updated 11/18/2015 9:25:58 AM ET 2015-11-18T14:25:58

Date: November 17, 2015
Guest: Sen. Angus King, David Ignatius, Gov. Jack Markell, Mark Halperin,
John Heilemann, Anne Gearan

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: The Russians, the French and us. Can three
great countries beat one caliphate?

Let`s play HARDBALL.

Good evening. I`m Chris Matthews in Washington, wondering if all the
words from the West will bring on a serious assault on ISIS. Russia knows
what it`s facing. The evidence is in today. ISIS blew up its plane,
killing all aboard, a deliberate act of war. France knows what it`s
facing, with over 100 killed in a sheer act of wanton murder. We Americans
know what`s up. After all, it was our crazed invasion of Iraq that created
this demonic force known as ISIS.

So the question is whether all the power of Moscow, powers (ph) in
Washington will find a way to smash this caliphate the size of Indiana.

Let`s begin with the latest from Paris and MSNBC`s Richard Lui.
Richard, over there, talk about the second suspect that they`re after over

RICHARD LUI, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Good day to you there, Chris.
You know, we have new information, unconfirmed by NBC News, of a ninth
individual. We do not know whether that is actually factual. However, the
news agency is saying that this ninth person, coming from a spokeswoman
from the prosecutor`s office, that is involved in the case.

But when we got up this morning here in Paris, it was eight
individuals. As you know, over the weekend, it was seven, and then they
increased it to eight. So that`s the latest in terms of that potential
ninth individual.

This, perhaps, the yield of us getting close to now 300 anti-terror
raids across the country. And with that sort of data coming in to them --
and just one note on that. It`s not the sense that you would get a door-
to-door happening every time you heard a siren. That is not it at all,
although the number of anti-terror raids, here, Chris, have certainly gone

MATTHEWS: What about the chase across the border to the fugitive who
got away?

LUI: Yes, you know, we got a lot of new information on Salah
Abdeslam, 26-year-old national here, born in Belgium, is who you`re talking
about, that number eight individual -- the number eight individual that`s
involved in the attacks on Friday.

So what we have is a new picture of him. We also have new video of
him checking in, perhaps, to get two new (ph) hotel rooms. That`s the
other new bit of information -- two hotel rooms that were used as setup
points, perhaps staging points for the attackers before they reached these
six attack points.

We also have a new plea from his brother to come forward and -- and --
and give himself up. So there`s a lot of new developments in following
Salah Abdeslam, although it is believed he has left, that information that
you`re alluding to, as he has moved up into Belgium, and who knows where

Also, in addition to that, a third car involved in this, again, with
those fingerprints, if you will, of this suspect that they`re looking for.

MATTHEWS: Thank you so much, Richard Lui in Paris.

NBC`s Ayman Mohyeldin joins us now from Cairo. And the question to
Ayman -- thank you for joining us. You`re over there. The thought of --
you know, for years, I was growing up, Russia and Cairo had close relations
until Sadat came along and broke those relations under Nixon.

So the question to me, is it joining together? Are the Russians
coming to do this war against ISIS? Are they really going to do it?

AYMAN MOHYELDIN, NBC CORRESPONDENT: Well, they`re certainly dropping
the bombs for it. But there`s still a lot of questions as to how much
Russia is behind this to really fight terrorism or to try to prop up
President Bashar al Assad of Syria.

There`s no doubt about it that Russia has been trying to warm up some
of its relationships, those historic relationships that you talked about,
Chris, that in the past, it had with Arab countries. It`s lost a lot of
those over there the last couple of decades, when America filled that void.

There are some that are speculating that Russia is trying to get a
foothold back in the region. It`s trying to exploit the weak relationship
between the United States and Egypt. We know that over the past several
years that Egypt and U.S. relations have been a little bit strained
following the revolution and the Muslim Brotherhood takeover of power here.

There has been an attempt by Russia to kind of start cozying up to the
regime in Cairo, selling it military equipment. But nonetheless, Egypt is
still strongly -- a strong ally of the United States.

Whether or not Russia can actually continue or sustain this for a long
period of time, whether or not it can gain some of that political and
diplomatic foothold in the Middle East, that remains to be seen. I don`t
think a lot of people here in the region are expecting the Middle East to
pivot away from the U.S. towards Russia anytime soon.

MATTHEWS: Well, my question is positive. I`m being optimistic here.
Given what happened in Sharm el-Sheikh and the airport there, doesn`t Egypt
have an interest in weeding out the ISIS person assumably (sic) involved in
putting the plane down there at that resort city? And of course, the
Russians have a tremendous nationalistic urge -- I would think any country
would, but especially Putin -- to show his potency right now and go in
there and blast away and really do some damage to ISIS.

Isn`t all the -- all the cards in order now for some action by the

MOHYELDIN: Yes, absolutely. I mean, Egypt has been complaining,
saying that for the past several years, it is suffering from terrorism, the
kind that we`re seeing in Paris and elsewhere, and they`ve been asking the
international community for help as it tackles this issue of a militant

No one is expecting Russia to carry out any military operations here,
but we heard from Russia today a sense of determination that it is going to
hunt these people down. And there is now a little bit of sympathy from a
country like Egypt, given the fact that Russia just lost nearly 200 of its
citizens on Egyptian soil, that it is going to be very cooperative of it.
They are very much cooperating on the terrorism front right now.

So there is that growing cooperation between Egypt and Russia, and
Russia is poised to continue its military operations.

I think people are reading between the tea leaves a little bit.
They`re saying, OK, well, Russia is involved in Syria to defeat ISIS, but
is it also trying to prop up the regime of President Bashar al Assad?

And when you get to that question, Chris, that`s when you start seeing
that, wait a minute, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and other
countries who are determined to see President Assad go from power, they`re
going to take a step back and say, What is Russia`s real motivations here?
And that`s where you begin to have some questions.

MATTHEWS: OK. Thanks so much from Cairo, Ayman Mohyeldin over there.
Thank you.

Among the 216 -- or 2016 Republican presidential candidates
candidates, the common theme in the wake of the Paris attack is that ISIS
must be destroyed.


there with very serious intent not to contain them, but to take them out
completely, to destroy them, to eliminate them.

war and harness all of the power that the United States can bring to bear,
both diplomatic and military, of course, to be able to take out ISIS.

launching a major offensive against ISIS right now. Four bombs a day? Are
you serious? That`s not a -- that`s a public relations war. It`s not --
it`s not a -- it`s not a real war.

Take this fight directly to ISIS. We bomb the absolute stink out of them.
We can`t fly a few sorties. It`s going to have to be an aggressive air
campaign followed up by ground troops.

to win this war if you go on offense. You`ll never win the war from the
air. We need 10,000 American forces in Iraq, not 3,500. If we don`t do
these things soon, what you see in Paris is coming to America.

(EXPLETIVE DELETED) out of them! It`s true.


TRUMP: I don`t care. I don`t care. They`ve got to be stopped!


MATTHEWS: Senator Angus King is an independent from Maine who sits on
the Intelligence and Armed Services Committee both. David Ignatius is a
columnist for "The Washington Post."

Gentlemen, thank you. Senator, first, I see an amazing picture the
other day. I saw that the president and Vladimir Putin, head to head,
literally head to head, like this -- like this -- with an interpreter
there, and of course -- there`s the picture -- and of course, Susan Rice,
our ambassador to the U.N., looking like they`re talking turkey for the
first time.

Are we going to be able to form an alliance of the United States,
France, Russia, and the other great powers to take down the caliphate?

SEN. ANGUS KING (I), MAINE: I think an alliance may be too strong a
word, but I certainly think our interests are aligned. The Russians --
your reporter had it just right. The Russians have to really make a
decision here. They either want to take out ISIS or they want to prop up
Assad. Assad is kind of ISIS` evil twin. His brutality to his people is
one of the things that brought ISIS into being.

So the Russians are going to have to figure out a way -- and I think
the talks in Vienna are mildly hopeful -- to move Assad out, and then
concentrate the fire on ISIS. Clearly, the Russians, the French, the
Americans, the Gulf states, even the Iranians focusing on ISIS is going to
make a world of difference in that fight.

MATTHEWS: If we make a political decision that we can trade a
recognition of a slow departure of the Assad family from Damascus in some
way or another it`s handled, for cooperation on going after ISIS, don`t we
still face, after the politics have been put together, the need for a land
army of indigenous people?

If a bunch of Europeans and Americans go into that part of the world,
they will make the ISIS case, won`t they?

KING: Chris -- Chris, that`s exactly what ISIS wants.


KING: They want this to be a war of the West against Islam. That
would be -- sending our troops in there would be a gift. They have to be
Muslim troops, they ought to be Sunni Muslim troops, and the Sunnis in the
region have to say, This is going to be our fight because right now,
they`re letting ISIS define the brand around the world, and it`s bad for
Muslims everywhere. We`re seeing that all over the world.

So you`re absolutely right. And that`s why, you know, I just think
the idea of us sending in troops not only do -- is it not a good idea from
our point of view, but it`s not a good idea if we want to beat ISIS. If
ISIS is going to be rooted out of Mosul and Raqqa and those places, it`s
going to take people on the ground, but it`s going to take people who are
local people, people from that area, Muslim and Sunnis.

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about a disconnect. I`m going to start with
David and I`ll get back to you because you`re a senator, and you can do
something about it. Four million refugees from Syria, four trained
fighters, who`ve (ph) been trained, one in a million.

Why aren`t we recruiting -- I`m not saying they have to all join the
military, but of four million refugees, aren`t there several tens of
thousands of Syrians who are willing to fight for their country? And why
aren`t we recruiting them?


MATTHEWS: And training them?

IGNATIUS: Because our question number one in the vetting process was,
Do you want to fight against President Assad, or will you just fight
against ISIS? And Syrians who have been fleeing the country, have been
fleeing barrel bombs, have been fleeing attacks by the regime -- they want
to fight Assad. They want a new government. And that essentially
destroyed our train and equip program from the beginning. We -- there`s
another U.S. program...

MATTHEWS: Why don`t they fight both?

IGNATIUS: ... run by the CIA...

MATTHEWS: I don`t see why they`re not fighting both.

IGNATIUS: Well, they should be fighting both. And that`s what the
CIA force, which is nominally secret, is doing. We`re pumping a lot of
money and weapons to...

MATTHEWS: Four trained fighters. That`s it!

IGNATIUS: Aside from the four trained fighters, there are some
thousands of fighters who are working in this other program, and they`re
holding the Russians and the Syrian army at bay in the northwest of Syria.
So -- but absolutely, the idea of having this program and having so few
show up...

MATTHEWS: Let me go back to the center on this the question comes --
we have the bombing capacity, so do the Russians, so do the French. We all
know that.

But the ability to re-take the country and have it build up another
society to replace ISIS and replace Assad eventually -- don`t we need to
have freedom fighters on our side? And why don`t recruit them? Why are we
just becoming a world of refugees, rather than a world that fights back and
says, We`re here to help you Syrians retake your country? We`re not here
to help you find a life in the United States or France or Belgium. You
have a country. Go back and take it. We`ll help you.

Why are we turning everybody into victims, when we should turn them
into fighters?

KING: Well...

MATTHEWS: I don`t understand this. Four million refugees, four
fighters. It doesn`t add up.

KING: Well, I think you`re right. I think David put his finger on
it. When we were trying to do this so-called train and equip program, we
were saying, You can only fight against ISIS, not Assad. Their primary
enemy is Assad right now. And that`s where they`re focused...

MATTHEWS: Well, let`s adjust.

KING: ... and that`s why we couldn`t get them to join up. But I
think you`re absolutely right. I mean, there are camps, I`ve been to them,
in Jordan and in Turkey, where there are thousands and thousands -- the
second largest city in Jordan is a refugee camp from Syria.

And here`s where we could build that army. I think that ought to be
one of our main priorities because they ought to be local people, they
ought to be Muslims, and they ought to be fighting for their own country.
That`s where you get the will to fight.

MATTHEWS: And these people like this guy James Jeffries (ph) in "The
Washington Post" op-ed today -- they say, Just go into ISIS country, the
size of Indiana, the caliphate, take it all back, and then we`ll figure out
who to give it to.

Well, we`ve been there before, and what we ended giving it to is the
Shia, even though it`s not their land, and the Sunni hate us for it.

IGNATIUS: You know, Chris, I think that is the issue. These calls
from these Republican presidential candidates for bomb this and bomb that,
and you know, this is war -- we need to make sure we know how the vacuum
will be filled...


IGNATIUS: ... after Raqqa is turned into rubble.


IGNATIUS: Who`s going to -- who`s going to be there? Who`s going to
govern? And the truth is- I`m sure Senator King knows this better than
anybody -- there is not yet a Sunni force that could hold that ground after
it`s cleared. And that`s what...

MATTHEWS: Well, it would help...


MATTHEWS: You know, when we went into Paris in `44, we had the French
with us, not a big contingent, but we had DeClerc (ph) and we had Degaulle.
They were with us, the Free French Army. The polish government was in
exile. They went back and forth.

I think we have to regain that sense of nationalism. And the people
that will really fight for a country, really fight for it, are those who
are from it. And if they don`t like living in Syria, that`s their problem.
But it`s their country! And that should be our primary mission, not
resettling people, but getting them back to the front to win back their
country. That should be our national purpose.

Thank you, Senator Angus King, and thank you, David Ignatius.

Coming up, the hot-button political debate here at home, what to do
with the influx of Syrian refugees, like that`s our problem. Governors of
more than half the states now say they shouldn`t be allowed in. Well,
that`s local politics.

And later, the threat here at home. ISIS vows to strike Washington.
We`re going to talk to the city`s -- this city`s police chief about what`s
being done to keep things safe here in the capital.

HARDBALL`s coverage of the terror in Paris continues after this.


MATTHEWS: In a poll taken before the Paris attacks -- before --
nearly 6 in 10 Americans, 58 percent, disapproved of the president`s
handling of ISIS. Just 34 percent say approved. Anyway, President Obama
also had poor marks on his handling of foreign policy overall, 57 percent
disapproved, 38 percent approved.

We`ll be right back.



JOHN KERRY, SECRETARY OF STATE: You know, I think we`ve got to not
run off, you know, half-cocked here at an early stage. I think it`s
appropriate for a governor to stand up and say, I want to make certain, I
want to protect my people. But we shouldn`t automatically say, Under no
circumstances, never are we going to keep faith with America`s values as a
country that sets an example as a melting pot (INAUDIBLE)


MATTHEWS: Well, that`s Secretary of State John Kerry, of course,
warning anxious governors across the country not to run off half-cocked, as
he put it, on the issue of admitting Syrian refugees to this country.

In the last 24 hours alone, governors in 31 states in this country
have gone on the record saying they don`t want Syrian refugees in their
states. Nearly all the governors are Republican. All of them have cited
safety as their chief concern.


GOV. GREG ABBOTT (R), TEXAS: I will not roll the dice and take the
risk on allowing a few refugees in simply to expose Texans to that danger.

GOV. CHARLES BAKER (R), MASSACHUSETTS: View on this is that the
safety and security of the people of the commonwealth of Mass (sic) is my
highest priority. I`m not interested in accepting refugees from Syria.

GOV. TERRY BRANSTAD (R), IOWA: I want to do all I can as governor of
this state to protect the safety and wellbeing of Iowans. I don`t want
people coming here without very careful vetting to make sure that there`s
ISIS operation.


MATTHEWS: Well, today, Republican speaker of the House, Paul Ryan,
here in Washington followed suit, calling for what he called a pause to the
refugee program.


REP. PAUL RYAN (R-WI), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: This is a moment where
it`s better to be safe than to be sorry. So we think the prudent, the
refugee program in order to verify that terrorists are not trying to
infiltrate the refugee population.


MATTHEWS: Well, late this afternoon, Democratic senator Chuck Schumer
of New York told reporters he`s considering supporting a pause in the
program, but is reserving judgment on the question for now.

Well, the United States has already planned to admit 10,000 Syrian
refugees over the next year, I believe 65,000 over time.

I`m joined right by one of the few who say he`s comfortable admitting
refugees to his state, Democratic, governor Jack Markell of Delaware.

Governor, thank you for joining us. Explain your positive position
about refugees from Syria.

GOV. JACK MARKELL (D), DELAWARE: Well, first of all, I mean, all
governors, the thing that we care the most about is keeping our people
safe. I mean, that is a given.

And so the refugees who come here from overseas go through the most
secure, the most stringent review process that anybody who comes in this
country goes through. And they have to go through it before they`re
allowed to cross the Atlantic.

I do, by the way, find it interesting that we`re talking about Syrian
refugees, when, in the case of Paris, my understanding is that virtually
all the people, all the perpetrators were either French or Belgian
citizens. And so are we talking about telling all French and Belgian
citizens or all French and Belgian Muslims that they`re not coming?

I have heard some presidential candidates say that we should only
allow citizens. So are we going to change what`s on the Statue of Liberty
to say, give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, so long as
they`re Christian?

MATTHEWS: Suppose one of the people that come into your state, under
your support, does go terrorist, does become a recruit, becomes a cell
member? Would you feel responsible for their actions?

MARKELL: Well, I mean, I think we would all feel awful, but I think,
in the end...

MATTHEWS: No, you personally. Would you personally be responsible,
as chief executive, having advocated the admission of these Syrian refugees
into Delaware? Would you personally accept responsibility for their

MARKELL: Well, yes, and let`s remember, this is a federal program.


MARKELL: And so all these governors can protect and say that...

MATTHEWS: But you`re advocating it. You`re saying, bring them on.
You`re saying yes. You`re coming on TV to say it`s a good thing.

MARKELL: Yes, because, look, these are people who are fleeing


MARKELL: And I know that everybody likes to believe these are all
able-bodied, able-minded men who are young and ready for...


MATTHEWS: Who said that? I didn`t say all of them. I said the ones
that are should be fighting.

MARKELL: Well, I`m not -- yes, and I`m not saying that you did. And
I understand your point.

MATTHEWS: It`s not a country of CEOs and conscientious objectors.
It`s a country of people like any other country.

Normally, people`s first instinct is not to leave their country, but
to stand and fight for their country.


MATTHEWS: You would stay here, wouldn`t you? Or would you go off to
Australia if this country was threatened by a takeover? You would stay and
fight. Why don`t they?

MARKELL: Of course. Of course, but the -- in order to get refugee
status, you either have to have been persecuted -- many of these people are
women or children who are malnourished. I mean, this is just who we are.
So, obviously, we have to do everything we can...

MATTHEWS: I agree. There`s two categories, by the way, Governor, in
support of your position. There are two clear categories that have been
meshed together.

One is that people that apply through, say, Jordan or the countries
surrounding Syria. They have gone through the paperwork. They have
applied. They have established themselves as threats -- as people that are
threatened by political action or sectarian action. They`re all clean.

But then you see all the people in those boats, oh, boat after boat of
young guys in their 20s, one after another...


MATTHEWS: ... boatloads of just guys, just guys. You go, wait a
minute, what`s this? What is this all about?

MARKELL: Of course, but they`re...


MATTHEWS: And we have recruited four Syrians. Four out of four
million, we have recruited to fight ISIS and Assad. Four out of four
million. It doesn`t make any sense. In any culture, there must be more
than one out of a million that wants to fight for their country. There`s
got to be.

MARKELL: Agreed.

But I think -- but if people make a mistake if they`re equating
refugees in Europe with the -- with those who are actually being approved
as refugees to come to this country.

MATTHEWS: I agree with you. That`s what I tried to clarify.

MARKELL: Totally different things. And people conflate these.

MATTHEWS: I know. I do. Well, there`s been a lot of conflation
lately, like we went to Iraq after we were attacked by the Saudis.

Anyway, thank you, Governor Mark -- I`m sorry -- Jack Markell, thank

MARKELL: Thank you.

MATTHEWS: Of Delaware.

MARKELL: Thank you.

MATTHEWS: A Quinnipiac poll taken in September, before the attacks of
last week, of course, showed that a majority of American voters, 58
percent, said that they believe that Syrian refugees -- and this is back in
September -- posed a threat to national security.

When you look at the results by party I.D., there`s a clear division
between Democrats and Republicans; 59 percent of Democrats back then said
they did not believe refugees did posed a threat, while 81 percent of
Republicans say they did.

I think these numbers, by the way, are all up, higher than they were
now, after Paris.

I`m joined right now by Steve Schmidt, chief strategist to John
McCain`s 2008 percent, as well as Michael Steele, former chair of the RNC.
Both are MSNBC political analysts.

Michael, you first. If you were a governor of a state, what would you
be saying?

would take the Paul Ryan message and amplify it. Let`s take a pause here.

I have no confidence in the governor -- government, federal
government`s confidence in its own program. I think that`s one of the
things that is driving a lot of this. Irrespective of Paris, as those
polls reflect, there was concern even before then about how this type of a
program is being implemented and would be implemented.

As you noted, Chris, there are two categories of individuals we`re
talking about, the women and children who are clearly refugees, who are
clearly in harm`s way, and the young men who are coming in separately on
their own who aren`t necessarily coming in as persecuted and so forth.

So that`s the real pause here. And I think the 31 governors who said
so need to be paid attention to.

MATTHEWS: You know, Steve, we have always had the conceit -- and it
is a conceit -- that, in this country, the people who come here from other
parts of the world are assimilated, assimilatable at least, that they
choose to become Americans.

Even if they live in a community like themselves that maybe sticks to
an old language oftentimes, they become Americans, where, in France, you
have to be French to be a Frenchman. We know that.

But now we`re seeing in France, where people who are not assimilated,
who may have passports, but do not feel French, obviously, because they`re
killing French by the hundreds, are a problem.

When you bring people in here fresh from Syria, what do you know about
their loyalties? Maybe you assume that they`re refugees. What do you
think? What do we think?

France. It`s Belgium, it`s Sweden, it`s Denmark, it`s across the whole of
Europe that there are legitimate fifth columns in these countries of un-
assimilatable and unassimilated Muslim men.

And that`s not to say that every Muslim is a terrorist, but it is to
say that every terrorist who is acting in Paris in bringing down the
Russian airliner does so in the name of Islamic extremism. And we see a
Democratic Party in this country that is so kowtowed by the sentiments of
political correctness that they won`t name the enemy, they won`t
communicate clearly to the American people, they won`t acknowledge the


MATTHEWS: What -- there you got me. Why is it important that you say
your terrorist enemy is Islamic terrorists? Why does that help the fight?

SCHMIDT: Radical Islamic extremists.


MATTHEWS: How does it help the fight?

SCHMIDT: It helps the fight because it is essential that we
understand the doctrine that underlies...


MATTHEWS: Of course we understand it. Who doesn`t understand it?


SCHMIDT: ... this great violence.

MATTHEWS: Who doesn`t understand it that needs to be educated?


MATTHEWS: I don`t buy that. You know...

SCHMIDT: We need to understand it.

General Sisi of Egypt gave perhaps the most compelling speech of any
Western leader, in the same category of King Abdullah`s, talking about the
necessity of fighting radical Islamic extremism. That`s what it is. And
we shouldn`t be kowtowed in acknowledging that.


MATTHEWS: Why do you -- it`s not about being kowtowed. You can call
them anything you want. I don`t care what you call them.

I`m just telling you, we have got 17.5 billion Islamic people in the
world. Many of them have nothing to do with this fight. They live in
Indonesia, they live in Pakistan, they live in India.

SCHMIDT: Most of them do not.

MATTHEWS: And they`re not involved in this Middle East fight that
never seems to end.

Why do we want to point out their name? When we fought Mussolini, we
didn`t say the Catholic powers of Italy or the Catholic Germans we fought.
We never got into their religion. Why get into this religious thing now?
I just think it serves the interest of the other side.


SCHMIDT: Because the enemy is acting in the name of their faith.



MATTHEWS: You`re a part of this Islamic fundamental...


STEELE: No, I agree. I agree.

MATTHEWS: You think we ought to call them by that name?

STEELE: Yes. You have to a call thing what it is.


STEELE: Because that`s what it is. They are using Islam...


MATTHEWS: But we know what they`re doing.

STEELE: They`re using the faith in an extreme way. And so it is an
extreme form of Islam.



MATTHEWS: I think it`s what they want. I`m not against it for P.C.
reasons. I don`t care if we say -- I think we`re giving them what they
want, which is an East-West war, which is what they`re trying to kindle

Last word, Steve.


SCHMIDT: Chris, every Republican presidential candidate should be for
the declassification of the 9/11 report, the 28 redacted pages that show
the Saudi involvement in 9/11, the funding of the radicalism, the Wahhabism
that comes out of that country. And we need to understand the nature of
this threat.


And let`s bring in the fact that Dick Cheney kept our troops in that
country for 10 years in the holy land of Mecca and gave them a reason to

Thank you, Steve Schmidt.

And thank you, Michael Steele.

Up next, protecting Paris and protecting the U.S. Capitol here in
Washington, security efforts under way in major cities across America. I`m
will speak with D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier.

And this is HARDBALL, the place for politics.


MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.

Let`s go back to Europe for the latest on the investigation into the
deadly Paris attacks over the weekend, as well as the security threat today
in Germany.

NBC`s Claudio Lavanga joins us now tonight from Brussels.

Claudio, Germany.


Well, there are some conflicting reports on what really happened and
on what this threat really was that closed the cancellation of that soccer

Well, the -- first of all, the Hannover police chief said that there
was some indication that there could have been some vehicle in particular,
very specifically an ambulance, that contained some explosives near the
stadium or inside the stadium.

Now, the German interior minister then came out during a press
conference and he said that there was some credible threat. There was a
good reason to cancel that event, that it would have been irresponsible to
continue with the soccer game. But he did not give out any particular
details, saying that there was no explosives found, and that no arrests
were made.

He also said that he wasn`t going to go into details about what that
threat was, not -- so not to upset the population. Well, that kind of non-
answer is worrying in its own right, Chris.

MATTHEWS: Thank you so much, Claudio Lavanga, over in Europe. Thank
you so much.

Well, ISIS now says it`s going to hit Washington, D.C. And what is
the nation`s capital doing to prepare for such an attack?

Joining me now is Washington, D.C., Police Chief Cathy Lanier.

Welcome to HARDBALL, Chief Lanier.

How did it strike you when you first heard the last several days that
ISIS put out a word that it`s headed to Washington, D.C.?

obviously, we are already under in a very heightened security posture
anyway because of what happened on Friday.

So, I don`t think it changes too much the level of security that we`re
at here in Washington.

MATTHEWS: Well, you know, the Capitol was targeted, we all believe,
in Flight 93 that was knocked down over Pennsylvania. Do you think it`s
going to be a hard target, one of the nation`s iconic places like the White
House or the Capitol, or is it going to be a movie theater somewhere? How
do you prepare for all those targets?

LANIER: Well, the way you prepare is not getting too focused on only
putting security or focusing your security around the last attack.

I think, in most major cities, and particularly in Washington, D.C.,
with all the law enforcement resources we have here, is, when we change our
security posture, which is always at a much higher level than many places,
we have to cover everything.

We can`t focus solely on the last attack, because, you know,
terrorists are going to pick, you know, areas where they feel like the
security is lacking in some way. So we can`t be focused too narrowly on
any particular target.

MATTHEWS: You know, Chief, when I first came to Washington back in
the early `70s, you could go anywhere. You could go drive past the White
House and blow your horn and say, go out -- get out of office, President
Nixon, if you didn`t like him,.

You could go into the Capitol Hill looking for a job, basically bob
through any door you wanted to. Is it going to get worse? Is it going to
get more and more severe, that -- the ability to move around in this

LANIER: So, that`s the change and that`s balance that we have to have
in cities across America, is we have to be able to have very tight, very
high-level security, and do things that are visible and say, we have a
security presence here and this is -- we are a hard target, without
crossing a line that scares people or violates the civil rights.

So I think that is a balance that local law enforcement has had to
keep for many, many years, and we`re going to continue to do that.

MATTHEWS: Do you have any resource needs that you haven`t been able
to get from the federal government so far? Here`s your chance to talk
about it.


LANIER: Absolutely not.

I have to compliment our federal partners here, and at least in the
nation`s capital. We get -- I was on the phone early Friday evening with
the FBI. I have spoken with DHS consistently across the whole last several
days. Any resource that we have ever asked for, we have gotten.

And they integrate with us. So, you know, there`s multiple layers of
security here, some that you see and some that you don`t and see. And I
have no complaints.

MATTHEWS: Well, thank you very much, the much-respected Chief Cathy
Lanier of the Metropolitan Police of Washington, D.C.

Thank you for joining us.

LANIER: Thanks, Chris.

MATTHEWS: Coming up, the attacks in Paris have also changed the
dynamics of the presidential election here in the U.S. We are going to
size up who has risen to the occasion and who`s been left behind when the
roundtable, the HARDBALL roundtable, comes here next.



MATTHEWS: Welcome back to HARDBALL.

French President Hollande has vowed to destroy ISIS, of course. Are
the French people ready for a war, though? And are they in a mood to
destroy ISIS?

MSNBC`s Chris Hayes is the host of "ALL IN" and he joins me now from

Tell us, Chris, my colleague, what can you smell, feel over there
since you got over there we can`t see on television about the atmosphere of
-- and including the atmosphere of people toward the media that come into
that country?

CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC`S "ALL IN" HOST: Well, I think people understand
why the media is here. I don`t think there`s any sort of frustration about
that. What I do think is happening here is a real difference between the
reaction since the "Charlie Hebdo" attacks nine months ago and these
attacks, and for a number of reasons, but mostly because I think the way in
which the targeting happened sort of, the random cruelty of it, has really
spooked people.

And I think it`s spooked people amidst what was already a huge
geopolitical crisis on the continent of Europe and France and in Germany,
in Netherlands and in Greece around the refugee crisis. And those two
issues, which as far as the investigation tells us, are distinct issues.
In fact, an E.U. official saying everyone who carried out this attack were
E.U. nationals. But those two issues, because they are looming, because
the refugee presence has given a lot of fodder to the right wing across the
continent, they are now to a certain extent I think infused in the minds of
the populous.

And you can hear things coming from French liberals things that
sounded like American liberals post 9/11. Now, we know what that led to.
That led to the launching of the war on terror, the war in Afghanistan,
ultimately, the war on Iraq. The Patriot Act, you know, trillions of
dollars spent. There is a political mood that is not dissimilar in Paris
right now, and it`s a real question for the politicians here, the
citizenry, and the leadership about what that gets channeled into.

CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HOST: Well, with thanks so much, MSNBC`s Chris
Hayes. You`ll be watching him at 8:00 p.m. tonight for more in "ALL IN."

We continue now to follow the latest developments in t 2016 race
tonight. The terrorist attacks in Paris have, of course, ignited the hawks
and the hardliners in the Republican Party. We`re seeing a flood of tough
talk on the campaign trail. Here`s a sample.


sense that we should be allowing ISIS jihadists to come back to America
with U.S. passports to attempt to murder innocent Americans.

bring us your tired and your weary. It didn`t say, bring us your
terrorists, let them come in here and bomb neighborhoods, cafes and concert
halls. It`s time to wake up and smell the falafel. Something isn`t going
right in this open immigration policy.

TV ANCHOR: So, would you put it at zero?

HUCKABEE: We are important terrorism.

things like, you know, through an executive order, I`m going to bring
100,000 people in here from Syria, they need to say, you do that and we`re
going to defund everything including your breakfast.

other day, because they asked me what I`d do, and I said, I`m going to bomb
the (EXPLETIVE DELETED) out of them. It`s true. I don`t care. I don`t
care. They`ve got to be stopped!


MATTHEWS: Well, that was a Whitman sampler.

Anyway, as they say, talk is cheap. Who are the winners and losers in
election cycle that`s now dominated by terror politics?

Tonight`s HARDBALL roundtable -- it`s a great one -- Mark Halperin and
John Heilemann are the co-hosts of "Bloomberg`s" "With All Due Respect." I
love that. And Anne Gearan is national politics correspondent for "The
Washington Post".

First of all, Anne, you first, you`ve been here longer. But let`s
start with this -- I really think this is fair to just do this. It`s a
serious time. Who won, politically, from this horror?

ANNE GEARAN, THE WASHINGTON POST: Well, starting on the Democratic
side, I think, certainly, Hillary Clinton emerges looking the most
presidential, the most ready, the most in command of the facts.

MATTHEWS: Is that because we all, deep down, believe she`s more
hawkish than she often shows?

GEARAN: That`s certainly part of it. It`s also that she just has the
lexicon and the fluency with the material. And we definitely saw that at
the debate. Bernie Sanders could not wait to change the subject fast
enough, away from foreign policy. It isn`t his forte, his interest or his
reason for running. And you just saw that. So, I think that side is

On the Republican side, I think the middle of the field, actually,
looks pretty good here. We`ve got Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush, both saying
relatively reasonable things. They both back a no-fly zone, as does
Hillary, and they`re not saying, quite as potentially xenophobic things
about Syrian refugees as you`re hearing elsewhere in the field.

MATTHEWS: So, you think -- well, who`s hurt? Who`s hurting? Bernie
and Ben Carson?

GEARAN: Ben Carson, certainly, just because he looks like he`s been
stumbling quite a bit. Long-term, I think Trump keeps winning by saying
things that other people --


MATTHEWS: Anyway, I`m surprised -- I agree with everything. What do
you think happened?

MARK HALPERIN, BLOOMBERG POLITICS: Polls show that Republican voters
think Trump is strong. Think Trump is decisive. Thinks trump can stand up
to our U.S. enemies overseas. So, I think there`s no reason to think why
at least --

M ATTHEWS: If he was on the rebound before this, he was coming up.


JOHN HEILEMANN, BLOOMBERG POLITICS: Well, I think that`s true. Look,
if you think about some of the things that Chris Hayes is saying. You look
across Europe, the rise of the strongman in a lot of western democracies
right now, is another Trump -- it could be very much part of that pattern.

I think the idea of much of the Republican establishment assumes that
Ben Carson, Donald Trump, anybody who doesn`t have any foreign policy
experience is now going to be sidelined by this -- I think that`s crazy.
The dynamics that have been roiling in the Republican Party are still

And Trump stands as well-poised to take advantage of them, being the
strongman, being the -- I`m going to bomb the crap out of them guy, has
anybody else in the field.

MATTHEWS: Well, nothing says tough guy like Donald Trump. He`s loud
and profane. Let`s hear more from him, if you can take it.


TRUMP: Here`s what`s going to happen. The lobbyists will come and
see me, but I don`t give a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) about lobbyists, OK?


I don`t care.

But it`s political bull (EXPLETIVE DELETED), do you understand? It`s
true. It`s true.

How would you fight is, Mr. Trump, if you`re president. I would bomb
the (EXPLETIVE DELETED) out of them.

I`m going to bomb the (EXPLETIVE DELETED) out of them. It`s true. I


MATTHEWS: So, you know what, I`ve always thought that Trump was,
maybe mistaken about it, but he had a nationalistic message on every front
-- trade, immigration, of course, the Middle East. Everything was sheer
nationalist -- nationalist with an economic covering.

But it was really tribal. And I think he`s reaching the white working
class guy. This stuff is just catnip for him, this immigration issue of
refugees coming here. Catnip!

HALPERIN: It is, because he was there first and he shows he`s
decisive and it plays into his. We see with all these governors, clearly
finger in the wind. This plays to big --

MATTHEWS: The national parties of Europe have always been there in
the recent 20 years. And there`s always like a national party that`s going
to be third, you know (INAUDIBLE)

GEARAN: Absolutely.

MATTHEWS: They never quite win.

GEARAN: No, but they can sometimes change the dynamics of those
elections. And certainly, he would have been a third party candidate in
America at another time. It`s sort of shocking to see the way that --

MATTHEWS: He`s running inside but --

GEARAN: Look, he`s made a part of the Republican Party a third party,
really. And he`s running as the leader of that.

MATTHEWS: He`s also lucky.

HEILEMANN: Nationalism, populism, xenophobia, they all go hand in
hand. And those forces have been ascended in the Republican Party all this
year. And this set of -- what`s happening now in the world is only going
to in a certain part of the Republican Party, only going to inflame those

MATTHEWS: The weird part is they`re anti-hawkish and they`re anti-
intervention, but they`re hawkish in terms of macho. So, it`s interesting
how he`s blowing that trump, beating the heck out of a country he doesn`t
want to get involved with, which is tricky.

Anyway, much more ahead with the roundtable and our coverage of the
attacks on Paris.

HARDBALL back after this.


MATTHEWS: Well, this week, Hillary Clinton will deliver an address
outlining her strategy for defeating ISIS. That`s coming up this Thursday.

Our coverage of the terror attacks on Paris and the political debate
back home is continuing with HARDBALL, coming back.


MATTHEWS: We`re back with the HARDBALL roundtable.

First in, this refugee thing -- it seems easy Republican knee-jerk,
no. That`s the easiest answer right now.

GEARAN: Yes, I mean, it was low-hanging fruit for -- it`s an easy
thing that you can say that you`re going to do differently than Obama`s
doing, than Clinton wants to do. And it appeals to all of the impulses
that we were discussing here a little bit ago.

I think though in the long-term, it`s not going to be a tenable or an
attractive position for on the extremes that many of the Republicans have
articulated so far.

And, particularly --

MATTHEWS: And the states a lot of them represent I would think it
would be more popular than you`d like to believe.

GEARAN: Well, for a short period.


HEILEMANN: It`s just not easy but it`s cheap, because these governors
can be in favor of trying to ban refugees from their states, but they have
no legal ability or no legal ability to actually ban them.

MATTHEWS: But they can save money even further because they say we`re
not going to spend any money to put hospital beds out there, put up tents
or pup tents or even little prefab housing.

HEILEMANN: I think in the long run, Hillary Clinton`s position that
she articulated today which is -- be vigilant, exercise a lot of vetting,
but still be the America that we`ve always been, be open and accepting and
vibrant as an economy and as a culture, that`s the winning argument for the
long run. For long, that`s the winning argument.


MATTHEWS: Does it win in Ohio and Virginia? Does it win in the
tricky states?

HEILEMANN: For the long run, I think it`s the winning argument. Be
optimistic and not pessimistic. It`s always I think better in the long

HALPERIN: I think both on this issue and the ISIS issue, watch Jeb
Bush. This opens the door back to him being an adult. There`s not any
other person who is willing to take the mantle of reasonable adult as he
is. And I agree with what was said in the short term, being nuanced is not
a great thing. In the medium and long-term, the party may decide --


MATTHEWS: The most anti-immigrant candidate --

HEILEMANN: His position is very close to Hillary Clinton`s.

MATTHEWS: Cruz says he`s anti-immigrant because he`s Cuban-American.
He`s not completely anti-immigrant. But Trump is just so anti-immigrant,
he`s just going to blow this bugle.

HALPERIN: It`s going to be hard for anybody to add flank in there.
But again, look at who the party`s nominated in the past. They`ve not
nominated --


MATTHEWS: Well, the two the outsiders Trump and Carson, back to you,
longer life than they would normally have, this fight --

HEILEMANN: I think a totally different characters, I think that --

MATTHEWS: But does it give either of them more life.

HEILEMANN: I think it gives Trump a lot of life. In Carson`s case,
it highlights his inexperience and lack of knowledge on foreign policy.

HALPERIN: It helps Trump and you`re seeing --

MATTHEWS: Anne, last word. Will the Trump get to February?

GEARAN: I think it definitely helps Trump and not Carson.

MATTHEWS: And gets to February?


GEARAN: Beyond February.

HALPERIN: February.


MATTHEWS: You`re shaking up the cable news reporting right there.

Mark Halperin, John Heilemann and Anne Gearan.

When we return, let me finish with two numbers that don`t make sense,
certainly not when you put those two numbers together.

You`re watching HARDBALL, the place for politics.


MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with two numbers that don`t make
sense, certainly not when you put them together. The first number is four.
That`s the number of Syrians we Americans have recruited and trained to
fight ISIS.

Hold on to that number four because now comes the huge question mark
that comes with the other number -- that other number is 4 million. That`s
how many Syrian refugees there are, 4 million including all those able-
bodied men we`ve seen aboard those boats to Europe.

So, why the strange unexplained difference in the numbers? Four
million people fleeing ISIS and Assad and just four trained to regain their
country? Is there just one in a million Syrians willing to fight for
Syria? Is that the deal? Is it?

country if it were taken from us, if it came to that?

There are dread implications to these numbers. They signal that ISIS
is not only winning the war for Syria. They`re taking the country from
people who would rather leave for the west, either that or no one in the
United States is doing something to alter their decision-making.

We talk, don`t you hear it, relentlessly about how ISIS recruits
members worldwide, how it uses social media. Why aren`t the fleeing people
of Syria doing that? Why isn`t the United States and other countries
trying to build a Syrian army of the millions of people who have a birth
right to the fight for that country?

Some said here last night that we can`t ask Syrians to fight for their
country because they have families. Well, tell that to the American
their fourth deployment right now.

When we went in to liberate Paris, we had elements of the free French
army fighting alongside us. Is it too much to ask that the Syrians lead to
fight to retake Syria? It is their country, unless they`re willing to

And besides, even if we the United States and other European armies
overthrew ISIS, we still have to turn Syria over to somebody. If we had
Syrians playing a rightful part in the liberation of their country, they
would be the ones taking it over.


"ALL IN WITH CHRIS HAYES" starts right now.


United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>