >> it's exactly that. this is justice roberts' dream. he's been trying to do this since he was in the reagan justice department as a younger lawyer. and it's finally made his dream come true. he's been able to maneuver the supreme court so that they've gutted the voting rights act just as you said, made it impossible to block attempts to suppress black voting. this is a good deal for the republicans. it's an awful deal for the united states.

>> let me bring in richard ryan haywood. richard, you're the expert on this. it seems to me if you can't have a map that tells you which states have to get agreement on changing your voting rules, you don't have a weapon here. >> that's right, chris. thanks for having me on the show. today's decision is a disgraceful one. it's a significant departure, chris, from the supreme court's own precedent over four decades of upholding the constitutionality of the voting rights act. what it does, very concretely, chris, it lays bare, it lays vulnerable millions of voters of color in those places previously covered by section 5 of the voting rights act. they're now open to a host of attacks in those jurisdictions that over time have been most adaptive and most intense in forms of voter discrimination. for example, the supreme court issued its opinion this morning around 10:30. already today, there are news reports from the state of texas which are saying now that texas will implement its photo i.d. measure. you'll remember that texas's

photo id measure was blocked under section five of the act and regarded as one of the most discriminatory voting proposals in the country at the time. >> you know, i just want to get this in perspective. i couldn't have a better person here than julian bond. if you think about the way america has changed, back in 1964, the all-white delegation to the united states senate -- texas, south carolina, georgia, mississippi, virginia, they're all white guys, basically. they all voted against the civil rights bill knowing that was good politics to deny the chance of a black person to walk into a restaurant, go to a men's room or ladies room in a gas station to vote against all those rights was in their political interests because no blacks were allowed to vote. this is what the voting rights act particularly changed in '65. talk about the history of how everything was changed because when the blacks were guaranteed the federal government was on their side in making sure they had a right to vote, everything changed. >> you know, we owe all this to lyndon johnson who may have been condemned for his activities in the vietnam war, but in civil

rights he was number one. he was a president who led this through the congress. he had the skills and the ability to do it. he helped pass the civil rights act and the voting rights act. he changed america. he made it into a different country. and in the years from then until now, we've lived under these laws that have protected people if they wanted to vote. now these protections just washed away in an instant by the roberts court. this horrible, horrible day for america. it's an awful, awful day, and it's going to take an enormous effort by a lot of people, black, white, of all races and colors, of all political persuasions, everybody who believes in justice and fair play to set this right again. >> by the way, there was everett dirksen. it's hard to remember there were republicans like him in the '60s who voted not only for the civil rights bill for the voting rights act as leaders. let me ask you about this. the real world it takes 60 votes to get anything through the u.s. senate. some many states will the get hurt under a new voting rights map. so you just assume the states targeted by a new map aren't going to vote for it.

just think about that. then you got to figure out, you got to get 60 of the other remaining senators to vote for some new map. i know people like to be optimistic. maybe eric holder, the ag is optimistic. how can any reasonable person assume the way congress is set up today they're going to come up with a map of states where there's a need to have prior review of any voter change? >> chris, i think here is where there's a silver lining in what is an otherwise disgraceful moment. and that is that congress i think has an opportunity to take what has happened to them and to this country to mr. bond's point more broadly personally. in 2006, the u.s. senate voted 98-0 in support of reauthorizing the voting rights act. the u.s. house voted 390-33. overwhelmingly there was bipartisan support for reauthorizing the voting rights act. what the court did today was said there were 98 senators and 390 members of the house who did something irrational and struck

what they did as unconstitutional. i think this is a moment for the united states congress to test it -- for the u.s. congress to test its heart, to look inside and look at its mettle and its spirit and determine whether it's now willing to stand in the gap to bridge the gulf that the supreme court decision has created. >> do you believe in santa claus. >> i don't believe in santa claus, but i do believe that congress has an opportunity to receive today's ruling as a challenge and to respond to it. >> let me go back to julian and i'll be back to you in another minute for your thoughts on this. how do you get senators and congressmen, we have a republican house, archly conservative. how do you get that house and a senate that requires 60 votes particularly to target maybe another ten states to now designate afresh states that are guilty of voting rights suppression, therefore have to have the responsibility to get prior review for any change in their law? how do you get that through this congress? i just don't think the squares with this congress, its willingness to go out and name these states. >> it doesn't seem that way.

but i've always been an optimist. i've always believed the best thing could happen. i think if you appeal to people's better natures, they will respond. now often they don't. often they behave in the worst kind of way. i think you have to assume they'll do the right thing and you have to knock on their doors and ask them about it. you have to tell them you're going to turn out a lot of voters and make sure they don't get re-elected if they don't do this. put the fear of god and the fear of the electorate in them. i think there are enough american who's believe strongly about this, people of all races and kinds who will get this done. >> what about the republican party today? i'm not talking historically. it's not always been bad in any sense. but right now, led by reince priebus and the fact we've got 41 states now that have tried in the last cycle, the last electoral cycle before 2012 election cycle, all tried to change their laws to make it harder for blacks to vote. what makes you think that that same political crowd, that party led by reince priebus who supports all this stuff, a party

intent on voter suppression of minorities and young people will change its mind and vote to target new states for voting rights procedure? mr. bond? >> so you have to have them ask themselves, do we want to see a republican president elected in the next decade or so? do we want 20 years from now there to be a republican president of the united states? if we do, we've got to change our behavior. we've got to be attractive to black voters. we've got to be attractive to hispanic voters. the way we're behaving now, we're not attractive to either one. in fact we're repulsive to both of this em. if we want to see a republican president, we've got to do something different. >> that has not been the pattern of state legislators across this country. dozens and dozens of them from states like pennsylvania where they were trying to change the law and make it very hard. all kinds of documentation to show up at a voting booth or in florida, where bill clinton went after them when they said no more sunday voting knowing african-americans like to go from church to voting prior to

the election day. also because you've got these very intensely crowded african-american areas in big cities like philadelphia where the people, the voting lines are so long. we've got new numbers now. 20 minutes to vote you're an african-american. it takes so much longer people want these options. and now the state legislatures run by republicans say we don't want you to have these options because we don't want you to vote. isn't this all true what i'm saying? >> i think this is where mr. bond's point is really salient. the voter suppression tactics we saw proliferate in the last several years were wildly unpopular among the american populace. americans don't like when they see that voter restrictions are proliferating. they don't like when the democracy is being contracted. americans are fans of expanding their electorate, of expanding democracy. and to mr. bond's point, both parties, the republican party and the democratic party have a real challenge ahead of them in making themselves relevant to

the american populace. the 2010 census told us by 2042, america will be a majority minority nation. there's a opportunity for both parties and for congress to recognize the way that america's landscape is changing, the way the burgeoning political power is happening and for there to be a response. today's response is that congress has to step in the gap that was opened be up by the supreme court by this most unfortunate opinion. >> here's the problem with your optimism. you start here. you can't have a better turnout than you had for president obama in the last election. 2012. some people -- certainly the turnout was unbelievable. a lot of it was spurred by anger, and what they saw as the effort of conservative white people to screw them out of voting. everybody be said we're going to show those people. we can show up at the voting booths. okay. how they can do more than they already did and look what's happened to them now. >> but chris, you seized on one aspect of america's burgeoning electorate. latinos, asian-americans are new sources of political power just

not coming into their own. look at texas, the expansive growth of the latino in texas. >> i think that's a state that's going to go purple soon. i agree with you there. >> there are meaningful opportunities. this is not just blind optimism. the reality is we're thinking about the 50th anniversary of the march on washington and how that was a watershed moment. and how that came on the heels history of exclusion in this country and followed by an opportunity to expand our democracy. we're looking at that again now. there's an opportunity for congress to step in the gap and for us to express outrage, as well. >> ryan, let's have lunch some day. you make me more optimistic than i normally am. thank you so much for your optimism. you don't believe in santa claus, but you're optimistic. mr. julian bond, it's an honor to have you on the show. please come back. it's great to have your historic perspective and your great mind. coming up, the so-called irs can dal? dare we use that word anymore? it may not have been one at all. now we learn just today the irs flagged terms like progressive and israel as well as tea party and patriot. there was no scandal, no effort

to target conservatives. no political influence from the white house. and no nothing. what do i want to know right now, it's a big question, why are we only finding out this now? why are the wheels of knowledge going so slow? plus, russia's president vladimir putin, he's a happy guy. he admitted today we all expected that edward snowden is still in the transit area of the moscow airport. that's a nice place to sleep. here's the important lesson for that episode. when you're in trouble, your enemies pop up. who is popping up against us in russia, china, they're seizing their opportunity to make us look bad. why did president obama try to move the ball on global warming and climate change today? because cities like miami are about to turn into atlantis if we don't do something about this. they're only five feet in the air, miami. they only got about three feet coming at them. so there will be two feet left of them in a couple of decades. finally, let me finish tonight with this point. how do you punish people the anti-environmentalist people in the congress and business world? because it's going to hurt us later what they're doing now.

this is "hardball," the place for politics. le girl, every food is finger food. so i can't afford to have germy surfaces. but after one day's use, dishcloths can redeposit millions of germs. so ditch your dishcloth and switch to a fresh sheet of new bounty duratowel. look! a fresh sheet of bounty duratowel leaves this surface cleaner than a germy dishcloth, as this black light reveals. it's durable, cloth-like and it's 3 times cleaner. so ditch your dishcloth and switch to new bounty duratowel. the durable, cloth-like picker-upper.

well, it is election day up in massachusetts. voters are going to the polls to pick their next u.s. senator, u.s. congressman ed markey is the favorite against republican gabrielle gomez in a special election to replace senator john kerry. and polls show markey with a lead in the high single or low double-digits. polls close at 8:00 eastern. if you're in massachusetts, you still have time to vote. please go out and vote. we'll be right back. [ larry ] you know throughout history, folks have suffered from frequent heartburn but now, thanks to treating with prilosec otc, we don't have to suffer like they used to. [ bell dings ] ♪ [ horse whinnies ] getting heartburn and then treating day after day is a thing of the past.

block the acid with prilosec otc, and don't get heartburn in the first place. we've sure come a long way. ♪ [ male announcer ] one pill each morning. 24 hours. zero heartburn. we didn't have u-verse back in my day. you couldn't just... guys... there you are. you know you couldn't just pause a show in one room, then... where was i... you couldn't pause a show in one room then start playing it in another. and...i'm talking to myself... [ male announcer ] call to get u-verse tv for just $19 a month for 2 years with qualifying bundles. rethink possible.

missing workouts because of sports injuries. runner's knee... ...it's right there. shin splints... ...it hurt right on this side. injuries like these can come from the pounding your feet take. but i found something that helps. dr. scholl's active series insoles with triple zone protection to help reduce pain from three sports injuries: runner's knee, shin splints, plantar fasciitis. i can feel the difference. i'm a believer. i'm back working out. i'm a believer. try dr. scholl's active series. i'm a believer. welcome back to "hardball." evidence in order to prove guilt, you need it. evidence. when it comes to the white house and the irs's is controversial scrutiny of conservative of groups, republicans have been said to rely on a tactic of accuse then prove. take a look. >> their paid liar, their spokesperson picture behind, he's still making up things about what happens and calling this local rogue.

this is a problem that was coordinated in all likelihood right out of washington headquarters. and we're getting to proving it. >> of course, the enemies list out of the white house that irs was engaged in shutting down or trying to shut down the conservative political viewpoint across the country, an enemies list that rivals that of another president some time ago. >> a coordinated campaign to use the levers of government to target conservatives and stifle speech has been in full swing and in open view. for all of us to see for years. >> we're in the process of proving, blah, blah, blah nixon enemies list, all that nonsense. now the truth. representative elijah cummings released transcripts that directly contradict all accusations. an inspector general report provided no evidence of conspiracy either. new information from the new irs chief daniel werfel which only adds to the gop conspiracy argument. his report finds the inappropriate tax scrutiny was

due to management and judgment failures, not political bias. he finds no evidence of any outside bias and no intentional wrongdoing here. most critically, catch this. new documents made public by the democrats house ways and means committee show that irs officials were also targeting liberal groups. in other words, they were going after patriot and tea party groups but also with groups with names like progressive or blue like in blue state or anti-republican. sam stein's the reporter from the "huffington post" and michael steele a former rnc chair. both are msnbc contributors. sam, let me start with you. i always thought of you as pretty objective about this stuff -- in fact, very objective. we don't know everything. what we know now it seems to me suggests that this wasn't just a tempest in a teapot but there was no tempest at all and no teapot. there was nothing. >> well, yes. like you i'm cautious because we've dealt with selective release of information. so i'm taking things as they're coming.

but the revelations yesterday were pretty ground-breaking i thought because for the first time we saw documents, internal irs documents which listed progressive groups, groups that advocated for medical marijuana, other groups on the left, the political left, who were also targeted on these be on the lookout lists that the irs put together. what that means is when they're applying for tax exempt status, much like these tea party organizations, irs officials wanted to categorize them. they want to give them extra scrutiny, so to speak. and so they flagged them by their names. the whole conspiracy, the whole scandal we've been led to believe was that people in the administration, people behind me had used the irs to go after political enemies. it would have been a stupid idea if you're also going after your enemies if you're also going after your political allies alongside of them. it seems like this punctured a hole in the scandal that was brewing around the irs. >> michael, what evidence is extant now that still exists now that there was a political scandal here? >> chris, i don't think there really has been any evidence

that confirms or affirms that idea that this was in fact a political scandal orchestrated out of the white house. it's one of the shortcomings of the issa hearings. and the way the chairman has heretofore approached this. he has gotten ahead of the facts in some of the comments that you played as a clip there. i, like sam, take a more cautious approach here. this evidence is coming out in dribs and drabs. we don't know the yet what is to be released. we still don't know exactly how deep or far all of this goes. so i tend to be much more cautious about it. >> what about how deep? relative to what? what has gone on so far that would go deeper? >> by deep i mean is it something that is entrenched inside the irs community itself, or does it really go -- >> what is the it at this point? >> pardon me? >> what is the "it"? what is the nature of this controversy. >> whether or not the hands on this were isolated to just the

irs and these employees. >> okay. but we don't have any evidence of that type. as of this moment, no. >> we don't, chris, because the investigation isn't over. we don't know yet. >> do we have any evidence to suggest that there was political hanky panky. >> as of yet, no. as of yet no. >> do we have any evidence to suggest that the irs itself is guilty of bias, political bias? >> i would say you have more evidence of that than anything else. >> what is that evidence? >> i mean, the fact that you have reams of papers with names of conservative organizations targeted. >> and other reams of papers with liberal groups with names like progressive. >> no, that's not true. looking at those documents, you go back and look at the redacted documents and the ones, just a handful of liberal terms were used, number one. number two, where are the liberal groups that actually were targeted? are they outraged by it? that's the other part of this. we haven't heard anything from the left if these groups were on this list and so targeted, where are they? >> i can answer those questions.

>> is the word scandal appropriate? >> yeah, i think it is. i think it becomes a scandal by virtue of the way the administration's handled it. >> i agree with you there. scandalously bad politics is what i would say. you make your point and i got a question for you. >> i got to address michael's points. he says these reams of paper don't mention progressive groups often. i went through all 15 bolo documents that were released by house democrats yesterday. progressives were mentioned on every single one of them in addition to tea party groups. i don't think that's a valid point. michael mentioned progressive groups haven't been outraged by this. in fact a group called progress texas, a liberal group in texas was outraged and did receive extra scrutiny and complained about it. so i don't agree with his point there. we're more conservatives targeted? were more conservative groups targeted perhaps in this dragnet? yes, but that could be a function of the fact that more consecutive groups were applying for tax exempt status in 2010 and 2011 in the wake of the citizens united decision.

what from our reporting and from documents i've looked at, it seems now the irs is putting together a categorizing system in which they can create buckets of groups that could get screened by the same agents, not something politically nefarious but something done so that every category would have the same screening process. and that's not necessarily a scandal. >> yeah, we have to find out. by the way, in all fairness to the bureaucrats, and i'm not anti-bureaucrat, trying to figure out whether a company, some sort of a 501-c4 group that is playing too much politics beyond where it's allowed to, somewhere below 50%, trying to figure out that out in terms of behavior is going to be very tough. one thing i want to agree with michael about. what do you think of the way the white house has handled this? >> i think it's been abysmal. they've created more noise around this issue than anything else that issa has done. >> i think the way they have -- >> is it free-floating guilt, as we catholics would say? they just say assume they're guilty of something? >> right.

>> why would they act like they're guilty if there's no evidence they are? >> i have no idea. it's a real puzzle for a shop that is supposed to be so politically keen and astute, they have a certain tone deafness. >> i agree. >> why is that? >> i agree with all that. what's remarkable to me someone clearly knew that progressive groups were on these bolo lists since when this thing emerged. and they still never said anything. we could have had a different political conversation over the past month if someone had spoken up and said this. instead we've focused incessantly on the scandal and only now learning this information. >> i sound like such a political hack sometimes. i got to tell you. i think they need a political operation at the white house that has somebody man or woman, whatever age in charge of making political judgments. the political judgment that had to be made here was either there's nothing there or if there is something there, get on top of it. but don't sit back and let this grow and blossom till it becomes a mushroom cloud. move.

>> i say let us keep on doing what they're doing. >> just move. >> i know, you love it, because it's ham-handed. thank you, sam stein and thank you michael steele. up next, which republican presidential hopeful is now head of a movie studio? you'll be surprised. this is "hardball," the place for politics. but i feel skinnier, you know? not really. aaah! jessica! whoa!

your friend's a rate sucker. her bad driving makes car insurance more expensive for the rest of us. try snapshot from progressive. snap it in and get a discount based on your good driving. [pop!] stop paying for rate suckers! try snapshot free at progressive.com.

back to "hardball." now to the sideshow. here is a story for you. the producers of that offbeat ifc show "portlandia" get a call out of the blue from the fbi. sounds bad, right in the not quite. fred armisen and carrie brownstein and stars were not the subject of an investigation. according to the hollywood reporter in, april an instructor at the fbi academy approached the producers requesting to use a clip from the show's sanitation twins clip and its advanced intelligence classes

which focus on terrorism, espionage and other crime. wow. here's a taste of the sketch. >> now there's a bin for everything. for cardboard and newspaper. >> the blue win. >> plastic and aluminum. >> black. >> yard waste? >> yeller. >> is that how you say it? >> yeller. >> what do you say? >> yellow. >> fingernails. >> and eggshells. cobalt. >> i feel bad using fingernails. >> i don't. they're gross. >> i know but we don't know. >> we know. >> can be worth something. >> like what? if we had einstein's fingernails i'm sure they would sell for a lot. >> is that whose fingernails it is? >> yeah. >> are you einstein? >> no. >> they're worthless. >> carrie brownstein says this falls under the surreal he category. he didn't tell us why he was interested. don't you think fred was the best obama? also, if you had to guess which of the failed gop presidential candidates just became ceo of a

movie company, who would you go with? newt gingrich maybe? it's actually rick santorum just accepted a gig as the head of the echolight studios a company with a goal of producing high quality movies for families of faith. he's not making the big move to hollywood. echo of light is based in dallas. according to santorum, quote, dallas can become the hollywood of the faith and family movie market. the move means santorum will no longer contribute to the far right world net daily website known for providing a platform for bizarre theories about president obama, not just the typical birther stuff but things like that he's gay, that's the president, of course, or that he tried to destabilize the kenyan government during a fact-finding trip in 2006. keeping the company you shouldn't keep. next, another blow for the westboro baptist church, the group united in the belief that god hates gays that goes to events like military funerals, attempting to spread their message. back in march a group with the totally opposite message set up

headquarters across the street from westboro baptist church down in topeka, kansas, and made the house into a visual statement of gay pride. there it is. well, the latest even though gay marriage is not legal in kansas, the equality house as its known went ahead with a same-sex marriage ceremony over the past weekend. as expected westboro protesters were on hand with signs to protest, but the brides were unfazed. quote, i knew the signs would be there and i wasn't even angry about it. we were just so ecstatic to be getting married. said one of the brides. local businesses pitched in to help cover the cost of the ceremony and the reception. nice people. up next, the chase for edward snowden is teaching us a lot about who our friends and allies are. so far, russia and china don't seem to be our buddies. that's ahead. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. ?ñ?h

>> welcome back to "hardball."

the strange saga of edward snowden doesn't seem to be ending soon. russian president vladimir putin confirmed today that the nsa leaker was indeed still inside the airport in moscow. and putin said the russians wouldn't send him back to the u.s. as the white house has been demanding. well, the russian leader said snowden is free to go wherever he wants. yesterday news that snowden was heading for cuba set up a frenzy among reporters buying tickets on the flight to havana, only to discover snowden wasn't on board. the next scheduled flight to cuba is on thursday. one thing we know when you're in trouble, your enemies pop up all over the place. right now the countries are russia and china. simon marks from feature story news and a veteran correspondent over in moscow, and jonathan capehart is an opinion writer for "the washington post." he is a great columnist and an msnbc contributor. simon, let me ask you about the general atmosphere. why is putin being an s.o.b. about this? >> well, i think, chris, essentially, for vladimir putin this is all part of the 21st century of the great game. this is an opportunity to check american power, to demonstrate

that america's power globally is on the wane, and that the power of countries like china and russia especially when they find common cause on an issue like the destiny of edward snowden has the ability to trip american presidents up regardless of party or philosophical outlook. >> jonathan, i don't think vladimir putin having looked at the cut of his jib over the decades or so, he doesn't look like he appreciates irony too much. the irony of a kgb guy looking out for civil and human rights of a guy flaunting authority is pretty unbelievable. >> it's pretty spectacular to watch. but also here you have edward snowden who is sort of like that tom hanks character. >> lost in the airport. >> "the terminal." victor was the character's first name. he's in a transit space there in the russian airport? you mean to tell me as you said, an ex-kgb agent who is president of the country wouldn't want to find out what edward snowden knows?

what he has? and what information that might be useful to russia. >> what do you think about that, simon? do you think -- i don't know. i don't thinking people lie directly but maybe they do in some parts of the world. would vladimir putin directly say as he did over the last news cycle he did not interrogate the guy and nobody's going after this guy for info, no requirements on giving up stuff. is that credible? >> we, i think he absolutely would lie about it. the russians have lied for the last 48 hours. it was just 24 hours ago they insisted they had no knowledge of edward snowden's whereabouts, couldn't even confirm that he was in russia. now they, of course, argue he's not in russia because he's in that transit lounge and he hasn't actually crossed the russian border. by the way, i've been in that transit lounge. you wouldn't want to spend an hour there much less a week. look, it's far too delicious a prospect for the fsb, the successor organization of the kgb not to sit down and talk to edward snowden, not to have some curiosity about what's in those four laptops he's apparently carrying. it seems to really beggar belief

that he hasn't in some fashion been debriefed. >> you know, i was thinking about this and what it says about, i grew up in the cold war, jonathan. i'm older than you. and i remember there were defectors on both sides. we cheered their defectors to us. if they were in the show business or whatever, they departed from some acrobatic team, we were glad to have them. is this a fair representation of the other side where we don't put up berlin walls, we put up walls to keep immigrants from coming in. but we don't put up walls to keep people in. are they just enjoying the irony of one guy probably in history that's fled our country. >> i don't recall a time. >> since oswald. >> has fled. he came back. here's the thing about edward snowden that drives me crazy. he does this thing which we now know he joined booz allen for the sole purpose of stealing these documents. >> and took the oath of secrecy. >> exactly.

so then but he wants to do this because he's standing on some moral high ground that he wants to inform the american people about what he's doing and the breadth and scope of what the nsa is doing for national security and on our behalf for national intelligence. but what does he do? he flees the united states. he goes to hong kong, china. he then goes to moscow en route to havana, en route to ecuador. instead of coming to the united states. a lot of people try to compare him -- >> what was his goal? i always ask this about people like oswald. when you do something you know is going to cause you trouble legally and make you a felon, how do you not have a plan to deal with that? >> you know, i don't know. but daniel ellsburg, famous for the pentagon papers. pretty much did the same thing. >> he put his hands out. >> exactly. he went to senators to try to get their help. he went to the press. he did go into hiding. he went to cambridge, but then he gave himself up at the boston courthouse. >> i love your attitude about

this. what is the word on this guy? he's become as i said last night, a where's waldo. i don't think there's a person in america who watches the news and reads the paper who doesn't want to know where this guy ends up and if he escapes justice or not. >> we're all assuming he's going to try to get to ecuador. ecuador would certainly make sense. one, he has applied for asylum there. two, they have a track record. they've got julian assange holed up in the embassy. >> what's it like in ecuador? do they have starbucks down there? who wants to live their life in quito? it may be great. >> one would have to argue that life in quito is probably more pleasant than one room in the ecuadoran embassy in london. the other option he still has open potentially is iceland. let's not rule that out as an outlier in all of this. he said consistently he wants to end up in a, quote unquote, democratic country. iceland would clearly far more fit that bill than other options. >> it's so interesting. back home here you have people like rand paul that will decide whether they like the guy,

jonathan, home question here, like the guy based on where he ends up. if he ends up in iceland, rand paul and the libertarian wing of the world say okay, we can live with that if he ends up in a commie or a dictatorship or a left-wing country like ecuador, no good. >> this goes to the distraction that edward snowden has now become. we started off talking about nsa and what it's doing and what it's not doing and how it's stretching the bounds of the patriot act. now we're discussing whether he's in havana or moscow and reporters jumping on flights that he's not on. >> let me say something good about him. i do enjoy this pursuit. he told us stuff we are glad we know. that's one of the great ironies. in my religion, you can do something wrong and -- you are not a perfect vessel. he is not a perfect vessel. we know more about our intelligence gathering than we knew before he started talking. thank you, simon marks. it's great to have you on. you have my attitude towards everybody. thank you. and jonathan capehart as always. up next, president obama is trying to tackle climate change. today, he's not expecting any help from the congress. at least he knows the future of

the planet is at stake. he's got the right values. can he move on this? this is "hardball," the place for politics.

well, former south african president nelson mandela remained hospitalized in critical condition right now, but we got this update today from his granddaughter, zindzi mandela tells nbc news now when she went to see her grandfather this morning, she told him about president obama's upcoming visit to south africa. zindzi said she told him, quote, obama is coming, and he opened his eyes and gave a big smile. wow.

president obama is due in south africa this coming friday. what a trip that's going to be. we'll be right back. my presidency will mark a

my presidency will mark a new chapter in america's leadership on climate change that will strengthen our security and create millions of new jobs in the process. that will start with a federal cap and trade system. >> we're back. that was president obama in 2008 promising bold action on climate change. of course, cap and trade failed to overcome republican opposition in the congress and earlier this year in his address for his second term, the president again promised action on climate change. >> we will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that

the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science. but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought and more powerful storms. >> today in a major policy speech, the president tried to deliver on that promise. >> the question now is whether we will have the courage to act before it's too late. and how we answer will have a profound impact on the world that we leave behind not just to you but to your children and to your grandchildren. as a president, as a father, and as an american, i'm here to say, we need to act. >> wow. well, the president promised a series of executive actions that wouldn't require congressional approval. the centerpiece is a directive to the environmental protection agency, the epa to establish

carbon emission standards new as well as at existing power plants. experts say that has the potential to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions since power plants account for over a third of all emissions in this country. republicans, of course, are already criticizing the president for focusing on the environment. but for people who live in the fact-based world we all live in doing something about the environment is not simply a political issue. the national oceanic and atmospheric administration administration says the sea level could rise more than six feet by the end of this century, sinking sea level cities like miami below water level. that should be considered a crisis, don't you think? howard fineman editorial director for "the huffington post" and joan walsh. both are msnbc political analysts. this is so important. i don't want to nail it down to certain questions and certain answers. but if this is true, that carbon emissions are causing the sea level to rise and we're going to have miami turning into atlantis by our children's life times, it's not a joke, it's frightening. >>, no it's not.

>> it's real. it's not bs. we used to call these guys and women -- well, mostly guys pigs back in the '60s. people that didn't care about anything except their own wealth. that's all they cared about. pigs. how can you stand up in congress or as a businessperson like romney and make fun of what is >> we're back. people that didn't care about anything except their own wealth. that's all they cared about. pigs. how can you stand up in congress or as a businessperson like romney and make fun of what is scientifically happening to our planet and it's the only one we got? >> well, i think it's hard and wrong for those people to do that. i think the political problem that the president confronted today which he didn't do before the 2012 election, by the way, was what to do about existing coal-fired power plants. >> yes. >> and that's the heart of the heart of the country. we're talking about, ohio, illinois, kentucky, west virginia, pennsylvania, the industrial heartland of america which still very much relies both for power and light and industry on coal. now, the supreme court said in

2009 that carbon dioxide should be and could be regulated as a pollutant. in other words, as early as his the beginning of his first administration, this president could have moved administratively, aggressively to clamp down on existing power plants. many of which are belching huge amount of the carbon dioxide that results in the warming of temperatures, you're talking about. he didn't do it then, but he did do it today. at least he initiated the process today which he didn't want to do, frankly, before ohio voted in 2012. >> let's take a look at mitt romney. i don't want to call anybody a pig, but generically, he fits the category. here's mitt romney mocking president obama in his convention speech last year. what a hoot it got from the baboths in the audience. let's take a look. >> president obama promised to twin to slow the rise of the oceans. [ laughter ] and to heal the planet.

my promise is to help you and your family. >> there's so much in that, joan. there's so much awfulness in that. in other words, making money in business is the signs that god loves you. anything you do to make money in business is good, and anybody who questions that and thinks you might be hurting god's environment which he gave us is wrong and you can laugh at them. >> remember how ridiculous that sounded, chris, after superstorm sandy when the oceans did rise, people died, people lost their homes and wanted help for their families. howard is right. he did wait on some of this stuff until the second term. >> who are his enemies? is it always kentucky on coal? is it west virginia? >> i mean, you know, joe manchin is not happy today, but joe manchin is not going to be happy. the president is not going to worry about west virginia, that's for sure. >> the democrats can kiss west virginia good-bye and probably kentucky. >> they've been kissing it good-bye and kentucky for a while. they won ohio. threats for made about his existing policies in ohio and pennsylvania and he won anyway.

this is necessary. he's putting together a new politics around climate change, doing it without congress. the house passed great climate change cap and trade legislation in the first term and couldn't get it through the senate. people were moving on this. now there's absolute obstruction. he's doing the right thing. >> a lot of wealthy people live near the shore as we know in florida especially. let's take a look at an example of how climate change can be important today, not years from now. look at miami. "the unavoidable truth is sea levels are rising and miami is on its way to becoming an american atlantis. it may be another century before the city's completely under water. though some more pessimistic scientists predict it could be much sooner. life in the vibrant met top list of 5.5 million people will begin to dissolve much quicker, most likely within a few decades. miami as we know it is doomed says a chairman of geological sciences at the university of miami." it's not a question of if, it's a question of when. howard, when you look at this, they tell me in this article

something like 2/3 of the land of miami as we know which is a fabulously dynamic city in this hemisphere is within five feet of sea level. so doesn't take much for the sea to rise three or four feet and remove most of miami. it's not something weird and way off. >> no, it's not. it's miami in certain ways is the venice of the east coast of the united states. and just as treasured or should be just as treasured. i think the strongest part of the president's speech was his statement that as a can-do american country, we have time and again said that we do not have to sacrifice our way of life and our environment for economic progress. american ingenuity has raised, is raising mileage standards on cars. it is, did institute reforms in industry in the 19th and early 20th century. the whole progressive movement was about that. the whole optimism and can-do yankee spirit of america needs

to be engaged in this problem. and if we just get our minds around that, if we see enthusiastically what a great creative, and by the way, job-producing challenge this is, it's a win/win for everybody. and there's always going to be people in old industries and backward industries who are saying, it's going to cost jobs. in the short term, we, but the very capitalist theory that his republican opponents are using is the one that actually supports the president's point of view. >> it's called the muffler. the muffler. it anti-so complicated. it works. howard, it works. i get an emissions check every year on my car. thank you, howard fineman, and thank you, joan walsh. we'll be right back. and you wouldn't have it any other way. but your erectile dysfunction - you know, that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready.

and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial.

they have no idea what it was like before u-verse high speed internet. yeah, you couldn't just stream movies to a device like that. one time, i had to wait half a day to watch a movie. you watched movies?! i was lucky if i could watch a show. show?! man, i was happy to see a sneezing panda clip! trevor, have you eaten today? you sound a little grumpy. [ laughter ] [ male announcer ] connect all your wi-fi-enabled devices with u-verse high speed internet. rethink possible.

let me finish tonight with this. the trouble with democracy is that it rewards and punishes only in the short-run. think of all those in the business world and in the congress who joyously vote against any effort to limit carbon emissions and never pay at the ballot. for the simple reason the results of their vote won't be felt in the stretch of their political careers. think of all the environmentalists who will get no credit in their political careers for voting their condition for climate change. take the example of miami. it's a great city, perhaps headed to be the greatest city of the western hemisphere. but for one problem, it's largely flat. when the ocean rises just three feet, much of the city will fall below sea level. over time, it will become an

underwater city, a lost city, an atlantis. when that day comes, most probably in this century people will look back at those on the piggyside, politically today, those who laugh at climate change and say they were the ones who did this. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "all in with chris hayes" starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. thank you for joining us on a fascinating, frustrating news night. tonight, on "all in" we know where he is, at least re we think we do. i'll tell you where we believe the nsa leaker edward snowden is holed up at this very minute and why the trouble this guy is causing u.s. government has only just begun. plus president barack obama stood in the 93 degree heat today and delivered the speech al gore called the best ever on climate n