the terror rages. this is "hardball." good evening, i'm chris matthews, up in new york. eye says has just burned alive 45 iraqis. they took them captive in anbar province. put them in a truck poured gasoline all over them and set them afire, according to a member of the iraqi parliament from that area.

those that isis burned alive including local forces trying to defend their area. this horrific new form of terror that kills people in the most agonizing ways is an isis tactic to let its enemy know that's what it does. prisoners of war are tortured and death exhibits for those who dare to face them in battle. a -- ayman talk about this incident , just for opposing them or whatever. >> yeah, chris, we're still getting the details of that incident, but it is not a shock to see how isis is behaving with these people. keep in mind the anbar province is predominantly sunni era, also some in the past that isis has relied on for some kind of sympathy or support, these people who have grievances with

the central government, but it seems even in places where there are sunni arabs that oppose the rule of isis, isis absolutely shows no mercy, any kind of compassion in allows these people is they have gathered people from tribes with deep roots in that part of the country, tribes who are well respected, and burned these individuals alive, including some members of the security forces. it shows you the strength and shows you the willingness of isis to go to any length to continue to control that part of the country, no matter what, at any cost, chris. >> besides sadism and just the usual renal that people for centuries have done this to each other when they have the upper hand, what is the strategy to do this so horribly to people, not just take them to prisoners of war -- i would say not just even in the case of sunni muslims who

oppose isis, but i would say especially in the case of sunni muslim what they're saying in effect is you're a nonbeliever, that's fine, we will mete out the punishments that are proscribed, but if you are a muslim, you're an appear -- -- i have not seen anything as brutal as this. i have followed these extremist groups for many, many years, this is going completely beyond the pale, and they seriously risk alien ating the moderates in the area, but i think think risk alienating fundamentalists as well. they're clearly overplaying their hand. >> i late to even talk about

people who having killed so ruthlessly and aimlessly. ayman, is this a recruiting tool? does this turn on, to be blunt about it, young people in the slums around paris oar the slums here in the united states or wherever? does this make people excited to join them? >> it's very lard for me to answer that question. i think they are using those tactic to instill fear around anybody who, the message to the remains in iraq where these 45 people were killed is that if you dare to raise your voice, if you dare to ally yourself with anyone other than isis, this is the fate you will their. the message to the christian world is similar -- for those who ally themselves against isis, you will be beheaded

wherever we can get to you. not because i think they want to recruit people in the west and in europe. that's certainly an objective of theirs. we have heard that very explicitly when their leaders have called on people, but with these specific type of brutal murders, gruesome, grotesque, the message is different. the message is if anyone dares to challenge us, this is the fate you will have, do not cross isis. i think they are using fear as an attempt to keep people away from confronting isis, or whether it be those that are allying themselves with the west. robert, tie this into the romance of going to paradise. i mean, somebody was quoted the other day, in tunisia talking to people and some say we hate the united states, and this is going to take us to paradise. if this is going to take us to paradise in your religious beliefs, how does that fit with killing people in a most horrific way, is it a chance to be sadiic and also get the

pleasure of going to heaven? what is the drive here, and how does it connect? >> actually we're talking about two different things here. yes, absolutely the appeal of going to heche is a very, very strong one, but that involves your death. if you become a martyr in defense of islam, you will receive great rewards. what we are talking about here in killing other people, that's really quite different. that's not necessarily the road to nirvana. but those participating in the struggle, and while i think ayman is exactly right, uses they particularly brutal tactic, that is a local terror tactic, as he has just described. that is telling them, look, you oppose us at your peril. don't do it. but a little more broadly than that, in their willings in to use violent in 0rd to expand the caliphate, that's going back to

the earliest days of islam. this is not an antislam statement at all, i have the greatest respect for islam, but during the rise of islam, it was very violent. it was spread will you warfare earlier. conquered people were given a choice, you will either accept salt lake city or be killed. there was a slightly better people offered to the book, to the christians and the jews, but the initial expansion was a violent expansion. religions mature, religions evolve, religions moderate. islam is certainly the same. they are going back to the very violent earliest tradition, and yes, to some fundamentalists, this is a very attractive thing. they are returning to the roots, regaining the glory of islam that we had in the earliest years. >> to a summit on encountering joe biding said the key was offering an alternative to the lure of groups like isis. >> we're here today, because we all understand that in dealing

with violent extremism, that we need answers to go beyond a military answer. we need answer that is go beyond a force. societies have to provide an affirmative alternative for immigrant communities, a sense of opportunity, a sense of belonging, and to -- that discredits the terrorist appeal. it's not enough to take on these networks of extremists who wish to do us harm. we also have to take on the ideology that attracts foreign fighters from all around the world. >> you joe, ayman, when the vice president is reading there, i don't think that's going to be the solution. if the problem is poverty or a lack of alternatives in life, you will have to go to not just 95% of the people alienated about i the west and who are muslim in this case and turning to terrorism. you have to go to 100%. all it takes is a few percent in every community, in france,

denmark or the united states, anywhere in the wording. you can't turn everybody to the right side. get to go, something in their brain soup makes them do it. this idea we're going to recover all these communities is hopeless. why are we talking like this? it sounds like we're going to get kids off drugs by giving them an education. well, maybe in most cases, but in this case we're talking about worldwide terrorism. it seem like it doesn't seem strong enough a response. is it? >> i would have to say there are two different approaches. one is what you're talking about in the arab world where a the lo lot of this is taking place and what's happening in the west s i think the vice president is talking to two different sets of problems. the first problem in the middle east is yes, you have to create more political plurality. you have to allow for freedom of

ideas, freedom of the interpretation of the religion that's separate from what he's talking about back here in the u.s. and the france where we have you have to immigrant community feel like they belong. we're not looking at big slums on the outskier of new york, chicago and l.a., like we see in paris and other cities, where there are thousands of young people ripe for exploitation. immigrants come to this country because they feel like they belong. that's what i think the vice president is trying to say. we have to make the immigrants who feel isolated feel they belong and have a seat at the table and are part of the process, so they were not lured and drawn to that ideology, and initial to the other problems you have to do that are forward-operating problems, things in the middle east you have to address on the ground. >> every that ayman just said i think you can argue for in aspirin well.

we want freedom of expression, we want all those opportunities, but that was a neoconargument that got us into the mess we are in right now. tear down these dictatorships and out of them will bloom freedom. freedom agenda was what it was called, yet all it did is create hell on earth. we're left with what? we're left with isis, al qaeda and the ruins. the ruins have been great for these bad guise. i would like to see gadhafi and is a dam back, because at least they were the three stooges. they weren't threatening israel's real existence, certainly not ours. all they cared about was surviflts of them and their kids. they weren't a threat like isis. i think we've gotten from the frying pan into the fire because of neocons and that kind of thinking. well, at the end of the day, let

ate not overestimate what the united states can do. the united states didn't create arab spring. it wasn't because of actions of the united states united states that egypt fell or that gadhafi fell. the i think that ayman is exactly right over the long term. over the long term, yes, you have to give people an alternative or they have to find an alternative to extremism in order to meeting their legitimate aspiral aces. in the short term, though, going back to the -- >> wait a minute, i want to interrupt this. we did create the situation in iraq today, because all those generals and former members of the saddam regime were thrown out of the because of de-baath-ification, they found a place at a home they called isis. we were warned when syria went down it would be replaced by

something worse. everybody knew that. it was going to be worse. >> that wasn't necessarily the case. in the case of iraq, i go at great length in my book talking about the very serious mistake that we made in iraq. there was an opportunity to achieve some very good things there and unfortunately we squandered it. but at the end of the day when we're trying to counter radicalism in the middle east, we are in the periphery of that discussion. it's not about us. >> that's a good argument, but unfortunately they're bringing it to us on national and international television, and we are watching the burnings alive -- >> it doesn't mean that -- look, we have a very important stake in the outcome of these struggles. it's very important for us to be engaged, to try to reinforce the forces of relative good, if you will, in those countries. but at the end of the day, we

having to very careful against overplaying our hand. for instance we're constantly talking about a u.s.-led collision against isis. that may resonate well here, but it does not resonate well in the region. nobody wants tothe interests of the united states. the united states has been to be supporting the interests of those in the region who want counter a radical organization like isis. >> i would love to lead from behind. that's what you're sago saying, lead from behind. >> that's exactly what i'm saying. >> thank you form. my question, if they're proud of what they're doing, why are they keeping themselves anonymous? plus mystery in space, scientists are puzzled by these images in mars that show a vast plume of haze. what exactly is it? i know this is something different. what's going on on mars?

and a district judge in texas dealt a blow to the president's immigration policy, temporarily at least blocking the government from gift some relief from deportation. can this plan of the president's survive? and let me finish took with the growing horror of isis and the american response. this is "hardball," the place for politics. doug, we have the results, but first, we have a very special guest. come on out, flo! [house band playing] you have anything to say to flo? nah, i'll just let the results do the talking.

[crowd booing] well, he can do that. we show our progressive direct rate and the rates of our competitors even if progressive isn't the lowest. it looks like progressive is not the lowest! ohhhh! when we return we'll find out whether doug is the father. wait, what? a new poll found that 78% in congress should give the authority to the president to fight isis. we'll be right back.

the lead story online for much of the day on "the hill" newspaper was this piecely amy parnes.

in this story, three anonymous clinton allies are, quote being outraged by comments here by david axelrod about the emerging campaign. he was senior adviser to president obama and also an analyst at this network. he's currently doing media for his new book -- it's not helpful, and it's definitely not appreciated. another supporter added -- i think a lot of us are scratching our heads why is any of that necessary? a third -- she's been a great team player, very supportive of the president, so what's he trying to do? according to the story, clinton allies are outrajjed in part about the challenges facing john podesta. >> people are going to make mistake. the question is do the mistakes reveal something?

john podesta has to get control of the clinton operation. >> he's pretty good at that. are they sources actually speaking with hillary's authority, or some kind of bloodsport? why do these people refuse to identify themselves? robert gibbs, an msnbc political analyst and john bray benner, i'm going to ask an infant aisle question. if people are proud of what they're saying why do they go on background? why are they trashing axelrod for i would think a relatively constructive idea. so needily anonymous? i don't get that part. i would be proud. if you're for hillary, get out there and say so. >> my guess is they're not that

senior a person, they're not that influential in the campaign, but have convinced something to cite them as an anonymous clinton official. i'm sure there are several thousands of those i thought i thought the comments were laughable. she's bringing on john podesta to fix what was a huge impediment and one of the reasons she's not president now, because the financialing operation of her campaign was more interested in fighting inside the building than they were effective at fighting outside the building. that's all that david said. quite frankly if this has thing rankled or whatever, i would say this to the campaign -- buckle up. it's going to get worse, from your friends, from your donors, and certainly a lot worse from republicans. this is not abeasy gauntlet to

get to the white house, which she knows. >> are these people like -- we've watched people like lannie davis, i wonder if they've met them. they're all over the place, but are they in fact speak for her campaign, but the way the press runs it theesh being portrayed at clinton people. are they actually part of the hierarchy? you don't know? >> my guess is they're not part of the senior hierarchy. they may be people that are tangentially involved, but all this story did today was kick up the fact that hillary clinton had all these problems when she ran eight years ago. i mean, what on earth would clinton officials that were smart and savvy and at the senior of the campaign's ultimate leadership, why who they start this fight today? it's great for david. he's going to sell more books

because of it. it doesn't help hillary clinton at all. >> it's a great book. i hope so. it's called "believer." you're watching this from the other side of the aisle. is this the new rules of engagement, if if you say anything constructive about the clinton campaign-to-be, which i assume it will be a campaign, that somebody somewhere will take shots at you personally, and question your motives? it doesn't even have to be the campaign. it can be they sparkies, these characters that don't even have names. >> let me first say to the opposite side of the aisle, thank you, keep it up. the ultimate irony is they're proving axelrod right. he says, look, someone has to get control, so they send three people out there to shut it down. the fact that we're talking about it shows it had an opposite effect and no one is calling the shots and there are

these loose cannons over there. i think it makes people start to wonder if this is what clinton-ville is, you go out and say something that really wasn't all that critical and all of a sudden somebody is jumping on you. i looked at the comments, i think they were probably right on and i didn't think they were overly critical. chris christie is playing the terrain as he travels to it, playing it -- he's being a roman. after plays -- he assured crowds in new hampshire this week that he was anything but iowa nice. >> i had one of your leaders say to me today we don't want some kinder, gentler chris christie. we want the real chris christie. there's only one chris christie, this is it. >> he played up the aggressive fighting style. here he is. >> there will be times i will

say some things that will make you shake your head. there would be times i will say things in a way you may think he could maybe have said that a bit better, but what you are will never say is that i don't know who he is, and i don't know what he believes, and i don't know what he's willing to fight for and who he's willing to fight to get there. >> christie finds himself trailing the pack in all of the primary states. i know it's early. south carolina he doesn't even make the top five. rob, this thing about being two-faced or -- hughey long did it in the old days. i mean, you can get away with that before there was like radio, but now it seems to be that people know what people are saying in other places. can christie by the live free or die character?

gritty new hampshire or easier going fella out in iowa who hates loud noises. >> i think it's hard to do that in anything that approximates modern politics. what you say one place trails you everywhere else. a good example, the whole vaccine outbreak, no pun intended, on measles and vaccines happened when chris christie was in london. that was a big story in the united states. you really can't do the two audiences, you know, different things to the two audiences. i will say obviously iowa and new hampshire are very different stays, very different voters on how they receive messages. i think quite frankly most of the people running and deciding the republican primaries are going to want to see the chris christie they are used to seeing, and i think the worst thing any political consultant or adviser can do is try to make somebody something they are simply not. i think christie is what he is,

and that's what makes hi potentially electable. >> what's your view about the two faces, one for new hampshire, one for iowa? >> knowing the chris christie people who are smart people, that's not what it's going to be. he's very authentic. it will be the chris christie that, and he's better off when he acts himself. >> so jersey is going to sell in way? >> i think chris christie comes across as an american original, which i do think sells in iowa, as well as the other candidates. >> it will be good for us all covering the campaign to have a good show when the jersey boy hits iowa. that will be great. thank you both. up next, something completely different. as i said, these images of mars are puzzling scientists. top page, front page of "usa today" an expert is here to explain what's going on in mars. this is "hardball," the place for politics.

welcome back to "hardball." a mysterious cloud-like plume appeared briefly in the upper atmosphere over mars, and the phenomena is baffling scientists right now. they were about the size of a tropical storm, first spotted and observed by amateur astronomers for 11 days back in the spring of 2012. now a team of researchers has published a report detailing the phenomena, yet they've been unable to come up with any explanation. this story comes as john podesta tweeded this about the possibility existence of ufos -- finally my biggest failure of 2014, one against not secure the disclosure of the ufo files. of course he was kidding, but i'm joined by the senior astronomer and director of the ceti institution which searching

for extraterrestrial life. your expertise is in listening on the radio or whatever technology we have, to listen and see if there's any reaction to signals we send out. have you ever heard anything come back? any evident of life? >> yeah, chris, if we had heard something, believe me, you would know about it. that would be an enormous story, but i remain optimistic. >> i guess we are alls hoping there's potential life on other planets, or livable habitat for us in case we get too crowded. does it or does it not? >> to be honest, yes, there's clearly something in the air on the red planet, but it's probably either dust than been kicked up. mars has dust storms, even dust devils. you can find these nifty videos of dust devils down near the surface, but this is pretty high up, about 150 miles up, about

the size of the state of nevada or a tropical storm. it could be dust, it would be little particles of ice, water ice, dry ice, it could even be aurorae, but i don't think it tells you much whether there's life on mars, because that's a slightly different story. >> the chemicals you mentioned, lie the co2, does that tell you there's h2o? what do we know about life? >> life is something else. mars is everybody's favorite inhabited planet. the one place we haven't found life on mars is on mars. that isn't to say it isn't there. the surface is a terrible place. the photos like lie a remote part of nevada or arizona, without the cacti, right?

terrible, terrible place, but if you were to go to mars tomorrow or the weekend and dig a hole maybe 100, 200, 300 feet, you might find life down there, some sort of microbes. >> it goes for a real general audience, not a business newspaper. it goes for the big interest people have. the top of the fold on the front page, "mystery plumes" what is that about? >> your theory that it has to do with podesta's snow comments. i've gotten how many stories people saying -- see? they're covering up. >> so you don't believe there's any secret stash of hard evidence that we've been visited by other beings from other plan

either, you don't believe that? >> no, chris, i don't. look, to begin with, i'm not sure the federal government would be capable of keeping that secret, but even -- >> i'm just asking. i know some people care. people watching this show -- people are fascinated with the possibility of ufos. everybody has seen something they can't quite figure out at that moment what it is. it's something about our human nature. you're doing it for a career. people do want to find something out there. >> that's absolutely the case. one third of americans, polls have showed this for, i don't know, three decades. one third of americans think the aliens are here. one third, okay, so they're very interested. they think the federal 2k3w06789 is keeping it quiet. if you think that's true, you also have to think that the bolivians and belgians, all those guys are keeping it secret, too, or maybe the aliens only like to visit the u.s., which seems improbable. >> that's why i don't believe in

time 2r568, because i ask the people, where are they? where are the people from the future? doctor, thank you for your expertise. up next, the district court decision that could be a major plow to 9 president's policy. what would it mean? which is what the president is trying to give them. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics.

hey matt, what's up? i'm just looking over the company bills. is that what we pay for internet? yup. dsl is about 90 bucks a month. that's funny, for that price with comcast business, i think you get like 50 megabits. wow, that's fast. personally, i prefer a slow internet. there is something about the sweet meditative glow of a loading website. don't listen to the naysayer. switch to comcast business today and get 50 megabits per second for $89.95. comcast business. built for business.

welcome back to "hardball" last night a federal judge in texas temporarily blocked part of president obama's executive actions on immigration, today the administration announced it will delay carrying out the orders. the department of justice will appeal that temporary injudge. in the meantime we recognize we must comply with it. late today president obama spoke about the judge's action. >> i disagree with the texas judge's ruling and the justice department will appeal. this is not the first time where a lower court judge has blocked something or attempted to block smig that ultimately was shown to be lawful. >> this levels up to 5 million undocumented immigrants temporarily in limbo.

joining mess is justice correspondent pete williams. great question -- what does this do to his whole push to help people get relief from deportation. >> it puts it on ice for now. we'll have to see how fast the administration can get to the fifth circuit court of appeals. undoubtedly the states that challenge this law will respond. if the government doesn't get satisfaction, it can still ask the supreme court, but remember this is just round 1 in this court. the judge has yet to rule on the guts of the lawsuit, which is a straitup challenge to it as either illegal or constitutional. all he has done so far is texas is likely to prevail. better to put a stay on it now and let this play out than he says not to put a stay on, have all these people come forward out of the shadows, in the phrase he used today. then if it's later found unconstitutional or illegality,

immigrate people would have all their names and they could risks deport all the, you could argue that the judge is being overdramatic there, but that is something that's been raised as a concern. >> i notice it's a hard question. did the president legislate by these actions or just simply show prosecutorial discretion? >> the judge would say he went to far. the white house has said these discretion, the government can't possibly handle the people here illegally, so it will concentrate on the ones with the most serious threats, criminals, potentially terrorists, people who commit crimes. therefore it will give a pass to the others, but the judge says this is not just the government turning its back on the others. this is the government reaching out, giving them associate security numbers, work permits, other benefits. that he says is going beyond what the law allows. >> well said. now i understand it. i'm joined now by the

roundtable. marreesa, i know your advocately role. are you just the fact of this thing today, a judge putting the stay and stopping the lock motive from going where it was going towards relief for millions of people? >> i think we have to look at exactly what the judge said. it wasn't the policy he was going after. he actually said it was the manner in which the policy was carried out. the stay, when you look at the rest of the executive order, the rest, that part that actually focuses on enforcement, enforcing the border, enforcing arrive -- those are -- that still continues. what the judge had a problem with, chris, was the idea, the part of extending doca and dopa action for the undocumented to receive temporary relief. he said that didn't have enough comment.

i spoke with some folks indeed administration, and they feel it will be a temporary roadblock, but in the long term, that 11 million people will eventually be able to come forward. the real issue is congress needs to fix the problem. while this is a temporary order, this is up to congress to say we have a broken system -- >> they don't want to do it. >> they don't want to do the hard work. >> jonathan, this is analysis the kind you do all the time. is it possible the president's bigs enemies is the courts, both with this regard and the subsidies for obamacare? it's basically been comb atoes in terms of getting anything done. and yet the court can be pretty cold and tough by saying, look, you've gone too far, mr. president, you've encouraged them to come in from the cold, you're not just being not discriminating in terms -- you're encouraging them to come out.

>> because congress is so inactive, a lot of people have turned to the courts for relief, turning the courts into not only the judicial branch, but in some cases the legislative braj. maria teresa is absolutely right. we wouldn't be in this position if congress had moved on that comprehensive immigration bill that passed the senate in june 2013 with an amazing 68 votes. that's a bipartisan bill that went to the house, and speaker boehner let it sit there and let it die. they could have resurrected it during the lame-duck session and passed it then and actually trumped the president and taken some credit for fixing a broken system. instead they punted. now we have a brand-new congress where they will have to start all over again. rather than use the comprehensive bill as a template to get something done, they're

depending on the courts to do the work for them. >> jackie, do you do you think the president can act because the congress screws up? all he's got is this congress, so he says if they can't do the job, i'll do it, but that's not so easy under our constitution. you can do certain things along the margins, but can you create immigration law? >> you know, that's the debate. what the white house set they're very much in the parameters, and right now congressional republicans say he's not and these 26 governors, that is the question and that's what we're going to see play out. but the president does want to see dhs passed and what the congress is doing there is probably a mistake for republicans. >> i agree, they screwed things up, but he can't get away with what he wants to do, which is to set policy. s a system of three branches of government. >> but it's temporary.

>> i think this summer it will be the courts. i looked at the subsidies with regard to exchanges. i worry about that. i think roberts could go the other way this time. thank you. the roundtable is that i staying with us. the plan to retake the senate in 2016 includes running piano emwho lost the last time in to 10 and 2014. can 24th win with guys who already lost? this is "hardball," the place for politics. (sniff) uh honey isn't that the dog's towel? (dog noise) hey, mi towel, su towel. more gain scent, plus oxi boost and febreze for 3 big things in one gain fling. it's our best gain ever!

we've got some neu policies from the key swing state of new hampshire. let's check the "hardball" scoreboards. there's some surprises here. hillary clinton would bead rand paul by seven points, but catch the rest of this. against scott walker her lead grows to 13. but look at this baby against jeb bush, the republican with arguably the highe name i.d., clinton's got him by 14 right now, which is winning. we'll be right back.

we're back. democrats think they can win back the u.s. senate in 2016. to do that they're trying to lure back names back into the political arena for come back bids. those that lost in the wave

elections, when turnout was exceedingly low, they have a chance at winning in a presidential year when voter turnout is usually high. kay hagan lost a close one. mark beigh was close as well. former u.s. congressmen and congressman charlie crist. now back with our round table. i want to start with jonathan this time. do you think it is smart to go with the retreads? >> it depends on how the retreads lost. these are people who didn't lose because they're constituents hated them, or because they were terrible at their jobs.

they lost because the democratic coalition didn't come out to vote. and by tradition nay don't in off year elections. you talk about the republican wave that came through in the midterm election. so if beigch and hagan are on the ballot in an election year where there is a lot of excitement for hillary clinton, they could get back into office. >> isn't this recycling? you put them in, they face a six year situation six years from now when they're back with the wrong electorate and it is the same thing again. so it is like baseball players. you have to be able to take in kind of pitching. >> i think that could be true, i think that what the democrats are calculating are two things.

folks that are tried and tested. they don't want to repeat that i'm the witch against unknown candidates. and finally, and most importantly, these are folks that have their own personal fundraising network. i think a new candidate will be very difficult if the democratic machine is supporting hillary. these are folks with fundraising capabilities. >> the difference is this. the right wing coming up with new people that pop up all of the place. we had not heard of rubio or cruz. they're sprouting candidate out of the woods. the democrats are going back to where they were instead of reaching out to new kinds of people, different ethnic candidates, and the republicans are doing that a little better, your thoughts? >> i think it defends on the state. look at scott browne. someone like ohio, they go with

ted strictland who won statewide. >> a lot has changed since the last time he and other candidates have run. >> i think, chris, what you're saying to is what the republicans have done so well is they're building a candidate bench that starts in the state legislature and it preps them. the democrats do not have that. in california you had roughly three or four republican latinas for the first time run in local elections and made it to the state legislature and now they're going to be groomed for congress. >> yes, thank you so much. i'll be right back.

hey matt, what's up? i'm just looking over the company bills. is that what we pay for internet? yup. dsl is about 90 bucks a month. that's funny, for that price with comcast business, i think you get like 50 megabits. wow, that's fast. personally, i prefer a slow internet.

there is something about the sweet meditative glow of a loading website. don't listen to the naysayer. switch to comcast business today and get 50 megabits per second for $89.95. comcast business. built for business. let me finish with this new report of horrors we face. 45 people were burned arrive today. for the same reason that people have done horrors like this over the centuries. to terrify others into bowing before them. but isis changed the roles of warfare. they eliminated capture. run or fight to the death. capture becomes too horrendous to cover.

we americans cannot stand and watch this hell on earth without being effected by it. how can it not weaken us morally. isis knows they have the hot hand and they are playing it to the at the time. that is "hardball" for now. "all in" with chris hayes starts now. tonight on "all in." >> this is giving rights and benefits to those violating the law. >> the president obama's immigration action start dead in it's tracks by a texas judge. tonight, the political explosion on capitol hill and the human toll across the country. then -- the fire is still burning in west virginia as we learn more about the supposed safety upgrades of crude oil trains.