Skip navigation

The Ed Show for Monday, June 16th, 2014

Read the transcript to the Monday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

June 16, 2014

Guest: Jim McDermott, Wesley Clark, Mike Papantonio, Byron Dorgan, Goldie
Taylor, David Cay Johnson


we`re not going to allow ourselves to be dragged back into a situation.


SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, (R) SOUTH CAROLINA: The seeds of 9/11s are being
planted all over Iraq and Syria.

This is the greatest threat, National Security threat since 9/11.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They`re also unknown. Unknown.

result of inaction.

BUSH: Fool me once.

GRAHAM: You don`t have to believe me. This is what they`re telling you
they`re going to do.

BUSH: Fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me, you can`t get
fooled again.


ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good to have you us tonight folks. Thanks for

Well, here we go again. American got fooled once by going to war in Iraq.
Republicans are now trying to fool us again. They are once again beating
the drum for war in Iraq. We have to do something and it`s got to be big.
This is just another opportunity for the conservatives to tarnish President
Obama anyway they can.

Now, let`s not get amnesia folks. It`s been 11 years since America saw
this scene play out on their television sets. We were told the invasion in
Iraq would be quick and painless. We would be treated as liberators.
Iraqi oil would pay for all of this warfare. America was lied to by George
W. Bush and his administration, intelligence was cooked. The Iraq war
ended up being one of the biggest mistakes in American history.

Are we ready to relive this? We go in round two. The Iraq war could end
up costing American taxpayers for $4 trillion by the time we finished
supporting soldiers who fought in the war. Over 32,000 U.S. troops were
injured and over 4,000 American soldiers were lost. 11 years later and
Iraq is still what? Struggling. Is that Obama`s fault? Is that our
fault? Can they not fight for themselves?

Iraq is still struggling because of a guy named Maliki. He`s a new
dictator. Maliki has not been inclusive and he is the root of the problem,
but the Conservatives won`t tell you that, it`s all Obama`s fault.

The militant group ISIS has taken control of cities throughout Iraq.
Baghdad is still under control of the Iraqi government. But this has got
Civil War written all over it and the question is, is it our fight again?
This has Republicans here in the United States doing what they do so well.
They are trashing President Obama and calling for military action in Iraq.

Michigan Congressman Mike Rogers seems to be warming up for his talk radio
career and scaring America about another attack.


REP. MIKE ROGERS, (R) MICHIGAN: This is an Al Qaeda inspired group that
certainly has Al Qaeda ties that now has the capability to tap people with
western passports to send them back to Europe and the United States for
terrorist activity. That`s a problem for us.


SCHULTZ: South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham wants to return back to
Iraq by scaring Americans.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why spend one more dollar or risk one more life?

GRAHAM: Because Iraq and Syria combined are going to be the staging area
for the next 9/11 if we don`t do something about it. The number of people
that could die in this country from getting this wrong is going to be far
greater than 4,000 because they`re getting weapons they didn`t have before.

The economic chaos to the world is going to be far greater than this and
the money we spent in saving Iraq. This is another 9/11 in the making.
The FBI director has warned us in Congress that Syria and Iraq present a
direct threat to our homeland. You got foreign fighters from America and
Western Europe occupying this battle space. They`re operating with


SCHULTZ: Here we go again. Give me a break. You know what this is? This
is nothing more than 2003 mushroom cloud talk coming from Senator Graham.
These dirty scare tactics from Republicans are nothing new. It`s the same
strategy that used to get us into Iraq back in 2003.


that Saddam Hussein now has a weapon of mass destruction. There is no
doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our
allies, and against us.

COLIN POWELL, FMR. SECRETARY OF STATE: What the United States knows about
Iraq`s weapons of mass destruction as well as Iraq`s involvement in
terrorism which is also the subject of resolution 1441 and other earlier

CONDOLEEZZA RICE, FMR. SECRETARY OF STATE: The problem here is that there
will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear
weapon, but we don`t want the smoking to be a mushroom cloud.


SCHULTZ: Here we go. But you see Lindsey Graham now says that they have
new weapons. I want to hear the President say that. I want to hear
someone who`s got some skin in the game to say that. Every American should
remember those lies while Lindsey Graham is out there fear-mongering again.
Graham also wasted no times slamming President Obama.


GRAHAM: We were well on our way. The lack of a residual force, the
stubborn-headed president we have who thinks he knows better than everybody
else, who withdrew troops, and exposed this country to the inevitable needs
to change his policies quickly. If he does, we can still save this.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN ANCHOR: Stubborn-headed president?

GRAHAM: Stubborn-headed, delusional, detached president. But that`s the
last bad thing I`m going to say.


SCHULTZ: So, if you don`t become the world`s police officer, you`re
stubborn, you`re pig headed, you`re wrong, you`re delusional, you`re
detached, all of that. Of course Maliki he has no responsibility in any of
these, does he Senator Graham? This is all been President Obama?

Let me tell you something. Maliki is no doctor of democracy. He has not
been inclusive. President Obama is not delusional or detached. Republican
criticism on this issue is rooted in their hatred for President Obama and
there`s a lot of that in South Carolina.

The commander-in-chief is taking time in going through all options. This
is not shoot from the hip action. We could have used President Obama`s
resolve back in 2003 before jumping into a war of choice. President Obama
has no plans to rush your son and daughter back into action in Iraq. The
President made it clear that there will be no troops on the ground but left
the possibility open for military action.


OBAMA: We will not be sending U.S. troops back into combat in Iraq but I
have asked my National Security team to prepare a range of other options
that could help support Iraq security forces and I`ll be reviewing those
options in the days ahead.


SCHULTZ: So these options, Senator Graham, if President Obama takes out
these new weapons you`re talking about, would that be a good option? No.
You see, the neocons, they want international intervention. They want
troops on the ground. We need to learn from history. This country needs
to make a calculated and academic decision that will bring us better
results this time around. I suppose that diplomacy is totally out of the
question at this point for the conservatives.

And Maliki has not been an honest broker. Maliki has not been inclusive
and I don`t hear Republicans saying that. He is excluded the Sunnis. He
has been harsh on the former Ba`athist members. And this has opened the
door for ISIS to come in and get willing partners because they don`t like a
new dictator. He has not been a doctor of democracy. Remember all the
purple thumbs that were up in the air years ago? Where`s all that? The
Iraqi people need to step up and support their government and fight for
themselves before the American people are going to move on this.

Oh by the way, anybody checked with the American people on more
intervention in Iraq? The reason why we didn`t leave troops behind is
because President Obama could not get the agreement with Maliki. Maliki
came to Congress and he said, "Bush signed the exit agreement and you`re
going to live by it." He also would not give our soldiers immunity on the
ground. God forbid, there`s a shoot and match now, our soldiers are hung
up in some Iraqi court going through some judicial system. No. President
Obama wasn`t going to go along with that, but Maliki wouldn`t go along with
it either and so now we have no agreement.

I mean these conservatives think, "Well, it`s easy to cut a deal with these
folks. Heck, we just got to deal with them and we won`t be a target
anymore. We`ll just give whatever they want. More troops, more money,
more treasure from the American families across this country." that`s the

Get your cellphones out. I want to know what you think. Tonight`s
question, "Are you prepared to send your kid to Iraq?" Text A for yes,
text B for no to 67622, you can always go to our blog and leave a comment
at I`ll be podcasting about this again tomorrow. We`ll
bring you the results later on in the show.

For more, let me bring in Congressman Jim McDermott of Washington.

Jim, good to have you with this tonight, I appreciate your time. You were
there when the vote took place years ago to go into Iraq. Why do I feel
like we`re seeing an instant replay from Republicans on this? I want your
thoughts on what`s unfolding.

REP. JIM MCDERMOTT, D-WASHINGTON: Well, Ed, it really is a replay as
exactly as you said it. The same propaganda that`s being pushed on us now
was pushed on us then. It was a mistake then, we lost 4,000 people, lots
and lots of injured people, mayhem all over the country, a terrible mess,
and we installed a dictator named Maliki.

Now, the people in Iraq told me when I was over there before that started.
This is between Arabs and Persians. You people in the United States don`t
understand, we`ve been fighting the Iranians for hundreds of years and when
you put Maliki in with his ties to Tehran, you have given Iraq to the
Iranians. And the reason Maliki wouldn`t sign that status of agreement
with the United States was the Iranians did not want 10,000 American troops
stationed in Baghdad.

We were lucky the President dodged a bullet in the fact that he brought
those people hope. Otherwise, right now they`d be right in the middle of
it and we wouldn`t know which side to help. Should we help the Iranians
who were having negotiations on nuclear weapons or should we help the
Saudis and the Sunnis or what should we do?

The president has no good options at this point. The only good option is
to say, "I`m going to do nothing. If the Congress wants to do something,
let them take a vote and order me to." If I were the president, I would
not move without a vote of the Congress on any kind of strike in Iraq.

SCHULTZ: Republicans are calling the president delusional and detached.
Your response to that.

MCDERMOTT: He`s absolutely hard-headed clear thinking. This is the first
time we`ve had somebody sitting there in the midst of this, who is not
jumping and going for all the propaganda. The fact is that his options are
very limited. If he brought in air strikes, where would you strike them?
They are all mixed in together now. There is no place, there is no good
target, the drones -- we don`t have good intelligence to go after so called

There are no good options and the president is sitting there looking at
them and carefully evaluating what the military is bring it him and he is
not going for it and he is absolutely right.

SCHULTZ: Congressman Lindsey Graham is saying that this is the staging
ground for the next 9/11. Is that fear-mongering or is that the truth?

MCDERMOTT: That`s fear-mongering. It has -- may have some pieces of truth
in it that we have created an area of turmoil in which these kinds of
things are going to spring, but we will only make it worst by getting in
there and trying to kill this one and kill that one. We`re going to kill a
lot of collateral damage as we did in Iraq. We`ll make more and more
people angry at us. And we simply cannot solve these things with military
power. It`s going to take diplomacy.

Maliki has to go and Assad has to go. Now, how we get that to happen? We
got to get the Russians. We got to get the Iranians. We got everybody
together. If we want peace in the area, that`s the only way it`s going to
occur. Otherwise, you`re just going to have all these people killing one
other and we`ll look like fools. We`ve already spent trillions of dollars
in this war and we do not .


MCDERMOTT: . need to spend anymore.

SCHULTZ: Congressman Jim McDermott good to have you with us tonight, sir.
I appreciate your time here on the EdShow on this.

For more, let me bring in General Wesley Clark, Former NATO Commander and
Senior Fellow at UCLA Berkeley. General, great to have you with us

Thank you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: What role do you think? What role does Maliki play for the
conditions in Iraq as you give analysis to this?

CLARK: I think Maliki is responsible for a lot of the strife. He
certainly abused the Sunni population, the leadership, he`s targeted them.
He is an authoritarian leader. We did put him in. I agree with a lot of
things that Congressman McDermott had to say and a lot of things that you
said early on, but I see this a little bit differently.

I do think there is a real threat here. I don`t think we want to lead ISIS
run rampant and I don`t think we want Iran in there on the ground in Iraq.
I think this is -- one of these points in history were if the United States
is able to take modest military action, it could have a significant
benefit. And so I felt as I watch this situation emerge that if we put in
the right kind of liaison with the Iraqi leadership and use the special
forces assets that we have available that we could bring in the right kind
of combat power, get the intelligence we need and have a decisive impact

Now, the military impact is less important than the diplomatic impact. A
U.S. power and resolve in this crisis has a big impact, should have a big
impact, on Maliki. It`s a job of our diplomats and our president to take
that leverage and use it. It should also have an impact on Iran.

As I watch the Iranian nuclear talks I sometimes get the impression the
Iranians think that they`re still the most powerful force in the region or
that now that the United States in order and has boots on the ground,
they`re the most powerful force in the region of Iran. And that`s a
mistake. We don`t want that to happen.

So, you know, we had the hardest of all military operations is to withdraw
on the battlefield under pressure. The United States has done that in
Iraq. We`re doing it in Afghanistan and we have to be very careful because
we`re a global power, we`re the most powerful country in the world. We do
have global interest.

And by the way, you know, we have to watch very carefully the price of oil
because while some people might tell you that even if ISIS took over,
they`d be pumping oil like mad, they might. But any problem with that oil
market is going to impact directly on the American economy and it`s just an
unfortunate fact of life. I saw one of your viewers tweeted, let`s get
some alternative energy. You bet, we need it but right now, we don`t have
the ability .


CLARK: . to cut the cord to OPEC. So, we`re in some risk here.

SCHULTZ: General, if we -- OK. We could not get an agreement with Maliki
because he would not give American forces immunity and the president did
not want to put American troops in that untenable legal position if
violence had broken out. If American troops had not been withdrawn, would
there be a different scenario playing out right now as you see it?

CLARK: No. I don`t think so. I mean, I think that -- first of all, I
wouldn`t have put American troops there without legal immunity. You can`t
do that. The president did exactly the right thing.

Secondly, Maliki wasn`t willing to listen. Well, maybe now he is more
willing to listen. And if he isn`t, you know, shame on him because he`s
going to expose that region to a great deal of more hardship. But I
believe this is a time where military power can throw a diplomatic leverage
to the United States and we shouldn`t be afraid to use that diplomatic

SCHULTZ: OK. General Wesley Clark, great to have you with this tonight on
this very complex subject. There is no easy answer. I appreciate your
time here on the EdShow. Thank you so much for joining us.

Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the screen and
share your thoughts with us on Twitter at EdShow and like us on Facebook.
We appreciate that. We want to know what you think especially on this
subject tonight. Are we ready for all of this again?

Still ahead, the Bush era Iraq war architects are back defending
themselves. We`ll discuss it with our Rapid Response Panel.

And coming up, Republicans are making immigration excuses. Well talk about
the latest developments in Arizona with American`s lawyer Mike Papantonio.

Stay with us. We`ll be right back.


SCHULTZ: Time now for the Trenders, what`s hot and what`s not on social
media. Check us out on Twitter at Ed Show. And of course you can check us
out at for my podcast and you`ll also find my podcast at

Ed Show Social Media Nation has decided and we are reporting. Here are
today`s top Trenders voted on by you.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The number three Trender, no regrets.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was a stunning fall from power.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: An epic collection fail.

REP. ERIC CANTOR, (R) VIRGINIA: I don`t have any regrets.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Eric Cantor discusses his election loss.

CANTOR: I came up short in terms of number of votes.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did this completely shock you?

CANTOR: Yeah, absolutely.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`m shocked, shocked.

CANTOR: Our country needs a strong, robust Republican Party and I`m going
to continue to work on that in mission as I go forward.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you see yourself ever running for office again?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Any chance you would run for governor of Virginia?

CANTOR: I don`t want to close off any options right now.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The number two Trender, by George.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It`s a rare public appearance by the youngest royal.
Kate Middleton brings her adorable son to watch Princes` William and Harry
play polo.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Could he have anymore pinchable cheek?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Nice baby, daddy loves me.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The little prince takes a big step on Father`s Day.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: These great photos caught on camera during a charity
polo match showing his first step on Sunday.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Left, right, left, right.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: George is eager to take a few steps with some help
from his mom.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey, we were walking.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Prince George is a man on the move.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And today`s top Trender, fault live.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Immigration system is broken.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The latest touch of the Obama administration`s
immigration policy are these young children who travel without parent.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They were putting a law enforcement agency, the
largest law enforcement agency in the country in-charge of children.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If the president who is the largest opponent to
immigration reform.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Republicans blame the president for immigration

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There`s a human tragedy going on on the Southern border
right now and the president is doing nothing.

JOHN BOEHNER, HOUSE SPEAKER: I don`t know (inaudible). Oh, don`t make me
do this. Oh no, this is too hard.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is the present news, disengaged on solving this
challenge of immigration.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s time that we sit down and remove our political
hats to figure this out and work on it.


SCHULTZ: Joining me now, Ring of Fire Radio Host and America`s lawyer Mike
Papantonio. Mike, good to have you with us tonight.

Sort this out for us, Mike. The justice department recently announced this
program to provide these children who were crossing the border with lawyers
to help them in immigration court. What legal recourse do these children
have at this point the way this is unfolding?

MIKE PAPANTONIO, HOST, RING OF FIRE: Well, what -- they have to first
overcome the hysteria of -- the recourse is clear. They simply have to --
they have to avoid immediate deportation.

But this hysteria that`s flowing around this is you have Fox News and of
course you`ve got the Tea Party internet lunacy trying to interfere with
any attempt to help these children. According to the Right Talk right now,
you have Obama`s invited 60,000 Hispanic teenagers from places like
Guatemala and El Salvador to come to America and live with no strings
attach. The truth is there are many strings attached.

One Tea Party site tell us that if you take a look at this, the lunacy
that`s out there, one of them says that Obama has invited global communist
to send these undocumented teenagers across our borders so that they can
continue their lives as criminals and possibly terrorists. So that`s what
the legal system is up against, is the big media push that`s taking place.
Fox News of course has the loodub (ph) types accusing Obama of causing this

The truth is Obama is simply trying to put in place a legal system that
allows the cases to be evaluated one at a time. But he say -- the talk is
that the varied mention of immigration reform is bringing all of these
teenagers in by the thousands. The truth is, really, is Obama simply is
looking for a structure.

You have to realize, Ed, this is a President who has deported two million
undocumented immigrants. But the right won`t talk about that. Frankly,
the other thing the right won`t talk about is this, Ronald Reagan randomly
granted a total blanket amnesty for more than four million undocumented
immigrants without any kind of legal course put in place to figure out,
should they be here or should they not be here?

And so, this .

SCHULTZ: So -- is the flood of kids coming in to the United States greater
now because there maybe a deal on immigration that the DREAM Act has maybe
been somewhat of a magnet for these young kids coming in here and -- go

PAPANTONIO: Ed, there is no question that that has an impact. But the way
that this is being spun by the right is that Obama has lost control of
what`s going on here.


PAPANTONIO: That Obama has completely lost control and he`s inviting all
these teenage immigrants across the border.

Listen, we heard the same kind of scare with the Cuban boatlift. You
remember the Mariel boat lift. The 125,000 immigrants came from Cuba. The
scare was they were all criminals. The scare was that they`re all from
mental institutions. I don`t know if you remember that line. But when
they dug down and see what the truth was it was all scare and less than two
percent of them had any connection at all between .


PAPANTONIO: . middle institutions or any kind of crime. But the hatch job
here is to create an atmosphere to make it impossible .


PAPANTONIO: . for Obama to do this with any plan.

SCHULTZ: So, how could the Republicans claim President Obama`s
immigrations biggest opponent when their party has been saying that it`s a
dead issue since the beginning of the year? They are afraid of immigration
reform because what it`s going to do to labor, what`s it`s going to at the
polls and how these whole thing is going to change in our election process
because let`s face it, they know Republicans aren`t going to offer them
anything. They know that Republicans aren`t going to give them up any kind
of security or a future in this country. They`ve opposed to it.

So, where does that leave us when it comes to immigration reform? Is this
just another story to muddy up the waters to keep the Republicans from
doing anything?

PAPANTONIO: Here`s where it leaves us. It leaves us with people like
Schumer saying, "Please Republicans, just put something on the table."
Because without something on the table, Ed, you have no structure.

Now look, the Republicans .


PAPANTONIO: . are using excuses like saying, "Well, the Boston bomber was
an immigrant, therefore, we can`t do anything about it." The latest talk
has been gee-whiz Obama allowed -- released five Taliban connected people
from Guantanamo and we`re not going to take any action on immigration
because of that.

The other talking point is Obama can`t be trusted on any deals we make with
him. So, we hear all these .


PAPANTONIO: . talking points but the truth is, they understand this can be
done very orderly with a structure and that`s all Obama`s asking for. Give
me a structure, give me a plan and place for immigration and there won`t be
any problems here. But the Republicans seem .

SCHULTZ: All right.

PAPANTONIO: . incapable of doing that.

SCHULTZ: Mike Papantonio, America`s lawyer with us tonight here on the Ed
Show, I appreciate it, Mike. Thank you so much.

Coming up, Bush era Iraq war supporters take to the Sunday morning talk
shows to parrot their old messages. Rapid Response Panel weighs on that.

Still ahead, the federal government could take a lesson from California.
We`ll give you the great details on the State of California`s Assembly as
they have approved a budget, and that`s coming up in the Punch Out.
They`re talking infrastructure and improvements.

But next, I`m taking your questions Ask Ed Live. Just ahead, stay tuned.
You`re watching the Ed Show at MSBNC and going to be back. We`ll going to
be back.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. Love the questions, loved hearing
from our wonderful viewers tonight in our Ask Ed Live segment.

Out first question comes from Ray Berks (ph). "Why do people pay so much
attention to failed candidates like Romney and others?"

You know, just seems that the media has a fascination with couldn`t
shouldn`t and wouldn`t. Somebody that couldn`t and something different
shouldn`t on something or would have done something different.

There seems to be, I guess some big story there. I don`t know why. Monday
morning quarterbacking just seems to be a big thing with some people in the
mainstream Medias. It isn`t with me.

I think Romney is the guy that lost the election and it ends there.

Our next question is from Lenora. "Will the media fail the American people
like they did the first time about the Iraq war?"

Well, no I don`t think so because the media is the social media. I think
that the pressure from the social media on congressional members will be so
strong this time around. There is no way the President will have support
to put troops back in Iraq to fix what Maliki has screwed up. They had a

The Shia had a chance and he wouldn`t work with Sunnies or the Ba`ath Party
and now he`s going to mess on his hands.

The question for us, "Are we really the target and can we protect
ourselves?" That`s the fundamental question. And if we go to Iraq, are we
safer? We`re back to the edge old $64 question. Till we bought them over
there, bought them over here. Remember those days?

Stick around, Rapid Response Panel is next. We`ll be right back.

Market Wrap. Worries about Iraq keep a lead on gains but stocks did end in
the green. And the Dow is up 5 point, the S&P adds 1 and the NASDAQ rises
about 10.

Output from U.S factories rose more than expected in May. The increase is
boosting hopes for an economic rebound this quarter. And home builders are
growing more confident about the housing market. A closely watched index
of industry assessment jumps this month nearly crossing into positive

That`s it from CNBC, first in business, worldwide.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. As the situation on Iraq develops,
the President of the United States, President Obama weighs the options for
U.S. response.

The Bush-era architects of war are resurfacing to give us their take. Take
neocon Cheerleader, Bill Kristol, for example.


BILL KRISTOL, ABC NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: It`s a disaster unfortunately made
possible and certainly made more likely by our ridiculous and totally
withdrawal from Iraq in 2011.

President Obama said through this before Election Day in 2012, "Al Qaeda is
on the path to defeat. The war in Iraq is over." There was enough to get
him reelected but how these look today? Al Qaeda is on the path to defeat.
The war in Iraq is over. Either is true and it`s a disaster for our


SCHULTZ: Well since we`re quoting people, of course this is all President
Obama`s fault. Bill Kristol has zero credibility on this topic. Remember
when he made this prediction.


KRISTOL: Bush is not fighting this idea. Whatever the -- we don`t need to
be fights the whole.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Saddam, maybe that`s the dangerous..

KRISTOL: It is not going to happen. This is going to be a (inaudible) not


SCHULTZ: Two (inaudible). We`re always looking for one of them, aren`t

I guess you could call Bill Kristol an expert in disasters. Let`s not
forget Paul Wolfowitz. Remember him? Who served in the Bush
administration from 2001 to 2005 as Deputy Secretary of Defense.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Look, it`s a complicated situation here. You don`t
just come up with, "We`re going to bomb this and we`re going to do that."

PAUL WOLFOWITZ: Most importantly, I would say, in Syria where U.S. policy
and absence over the last three years has sent a signal of lack of
seriousness throughout the region. I would do something in Syria.


SCHULTZ: Just start another conflict, right? That`s rich coming from
Wolfowitz. Considering how we got involved in Iraq I the first place.
Wolfowitz try to sale that Saddam has WMD`s tale long after we had an
intelligence saying otherwise.

Ten years after the start of the war, Wolfowitz publicly conceded that the
series of blunders by the Bush`s Administration plagued Iraq into a cycle
of violence that really spiraled out of control.

Well, these people don`t deserve a platform to parrot old lies, do they?
They should not be treated as experts because they aren`t. Not only that
these men help craft the Iraq war but they were flat out wrong in deceptive
every single step of the way.

Joining me now on our Rapid Response Panel Goldie Taylor of TheGrio and
also with us tonight, Former Senator Byron Dorgan from North Dakota who for
their record held countless hearings on the Hill when it came to fraud,
misused of funds, abuse across the board. No doubt about it. Great to
have both of you with us tonight.

Senator you first, this is like old hound week all this conversation we`re
having about Iraq right now. Is it possible that we could end up right
back where we were? Your thoughts.

FRM. SEN. BYRON DORGAN, [D] NORTH DAKOTA: Well it reminds of me 10 or 11
years ago being in literally dozens of top secret briefings and hearings on
the hill, I mean literally dozens of top secret briefings in which we now
know that we were told things that we`re patently false.

I mean we went to war in Iraq under false pretenses. And, you know, the
crowd that you were just quoting that`s the crowd that said this is going
to be a slam dunk, right? Well, you know, the fact is the same breathless
energy by the same people is to say, "Let`s send American troops right back
in the middle of a civil war again." And I, you know, I`m thankful that
this President has said, "You know what? We`re going to slow down and take
a deep breath, think through this and we`re not going to make the kind of
judgment you want us to make to get back into a war in Iraq."

SCHULTZ: Senator, how do you, you know, gather this comments from Lindsey
Graham, who says, "This is the staging for the next 9/11, the unfolding of
Iraq." What`s your response to that?

DORGAN: Listen, they have no credibility, those who are saying these
things have no credibility, we`ve heard it all before. And we`ve
experience the fact that they don`t know what they`re talking about. You
know, again, we went to war in Iraq under false pretenses. And, you know,
after 10 or 11 years, we`ve spend $17 to $20 billion training and equipping
the Iraqi military, a military that it appears won`t even defend it`s own
country these days and it has a leader that`s in desperate trouble, doesn`t
seem to know how to govern and creates divisions in own country and we`re
going to send American troops back, thinking after 11 years we`re going to
solve that problem, I don`t think so.

And by the way, when we talk about democracy, what about our democracy? I
think the American people have about a belly full of wars in countries like
Iraq in which, you know, a lot of countries have tried and failed and we
have after 11 years been able to withdraw our troops in -- and good for the
President for doing that.

SCHULTZ: Well the election, that was the benchmark, it was a foundation of
his campaign that he would get us out of wars.

Goldie, the media landscape was much different when we entered this
conflict 11 years ago. There was no MSNBC giving, you know, the voices, an
opportunity to speak across this country indecent, they came later after
the war started. The run up was really a cheerleading squad. And of
course Huffington Post wasn`t around, social media wasn`t around. Who is
this going to play out with the American people Goldie? How do you see

GOLDIE TAYLOR, THEGRIO.COM COLUMNIST: You know, I think the differences
that you point out in terms of out media framework, in terms of what this
landscaper really looks like, we`ll make a difference. I mean back then we
had fewer platforms on which to speak. We have fewer waste (ph) of that.
The information coming out of Capitol Hill, I think this time around we`ve
got the pressure social media quite frankly. There are number of very
strong people in terms of foreign policy on social media today who are
getting information as it comes and we can kind of see it, you know, really
in real time.

So I think we`re dealing with a different landscape. But will that
landscape be powerful enough, a powerful enough force to help us, you know,
crack and shape a solution that we help in this recent, in terms of helping
to stabilize, in terms of, you know, maybe we put together a partnership
with the RAND (ph), maybe not.

But we`ve got to really sort of understand that this is not -- we can`t
take American value and sort of drop them off in the Middle East that we
can`t strip people of their agency that this new President in Iraq, you
know, has some responsibilities here, that maybe we help him to live up to.

But at the end of the day, the responsible is truly belong to him. And so
am I (inaudible) in the crown? Well only if what`s in crystal have them
on. But maybe, you know, we support in other ways, in terms of, you know,
sort of help and reaching, come to get around this, because no one, no one


TAYLOR: . you know, from when I suspect, you know, government that is
capable of terrorism both in the recent and abroad and may hit American
interest, no one benefits from that. And so we do have to crack the
meaningful solution. And I think this new media landscape can certainly be
a part of that.

DORGAN: Ed, and let me.

SCHULTZ: Goldie, do you think that there were be any -- go ahead Senator.

DORGAN: Let me just say that I`m not suggesting that what goes on in the
rest of the world is none of our business. But.



DORGAN: ...and, you know, it seems to me diplomacy should not be
considered as off to weapon, that diplomacy is very important here.

TAYLOR: Absolutely.

DORGAN: And let me just make one other point. What happen 10 and 11 years
ago is not going to happen now, because that happen not only where we
deceive with bad information to go to war but it was also the case that
happen in the shadow of 9/11. And you could do things in the shadow of
that horror of 9/11 that I think you can not do 10 and 11 years later.


TAYLOR: I agree with that.

SCHULTZ: Very profound point know that. Goldie, is there any military
action you think the American people would go along with President Obama

TAYLOR: You know, I don`t think that we have a stomach for, you know, we
lost 4,000 American lives in a war that should have never been ways (ph).
And so, I don`t think that we have a stomach for boots on the ground in
Iraq or any place else right now. But I do think that we got to, you know,
put the strong arm with diplomacy out there that there are, you know,
economic means to which we can pursue. But their may come a day when we
support military at least through air strikes. But that does not mean that
people are not on harms way because, you know, we`re doing air strikes
certainly people do.


TAYLOR: . die on those circumstances. But if they were comes a day when
we have to provide some military support we had better make a very strong
case to the American people that our specific interests are at risk to do

SCHULTZ: Goldie Taylor and Former Senator Byron Dorgan, great to have both
of you with us tonight on this subject. Thank you so much.

DORGAN: Thank you.

TAYLOR: Thank you.

SCHULTZ: Coming up the federal government should take a hint from
California. The state assembly approve that general funds spending plan
with some progressive plans for the coming fiscal year that is next. Stay
with us.


SCHULTZ: And in Pretenders tonight, prime denial Tony Blair. The Former
British Prime Minister is trying to rewrite history. Blair won`t
acknowledge the connection between the 2003 Iraq invasion and the current
crisis. Blair says, "Linking the two is a bizarre reading of the
cauldron." Blair went on to absorb himself.


TONY BLAIR, FORMER BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Even if you let Saddam in place
in 2003. Then when 2011 happened and you had the Arab of revolutions going
through Tunisia and Libya, and Yemen, and Bahrain, and Egypt, and Syria,
you would have still had a major problem in Iran.

Indeed you can see what happens when you leave the dictator in place as
this happened which has had now. The problems don`t go away. And that
doesn`t mean by the way engagement has in Iraq or Afghanistan and ground
troops. But it does mean that we actively try and shape this situation
with our allies in the region. And don`t believe that we just wash our
hands a bit and walk away then the problems will be solve.


SCHULTZ: Tony Blair, he would admit the miss that he and George Bush
created. But he sure wants President Obama to clean it up. The Prime
Minister needs a reality check. If Tony Blair has thinks denying the
responsibility for one disaster in Iraq can hooks us into another he can
keep pretending.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. This is the story for the folks who
take a shower after work. Hey look at California. California is doing
exactly what the Federal Government should be doing.

Now over the weekend, the Californian State Assembly, they approve $108
billion budget which will move the state forward on, guess what?
Infrastructure, education and social programs.

The budget needs Governor Jerry Brown demands for a rain day fund in paying
down debt. It also allocates some of the sort of cluster programs
benefiting lower income Californians.


STATE SEN. DARRELL STIENBERG, [D] CALIFORNIA: There is a lot to be proud
of in this budget. A huge investment in early childhood education, a
commitment for full-day preschool for all income four -year-old with at
least one working parent. More money for mental health.


SCHULTZ: Democratic lawmakers gave Governor Jerry Brown a victory by
allowing him to tap the so called Cap and Trade funds for California`s high
speed rail project, all good. The budget directs $250 million from that
fund to California`s $68 billion bullet train.

Some Republicans in the state were not supportive with the budget, they
said that their focus would have been less on new programs and more on
being physically responsible. But isn`t it about jobs? David Cay Johnson,
tax specialist and columnist joins us tonight here on the Ed Show. David
Cay, good to have you with us.

Should the Federal Government follow California`s lead by investing in more
infrastructure, social programs? I mean, at one time they were the world`s
seventh largest economy, I don`t know where they are right now, but they`re
certainly doing something that few states are doing.

right now Ed. And, you know, when Jerry Brown was elected for the second
go around three years ago and said I`m going to raise taxes on people at
the top and poor people are going to share in the burdens as well, there
were all these new stories that California`s economy is just going to
collapse, it`s going to fall apart, everyone`s going to leave the state who
has a high income.

And instead, the state general fund is growing so fast that they were able
to do things like expand programs for poor people and through the carbon
trading system, they`re going to set aside money for transit and the high
speed train, which are important, given how densely pack California has

SCHULTZ: Well, you know, we`re seeing certain states do certain pretty
aggressive things and they all happen to be controlled by Democrats.


SCHULTZ: The budget was passed on party lines. Is California allocating
money to the right things or are they throwing it away? I mean are these
things that will create jobs?

JOHNSON: They are putting a lot of money in infrastructure which is
desperately needed, we`ve been using up the infrastructure, that`s bad for
business. They need to make more improvement in child care but at least
this budget in the right direction on that.

SCHULTZ: So Brown is doing it right and Schwarzenegger just didn`t get it
right, did he?

JOHNSON: No, he didn`t. And unfortunately, you know, we have to recognize
that private wealth Ed, the creation of private wealth depends on a
foundation of common wealth, schools, education, infrastructure, justice
system that works, both civil and criminal justice and other programs. And
if you strip away the common wealth, then you`re damaging the creation of
private wealth.

Jerry Brown has a very balance view of this and, you know, you look at the
predictions of how California is suppose to be today, they`re doing very
well and the state budget analyst are quite optimistic about the next
couple of years.

SCHULTZ: So the surplus, there`s probably going to be a fight over what to
do with the surplus pretty soon in that and that would be a very good
problem to have. And oh, by the way, the Democrats in that state are all
for public education, it`s going to be interesting to see how that fight
all comes down. David Cay Johnson, always great to have you with us here
on the Ed Show.

Tomorrow night on the Ed Show, we`re going to do a segment while I was
gone. There a lot of big stories that broke over the last week, I of
course was doing R&R (ph), just catching a couple fish, that`s all, just a

That`s the Ed Show, I`m Ed Schultz. Politics Nation with Reverend Al
Sharpton starts right now. Good to be back, good to see you Rev.


<Copy: Content and programming copyright 2014 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Copyright 2014 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>

The Ed Show Section Front
Add The Ed Show headlines to your news reader:

Sponsored links

Resource guide