updated 7/30/2014 9:01:27 AM ET 2014-07-30T13:01:27

THE ED SHOW
July 29, 2014

Guest: Mitch Ceasar, Chris Larson, Ruth Conniff, Zerlina Maxwell

ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Americans and welcome to the Ed Show
live from Detroit Lakes, Minnesota. I`m ready to go. Let`s rev it up.
Let`s get to work.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Congratulations Mr. President.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This guy is doing this by executive order one after the
another.

And I think it is time to start talking about impeachment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That would be I`m my judgment grounds for impeachment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Our top political priority over the next two years
should be to deny President Obama a second term.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Have the guts to introduce a resolution of impeachment.

This guy has committed I believe high crimes in this community.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If Barack Obama becomes a president November again, I
will either be dead or in jail.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fox news is projecting that Barack Obama has been
reelected as president of the United States.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So help you God.

BARACK OBAMA, CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: So help
me God.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is almost an impeachable offense.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I personally impelling to impeach the president of the
United States.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Should we impeach Obama.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Impeach -- this President is not a king.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And replace him with a space robot.

OBAMA: Maybe it`s just me they don`t like.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The birth of things is over. The black thing is over.
So now he needs to have -- he needs to be able to call for justice.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Good to have you with us tonight folks. Thanks for watching.
Now, if you want to throw another log on the impeachment fire, I`m talking
to the White House tonight directly, start signing executive orders on
immigration reform.

No, you can`t do it. One man shouldn`t have that much control. Tonight,
we begin with -- let`s focus in on the Republicans` master plan first.
We`ll get to immigration in a moment. They want to impeach President
Obama. Calls for the impeachment of the President of the United States,
they`re nothing new.

Republicans have had impeachment on their minds since day one. Meanwhile
Speaker of the House John Boehner claims that he`s against impeaching the
President. Oh really? Boehner in a reversal comes out today and said
Republicans have no plans to impeach the President.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. John Boehner, (R-OH) House Speaker: This whole talk about impeachment
is coming from the president`s own staff. And coming from Democrats on
Capitol Hill, why? Because they`re trying to rally their people to give
money and to show up in this year`s election.

We have no plans to impeach the President. We have no future plans.
Listen, it`s all a scam started by Democrats at the White House.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Do you believe that? Speaker Boehner must pay no attention to
what people in his own party have been saying for months/years. The idea
of the White House being behind impeachment talk is absolutely absurd.
Republicans have been talking about impeaching President Obama for a long
time.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

SEN. JIM INHOFE (R) OKLAHOMA: People may be starting to use the I-word
before too long.

RUSTY HUMPHRIES, AMERICAN RADIO HOST: OK, the I-word meaning impeachment?

INHOFE: Yeah.

HUMPHRIES: OK, but you live in the world of the Senate, there`s no way
they`re going to impeach this guy over anything, is there?

INHOFE: No, no I understand that, I`m not talking about it now. This is
something that is endured until the next -- after the `14 election.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS HOST: Will you consider impeaching the president?

REP. STEVE SCALISE, (R) LOUISIANA: No, you know, this probably the first
White House in history that`s trying to start the narrative of impeaching
their own president. Ultimately, what we want to do is see the president
follow the laws.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would you allow us to default on our debt?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, that would be an impeachable offense by the
President.

REP. KERRY BENTIVOLIO, (R) MICHIGAN: I went back to my office and I`ve had
lawyers come in -- and these are lawyers well off their Ph.D.s and I said,
"Tell me how me how I can impeach the President of the United States".

WALLACE: But impeachment is off the table.

SCALISE: Well, if the White House wants to talk about impeachment, now
technically they`re going out and trying to fund raise off of that too.

WALLACE: I`m asking you sir.

SCALISE: Look, the White House will do anything they can to change the
topic away from the president`s failed agenda.

REP. JASON CHAFFETZ, (R) UTAH: Look, it`s not something I`m seeking, it`s
the not the end-game, it`s not what we`re playing for. I would simply ask
is that, within the realm of possibilities and I would say yes. I`m not
willing to take that off the table but, that`s certainly not what we`re
striving for.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Yes is yes, is yes, yes, yes. Some Republicans don`t agree with
their colleagues. On Monday, Loser -- Former Senator Scott Brown, who did
lose, said Americans don`t want to impeach the President.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT BROWN, FORMER SENATOR, MASSACHUSETTS: I think that there is no
appetite for impeachment for the President. Listen, here`s the best
checking balance, if people are sitting at their dinner table or going out
and they`re complaining with their friends about the state of affairs, the
failed Obama policies and agenda, the best way to do that is to take back
the Senate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Well, Brown must be looking at the polls as of late. He`s
running for Senate in the swing state of New Hampshire. Fifty seven
percent of Republicans support impeachment but only 33 percent of Americans
think President Obama should be impeached. Senator John McCain is on the
same page as the former senator from Massachusetts now running in the
Hampshire.

McCain said impeachment talk is a waste of time. McCain made clear,
getting votes in the Senate would be no easy task.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, (R) ARIZONA: I remember going through an impeachment --
William Jefferson Clinton, there are not votes here in the United States
Senate to impeach the President of the United States. And I think that we
should focus our attention on winning elections. We win this election and
regain control of the United States Senate. We can be far more effective
than an effort to impeach the President which has no chance of succeeding.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: With the current Senate, there`s no question about it, McCain is
right. There`s absolutely no way Republicans could get the votes for
impeachment. But if Republicans take control of the Senate in November, it
would be a different ball game.

Their first order of business I believe would be in 2015 to impeach the
President of the United States. And the main fuel behind the Republican
impeachment idea in recent weeks has been executive orders on the border
crisis. This is where it gets pretty dicey for the President.

It looks like action from President Obama could be on the way. The
Associated Press reports White House officials are making plans to act on
immigration before the midterms. Executive orders from the President could
grant work permits to potentially millions of illegal immigrants in the
United States. The move would allow them to stay without the threat of
deportation. Hold the phone. This would be a mistake if the President
were to do this.

Politically, there is no way Democrats can go home and campaign on across-
the-board amnesty for millions of undocumented workers. I don`t think
that`s a political winner for the Democrats. There has to be uniformity,
there has to be some process. And I think handing out permits for workers
to compete against legal workers in America is a bad idea. I don`t think
the American people would float that at all.

Beyond that, I don`t think one man, no matter whether it`s President Obama
or Bush. I don`t think one man should have that much power.

Congress needs to stop the obstruction and put comprehensive immigration
reform up for a vote. Up for a vote, that`s what they were hired to do.
And I don`t think President Obama needs to add any fuel to the impeachment
fire, he should keep doing what he`s doing and let the Republican Party
self-destruct.

OK, Mr. President I get it. You`ve been obstructed more than any other
president. You`re trying to move things forward in this country, but I do
believe that if the President arbitrarily starts handing out work permits,
it`s going to create more problems than it`s going to solve. It`s going to
give the right wing more ammunition against Democrats who right now, I
believe have the wind at their back as they go home in August.

The fact is, is that amnesty can win at a certain level, if there is a
process. The Brits just don`t hand out work permits, the Germans don`t do
it, I can tell you the Canadians don`t do it, the Japanese don`t do it.
Tell me, who around this globe just hands out work permits to people to try
to solve a problem of immigration? They don`t do that.

And I think the President would create a great deal of rift within the
Democratic Party when they seem to be pretty unified right now because the
Republicans have done a lot of obstructing, the country gets that. I don`t
think the President can solve every problem with an executive order. He`s
made his point, he`s done some good things, but to go down the road of
executive orders on immigration, the issue is too big. It could be an
electoral death nail for the Democrats when it`s completely unnecessary at
this point.

There has to be a process, there has to be both sides involved. We all
know who the obstructors are. And as I see it going into the midterms,
that`s all the people have to know right now.

Get your cellphones out. I want to know what you think. Tonight`s
question, "Do you think President Obama should issues executive orders on
immigration?"

Text A for yes, text B for no to 67622. You can always go to our blog at
ed.msnbc.com. We`ll bring in the results later on in the show.

For more, let me bring in Mitch Ceasar from Florida who sits on the
executive committee of the DNC. Florida is a hot bed this year in this
political season. Mitch good to have you with us tonight. Do you think
that .

MITCH CEASAR, DNC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBER: Thank you Ed.

SCHULTZ: . the President`s work permit plan, do you think the president`s
work permit plan is a good idea?

CEASAR: I think it`s a very iffy proposition. When you do anything this
close to an election, everything is a gigantic risk. You know, as you
said, you know, they passed a compromised bill in the Senate a year ago,
it`s never really even heard in the House. John Boehner rather sue the
president which the majority of the American people are against, rather
than take up discussion at bill.

Even if you change the bill to some extent, although it was a compromised
bill, it shows some activity. He`s not doing that, and I think it`s a
mistake for the President to take on everything as a one-man band, that is
simply politically risky, the economy is coming back, and to the
president`s credit. He needs to have a convergence and show leadership in
drawing to bring together, if at all possible, all the factions of
Congress.

SCHULTZ: Wouldn`t it be harder for the Democrats to go home and campaign
on the heels of their leader -- the Democratic Party Barack Obama, the
President of the United States having handed out, or even thinking about
handing out work permits to millions of workers in this country that are
illegal. I mean, the fact is how many millions of people are we talking
about. It would be viewed as an attempt to just buy votes, would it not?

CEASAR: Well, I think it would because in the accusation which has already
occurred, is that it would be a way to try to produce a greater turnout in
off-year cycle by Hispanic voters. You know, I don`t need a poll. I go
out and talk to people everyday all over the state and frankly in many
local coffee houses I have found. And people were just saying, you know,
the economy is finally coming back, we really need to have an early (ph)
process. We need to have a good immigration policy. We need to see and
recognize these humanitarian crises, but it needs to be a balanced
approach.

I think what I`m afraid of is -- and I think you kind of said that or at
least implied it, was the fact that the Republicans are baiting the
president, saying, we`re not going.

SCHULTZ: Absolutely.

CEASAR: . to do anything so you go ahead and do it.

SCHULTZ: Absolutely. The country knows who the obstructers are. The
country knows that the President is for the workers. The President is for
minimum wage. He has done great things on healthcare. He is defending his
turf there. I get all that, but to open up a can of worms and all of a
sudden just give work permits out would be fueling the Republican desire to
impeach the President of United States.

Now, this is my opinion on this. I don`t know what is gained. It is all
about power. We are learning in the American system that you can`t do
anything because both sides are so polarized. You can`t do anything unless
you have power. So how is handing out work permits and creating a bunch of
animosity and firing up the right wing base. How is that going to make it
a better climate for the Democrats to win in November?

CEASAR: Well, the Republican strategy is, we`re X number of days out from
an election, let`s say less than a hundred or whatever it is, and we have
to make sure we don`t come up with any specific proposal because we might
tick off some extreme part of our base. So, if we can`t come up with any
concrete proposal and of course, Republicans are polling in Congress are
lower than, you know, anybody -- perhaps even lower than morticians.
They`re going to attack the President. Try to bait him as much as they can
because they can`t come up with a specific program.

It`s too dangerous to do that. But if you can make it as we used to say in
sports a forced error by the president ...

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

CEASAR: ... that will serve a greater purpose.

SCHULTZ: Mitch Caesar, good to have you with us tonight from Florida. I
appreciate your time on the Ed Show. Let me bring in Washington Post
Columnist and MSNBC contributor, E.J Dionne.

E.J, you`re in the Beltway, is the President`s possible work permit plan
dangerous for him, what he have Democrats lining up saying, "Yes, go
Barack, go on this." I mean, this where we got to go. What about that?

E.J DIONNE, MSNBC contributor: Well, I think I checked around today and
what I heard is that that story is as somebody put it premature that they
are not there yet and the sense I got is that the story came out of --
primarily the frost for this story came out on folks on hill who`d like him
to do something like this. And that what he is the process of doing is
consulting with both the Department of Justice and the Department of
Homeland Security to figure out what can he do and what makes sense for him
to do.

It`s not clear to me at least that the President has legal authority just
to issue work permits where he does .

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

DIONNE: . have power that I think cannot be challenged by the Republicans
would not be grounds for impeachment, is about whom to deport and whom not
to deport, who to prosecute and who not to prosecute. There`s a lot of
leeway there for the executive. And I think that`s where they`re primarily
looking and I`m not sure that you`re going to see the President issuing a
ton of work permits on his own hook. And as I say, I`m not sure there is
the authority just to start doing that.

SCHULTZ: Well, if he did that, this of course would fuel the impeachment
talk. That`s just my commentary on this. They`re baiting the president,
no question about that. But here is -- when you think about all of a
sudden arbitrarily one man doing this, I think it gives us a snapshot of
how in the corner the President feels right now, and I don`t know
understand why. What has the President done wrong on immigration?

The president has deported more than the previous presidents. There`s no
question about that, which of course is following the law. And I know the
liberals are a little uptight about that but the fact is the laws are on
the books.

Well, if they`re on the books, you got to enforce them. The other thing
that has to be enforced is the law that was passed in 2008 signed by
President Bush, dealing with these underage kids that are coming in and now
being smuggled in, that they have to be processed. Well, the Congress says
to deal with that law.

So, E.J where has the president gone wrong on immigration reform? He can
only do so much.

DIONNE: Well, here`s what I think is going on politically. If you look at
the polls and look at where the president`s numbers have gone down in
recent months, they`ve come down to a significant degree among Latinos.
Why are Latinos upset?

Well, they know that it`s the Republicans` blocking immigration reform in
the House but they were also promised that things would change and they are
frustrated that Obama said, "Look, I`m going to do these deportations
because that`s the law, that will give Congress confidence that, you know,
that they can pass a bill and have confidence in me." Well, it hasn`t
worked out that way, and some of these deportations you`re busting up
families which is creating a lot of anger and, I think understandable anger
in the Latino community.

So, it`s not a question of where is the President wrong on the law, he`s
been enforcing the law. It`s what did people expect out of the government
in Washington. And the fact is that we know that Republican of
destruction, even if it`s done by them, ends up hurting the president
because voters often blame.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

DIONNE: . the president as the guy in charge of the whole thing even when
he can`t unilaterally ...

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

DIONNE: ... get bills through Congress.

SCHULTZ: You know, I think the President has gone down the road correctly
on executive orders. He`s done what he`s had to do to move the country
forward, but on this issue, it`s too big. I just think that there has to
be some real process to this legislatively or it`s going to be a big time
loser, especially for his party.

I don`t know how they`re going to endorse it. Now, they`re going to home
and say, "Do you think" -- they`re going to be asked the question, "Do you
think the president should be handing out work permits," leading the
conversation puts the Democrats on the corner in a bad spot, I think. E. J
Dionne stick around, we`ve got more to talk about.

Remember to answer tonight`s question, they`re at the bottom of the screen.
Share your thoughts with us on Twitter @edshow and on Facebook. Like us on
Facebook @edshow and of course at WeGotEd.

Coming up, more right wing hypocrisy as Governor Scott Walker sends jobs,
not Wisconsin`s heartland but overseas. But first, Republicans have a long
list -- a long, to-do list before heading on in vacation next week.

We`ll, let see, they`ve got to buy sunscreen, they got to pack the car,
they -- oh yeah, they`ve got to sue the president.

Trenders is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: What`s hot, what`s not. Time now for Trenders.

We want you to join the Ed Team. Join us on Twitter @edshow and at
WeGotEd. Like us on Facebook. Be a part of the team. You can get my
podcast, my radio podcast at wegoted.com, rawstory.com, ringoffireradio.com
and of course also free on iTunes. Available 24/7.

The Ed Show Social Media Nation has decided. We are reporting, here are
today`s top Trenders voted on by you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s a threat.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The number three trender, hot air.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Environmental Protection Agency plans to cut carbon
emissions by 30%.

REP. MIKE KELLY, (R) PENNSYLVANIA: Road agencies that have been so
emboldened now under this administration that they can deal and do
anything.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Would you say that President Obama`s war on coal is a
Americans` livelihood.

KELLY: You`d think it was kryptonite and he`s Superman.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Congressman Mike Kelly wants to protect big coal from
the EPA.

KELLY: You talk about terrorism. You can do it in a lot of different
things.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Where are you going with this?

KELLY: When you terrorize the people, the supplied. Everything in this
country needs to be great. My goodness, what have we become?

We are going stand up for coal and we`re going fight.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The number two trender, robocalls.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: During that dog days of summer, it can be hard
sometimes to get the fans on their seat.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Great turnout this year.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: South Korean baseball team that needs all the help
they can get is turning to technology.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A South Korean baseball team has robo fans leading
the cheers.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The Hanna Eagles have installed that they call
fanbots.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: From a - times out there (inaudible) it`s a pretty neat
idea.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The robots hold up digital signs encouraging fans to
cheer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (Inaudible).

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The team had no problem finding a place for them in
the past five years. The Eagles have actually suffered more than 400
losses.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Strike three. You`re out of there.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And today`s top trender, keep sue.

BOEHNER: The president`s job is to faithfully execute the laws. In my
view, the President has not faithfully executed the law.

OBAMA: They`re going to sue me for doing my job.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Republicans will push their presidential lawsuit
before leaving for August recess.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This resolution would offer us the speaker, on behalf
of the House to sue the President.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All the Republicans...

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ...got is suing the president and talking about
impeachment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is not about executive orders he wrote, this is
about future congresses and future presidents.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is not about the law. This is about politics.

SCHULTZ: I`m joined tonight again by MSNBC contributor and Washington Post
columnist, E.J Dionne.

E.J, John Boehner wrote this lawsuit is about future congresses and future
presidents. You know, if he would have worked with the President on a
number of issues and maybe even passed a few things, there might be a shred
of truth in that. But for him to make the case that this is about future
congresses and future presidents, what does he mean by that, your
interpretation.

DIONNE: Well, I think what he means is he wants to limit the authority of
future presidents so they don`t do the outrageous he seems to think
President Obama.

SCHULTZ: You know.

DIONNE: . is committing. I mean, there are a bunch of enemies here.

SCHULTZ: I mean, I can pull out. I can pull out hoards of tape of Dick
Cheney complaining about President Bush not having the executive authority
that he needs to run the country. I mean, it`s like we`re watching a movie
in reverse here. As Congressman Jim Clyburn -- go ahead.

DIONNE: Yeah. I mean, there are several things. One, the Republicans are
always complaining about junked lawsuits and always turning to trial orders
and here they are bringing a lawsuit to sell what is fundamentally a
political problem, which is why I think they`re going to have trouble
bringing it. And secondly, they are suing the president for postponing the
employer mandate in the Health Bill. They are against the employer mandate
in the Health Bill.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

DIONNE: The President put this off to make Obamacare work better, to have
a chance to make the important mandate work right, and they turn around and
say, "Well, we`re against this whole law, we`ll vote to repeal it 50 times
but you got to enforce this provision that we are against." And the third
thing is when you hear Boehner saying what he says about the law, what
really that leads to, the logic of that is not a lawsuit, it`s impeachment
but Boehner doesn`t want to say impeachment.

He came out today and said he`s against impeachment because he knows that
plays very badly with the voters. And to have all this impeachment talk
out there, why do Democrats raised so much money off it?

Well, because you seemed to have a pattern here. If a Democrat again is
elected to the White House, eventually the Republicans are going to start
talking about impeachment. And I think that ...

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

DIONNE: ... is really troublesome not just to Democrats but for a lot of -
- the road (ph) voters who say, "Just govern guys, please."

SCHULTZ: Well, you know sooner or later you have to believe what people
are saying. I mean, we can pull out of montage of Republicans not over
months but years of them talking about getting rid of President Obama to
impeach him.

Now, Congressman Jim Clyburn stepped to the floor today and I think he said
it in a very profound manner that he thinks the goal of this lawsuit is to,
you know, find a peg to hang in impeachment charge on the president. You
agree with that?

DIONNE: Yeah, no, I think that`s right. I think it`s got that goal but
for Boehner, it was an attempt to avoid impeachment and any kind of serious
move toward impeachment before the election because he knows perfectly
well, this doesn`t play well. Now, do I think in his heart to hearts John
Boehner wants impeach the President? I actually don`t think he does, but
he said he didn`t want to shut down the government either and he feels
under a lot of pressure from the part of the party that wanted to shut down
the government and would like to impeach President Obama.

So I do think there`s -- you can see a logic.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

DIONNE: . starting here and ending up with impeachment.

SCHULTZ: Well, I think the safe play for Boehner has been played out for
months on end. It`s easier for him to do nothing and just blame the
President. That way, he can turn to the Tea Party and say, "Well, he
didn`t damage us because we didn`t do anything, and I`m still kind of
listening to you but I`m really not sure if I`m one of you." There`s a lot
of appeasing going on by Boehner to try to keep his -- if Obama does
something, he`ll create a rift at this caucus.

Now, the House is planning to vote on the lawsuit on Thursday before
leaving for the recess. So, what is it mean when they go home to their
districts and they say, "Well, we sued the president." I don`t know where
-- how that plays well even in red districts. What are your thoughts on
that?

DIONNE: We -- If you look at the polling, it`s very clear. Republicans
like it, not surprisingly. But not only do Democrats hate it, but
independents are against it, moderates are against it. So, any Republican
congressman who is in anything like a contested district, who goes home
where somebody says, "Gee guys, the last thing you did was to do this
lawsuit against the president." I don`t think that helps them at all.

SCHULTZ: E.J Dionne, always great to have you with us my friend. Thanks
so much.

DIONNE: It`s good to be with you.

SCHULTZ: Michelle -- you bet. Michele Bachmann thinks there will be
profound consequences to gay marriage. Maybe she should keep her not so
profound thoughts to herself as society moves forward. Pretender is coming
up.

Plus, outsourced? Governor Scott Walker ignores the most important part of
job creation, not shipping them overseas. Rapid Response Panel weighs in.

But next, your questions coming up. Ask Ed Live on the Ed Show on MSNBC
right after this. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. I love your questions. I
appreciate your interaction with the program. Thanks for following us on
the Ed Team. Tonight in our Ask Ed Live question, our first question comes
from Perry. He wants to know, "Who would be the best democratic candidate
if the Republicans nominate Jeb Bush?

You know that`s a great question. It`s not just the last name, it`s where
he`s from. As I see it, California, New York, Texas, Florida, these are
the mega electoral states, but there`s only one of those states that`s a
swing state and that`s Florida. So I think you have ask yourself the
question, "OK, what Democrat would have the best chance of winning
Florida?" Because Bush would be tough to beat in Florida and I think it
would be at this point Hillary Clinton.

Our next question is from Eugene (ph). "Should Congress get paid an hourly
wage?"

You know, if they did maybe they do a little bit more work. In theory,
that sounds pretty good but in a real world, when Congress is working and
there are true statesmen who are going back and forth and doing the work of
the people, it`s a job that needs to pay well to draw people into public
service. I believe that. I don`t be grudged what we pay to Congress or
their benefits or the retirement or the healthcare, I don`t, because I`m
thinking about future generations. We want people to serve and we want
them to be able to make a living. I mean, and when they`re working it`s
very important obviously, but right now, since they`re not doing anything,
how about below minimum wage?

Stick around. Rapid Response follows next.

HAPTON PEARSON, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I`m Hapton Pearson with your CNBC
Market Wrap. Geopolitical worries weigh on stocks. The Dow falling 70
points, the S&P off 9, the Nasdaq down 2.

British Airs are up more than 20 percent after hours. The companies
earnings and revenue beat estimates, guidance also surpass analyst targets.
And Dow Component American Express is also out with results, profits came
in ahead of expectations while revenue was inline. Shares are down
slightly in late trading.

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

(COMMECIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed show. Thanks for watching tonight. New
developments this evening on Scott Walker`s failed promise to American
workers and workers of Wisconsin. The governor vow to crack down on
outsourcing jobs out of his state. Instead Walker crafted the Wisconsin
Economic Development Cooperation to boost Wisconsin jobs on one end but his
office has been doing just the opposite.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Both Eaton Corporation and Plexus Corporation receive
millions of dollars in financial awards from WEDC only to later lay off
workers. Their jobs were taken by employees at the company`s foreign
facilities.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHUTLZ: That anchor did say millions of dollars. Now the governor didn`t
take responsibility for the blow to the workforce. He pointed fingers.
Scott Walker accused his challenger to the governor seat of doing exactly
what his agency was guilty of.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mary Burke is trying to sell us on her experience at
her family business. But she forgot to mention that they make 99 percent
of their bikes overseas, in places like China, where her company has
outsourced jobs for years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHUTLZ: Tonight we`ve got more light to shed on Walker`s hypocrisy. Four
more companies outsource jobs after receiving millions in tax credits. Now
a Democratic state representative is calling for the oversight Walker
should have had in the first place right from the start. Walker says, he`s
all for it.

It`s too little to late for the governor as I see it, under his watch,
millions of dollars in Wisconsin taxpayer dollars have been flushed
overseas. Scott Walker doesn`t want to boost up the American worker or
Wisconsin workers. He just wants to create a facade and get reelected
because that`s really what it`s all about.

And the companies that have received these benefits from the Wisconsin
Economic Development Cooperation have been contributors to his campaign.

Joining me tonight in our Rapid Response Panel, Wisconsin State Senator
Chris Larson with us, also Ruth Conniff, editor-in-chief of the Progressive
Magazine. Great to have both of your with us.

Senator, you first, what kind of investigation is going to take place in
Wisconsin on this when you have the Republicans in power?

STATE SEN. CHRIST LARSON, (D) WISCONSIN: Yeah, there`s likely not to be
one. This is the chicken guarding the hen house.

When this agency was created, the WEDC, it was created under Walker, under
his supervision, with Republican senators and republican legislators
guiding it. And basically turning over control, over what had been a very
public part of government that invests money in businesses and turning into
a private -- public entity, which has limited disclosure, limited public
oversight and we actually has, not just Governor Walker as a member of the
board but the appointing authority who else runs the organization.

And through that, we`ve seen a lack of job creation. We`ve seen loss of
jobs within our state. We`ve seen loss of control of actually where the
money is going. And we`ve have seen delayed reports and delayed oversight.

And one thing you missed is, he`s actually proposing less disclosure from
WEDC and what companies are actually asking for money from the state. And
that`s -- I mean, it`s disturbing when $1.2 million from people who receive
money from WEDC are giving directly to the governors. It`s very disturbing
for the public.

SCHULTZ: OK. Now, I want to clarify, did you just say that the governor
is on this Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation? He is an attending
member and board member of this or chairman?

LARSON: Chairman of the board.

SCHULTZ: What is his role in this?

LARSON: Yeah.

SCHULTZ: He`s chairman of the board?

LARSON: Yeah.

SCHULTZ: OK.

LARSON: Yeah, yeah.

SCHULTZ: So it`s not as if this was going on and he didn`t know anything
about it, correct?

LARSON: Yeah, yeah. Governor Walker knows more about what`s happening at
WEDC than anybody else in the public. And what he is ...

SCHULTZ: OK.

LARSON: ... showing is even though he saying he wants to say, "Oh, we want
to cut this off," he`s cutting off disclosure. There is reports that have
been delayed because every time a report comes out, there`s a new scandal
associated with what`s happening at WEDC. And the least of -- the biggest
of which ...

SCHULTZ: OK.

LARSON: ... is that Wisconsin is last in the Midwest in job creation, dead
last in the Midwest. And that`s just frustrating for people.

SCHULTZ: Ruth, we`re learning about more and more of these companies. We
really don`t know how many companies have received these tax credits, do
we? And have outsourced these jobs. And another point I want to ask you
is that, do we know how many jobs have been outsourced through this
organization?

RUTH CONNIFF, THE PROGRESSIVE MAGAZINE: Well Ed, you know, as the Senator
points out, WEDC has been very reluctant to disclose a whole lot about this
and that`s because there`s been a series of scandals in the Wisconsin
newspapers. They gave away millions of dollars. There are about $12
million in loans they made and they just didn`t bother to collect on those
loans.

So $12 million in taxpayer money is just floating out there. Some of the
companies were never required to create jobs at all. One company got
$500,000, there was no job creation attached to it whatsoever. We learned
today about four more companies that have outsourced. There are probably
more.

We have more revelations on this coming out at the Progressive Magazine.
My colleague, Mary Bottari, has been uncovering new information, talking to
people within the state, has figured out that about 5,840 jobs is what
Walker, who promised to create 250,000 news jobs. 5840 jobs for these
millions of dollars is about what they created. At the same time, the
state lost about 13,600 jobs.

So in (ph) that loss really. And, you know, the outsourcing is amazing and
Walker is really brilliant, politically to try to accuse his opponent of
outsourcing, for being part of a company that has outsourced some jobs.
But really it`s a drop in the bucket compared to the Wisconsin ...

SCHULTZ: Well ...

CONNIFF: ... taxpayer money that our governor has paid the companies that
then lay off Wisconsinites and outsourced their jobs.

SCHULTZ: Well the out -- I mean, the global economy is here. There is no
question about that. But when you take tax dollars to create jobs in state
and then you don`t do it, the question is for the bicycle company and the
Burk family, did they take taxpayer dollars and go create jobs elsewhere?

CONNIFF: No.

SCHULTZ: Senator, isn`t that the issue?

CONNIFF: No, he didn`t.

LARSON: Yeah, I mean .

SCHULTZ: What about that, Ruth? What about that?

CONNIFF: They did not. They did not get one of these grants. You know,
that`s another area where the governor has tried to muddy the waters and
blame the prior, the Commerce Department because Mary Burk, who his
opponent also led the State Commerce Department. That department doesn`t
exist anymore. Walker himself replaced it with his private identity that
he leads and began handing out this money willy-nilly, 60 percent by the
way went to folks who contributed to his campaign.

So these are Walker campaign donors and donors of the Republican Governors
Association who receive these grants. And, you know, the money hasn`t been
tracked.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

CONNIFF: In fact, they created a new category of jobs impacted. They
can`t say jobs created, so they say well maybe if you impacted a job
somehow you should get this money.

SCHULTZ: Senator, what about the law? I mean, this is borderline
fraudulent. I mean, to take taxpayer dollars under the umbrella of
creating jobs and then that not happening and it clearly being done
overseas, I mean what is the legal arm of this as you see it?

LARSON: Yeah, I mean, the fun part of why Governor Walker did with
approval from legislative Republicans was that he would have total rule
over money going out. He appoints the person in charge of it, the other
people on the board or people who he directs. And they get to decide who
gets the money and for what projects. And like Ruth said, for a lot of
this money, millions of dollars going out, you don`t have to even create a
single job to be able to get the money. And that`s something that`s
frustrating.

What they`ve done even further to say, well, just impacting jobs is enough.
And that the end result is we are last in the Midwest and falling. And
it`s frustrating for the unemployed and people looking for work in our
state and they`re just sick of it.

SCHULTZ: State Senator Chris Larson, Ruth Conniff, we`ll look for your
great journalism in The Progressive magazine as you continue to follow the
story. I appreciate your time tonight. Thanks so much.

Coming up Tea Party or Joni Ernst misfires on state`s rights. We`ll tell
you about a pre-civil war notion now being resurrected by the grand old
party.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: And in Pretenders tonight, equality expert, Michele Bachmann.
During an appearance on a conservative radio show, the Republican
Congresswoman from Minnesota informed a presidential candidate, attacked
the Supreme Court`s decision to strike down the federal component of the
defensive marriage act. She called it a denial of equal protection for all
Americans.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN, (R) MINNESOTA: This is an effort to have government
coerce, force speech and behavior. And it`s being pushed and advocated by
the gay community. This is their ultimate goal, is to not allow for
diversity of opinion on this issue. I think also they want to abolish age
of consent laws, which means children -- we will do away with statutory
rape laws so that adults will be able to freely prey on little children
sexually. That`s the deviance that we`re seeing embraced in our culture
today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Accusing the gay community of deviancy, tyranny and child rape is
a far cry from Bachmann`s message last year of "Let`s love people." The
Minnesota congresswoman went all in to give her own timeline and historical
context to gay marriage.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BACHMANN: It wasn`t until the year 2000 that the world has embarked on
this radical experiment of marriage between other than man and woman. I
think that nature tells us by -- our biology tells us that marriage is
between man and woman. When we .

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And our Bible.

BACHMANN: That`s right. When we tamper over something that was generated
by the creator of the universe, I think there are profound consequences
that we haven`t yet realized.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: If Michelle Bachmann thinks marriage equality is a radical
experiment, she can keep on pretending.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Joni Ernst will take aim at wasteful spending and when
she sets her sights on Obamacare, Joni is going to unload.

Oh, and one more thing, Joni doesn`t mismatch.

JONI ERNST, IOWA SENATE CANDIDATE: Give me a shot. I`m Joni Ernst and I
approve this message.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. Iowa Senate candidate Joni Ernst
might want to rethink her tag line because it looks like she missed some
important U.S. history lessons.

In a 2013 video obtained by The Daily Beast, Ernst reveals herself to be a
tenther.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERNST: Why should we be passing laws that the states are considering
nullified. We have gone 200 plus years of federal legislators, going
against the Tenth Amendment in the states rights. We are way overstepping
bounce as federal legislators. So bottom line, no, we should not be
passing laws as federal legislatures, as senators or congressmen that the
state wouldn`t even consider nullified, bottom line.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Well, let`s do a quick recap, the Tenth Amendment reads this way.
The power is not delegated to the United States with the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states respectively or
to the people.

Ernst isn`t trying to protect the Constitution. She`s trying to rewrite
the doggone thing. Because of the Supreme Court, the final interpreter of
the federal constitutional law has explicitly rejected Joni Ernst`s
interpretation.

Pro-slavery advocate, John Calhoun tried using the same flawed argument
leading up in the civil war, it failed. Segregationists tried using the
same flawed argument in their opposition with the civil rights movement, it
failed.

In 1958, Cooper versus Aaron, a unanimous decision signed by every justice
on the court made it clear, states cannot just nullify federal laws or
Supreme Court decisions that they don`t like. Of course, it hasn`t stopped
the far right conservatives from trying.

Joining me tonight, Zerlina Maxwell of thegrio.com. Zerlina, good to have
you with us. Just how out of step is this?

ZERLINA MAXWELL, THEGIO.COM: Oh, it`s completely out of step. I think
that, you know, this is nothing new. There hasn`t been a lot of Tenth
Amendment extremism in the Obama era. As soon as Obama was elected to
office, you know, you had people come out in the extreme right and make
this argument, which really harkens back to a time when segregation was
legal or even before that when slavery was unfortunately legal in this
country.

SCHULTZ: So this is Iowa, despite the extremist`s views like this one,
Ernst and her democratic opponent, Congressman Bruce Braley, running for
Tom Harkin`s senate seat. They`re neck and neck in the polls. I mean,
what does that day about the state of Iowa, which Iowa -- which of courses
is so fiercely independent?

MAXWELL: Well, I think it might say something about Iowa, but I think what
it says even more so is that when you have someone who is endorsed by Sarah
Palin, who is then funded by the Koch brothers, you can have, you know, Ed,
arguments that are completely out of the mainstream and you can make it all
the way through the primary because that electorate is just as extreme.

And you know, you have Ted Cruz, you had Sharron Angle in 2010 and Joe
Miller harkening back to the midterm elections in 2010 that also made these
tenther arguments that are just wrong. They`re completely wrong and I
think voters are going to reject them because it`s completely out of the
mainstream.

Does she actually think that segregation is OK? Does she want to go back
to the Jim Crow era in this country when states were allowed to
discriminate against African-Americans? That`s a question that I think
voters in Iowa should ask her to see if she -- is she really that far
outside of the mainstream?

SCHULTZ: Well, you know, you get the tenther argument has been used to
justify some pretty ugly historical positions. So I - it mystifies me why
conservatives revive this, you know, to oppose federal regulations or
Obamacare for that matter.

MAXWELL: Right. And also to, you know, social security. She wants to
privatize social security. Get rid of all abortions and most forms of
birth control that American women use. And so I think that Iowa voters -
Iowans really need to take a long hard look at her and say we reject it, we
won`t allow Sarah Palin and the Koch brothers to dictate who we are going
to elect as our senator, especially when they have positions that are
completely out of step with where most Americans are and that includes
Iowans. You know, she wants to abolish the minimum wage as well. Said
that Iowans only, you know, should make $7.25 and that`s appropriate. I
think that voters in Iowa certainly -- once they hear more about her
positions, will vote against her.

SCHULTZ: Zerlina Maxwell of thegrio.com, good to have you on the Ed Show.
I appreciate your time tonight.

That`s the Ed Show, I`m Ed Schultz. Politics Nation with Reverend Al
Sharpton starts right now. Good evening Rev.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
BE UPDATED.
END

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.>