Skip navigation

The Ed Show for Monday,November 17th, 2014

Read the transcript to the Monday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

THE ED SHOW
November 17, 2014


Guest: Jamal Anderson, Rand Getlin, Corey Hebert, Bernie Sanders, Sheldon
Whitehouse, Jane Kleeb, Zerlina Maxwell

ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Americans and welcome to the Ed Show
live from New York.

Let`s get to work.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is about to get real right now for the NFL with
DEA.

STEVE SILVERMAN, LAWYER REPRESENTING PLAYERS: Our players were shut up
like cattle.

JEREMY NEWBERRY, FRM. NFL PLAYER, SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS: I am taking two or
three Vicodin before the game.

SILVERMAN: They were brought to market.

NEWBERRY: This is a NFL culture.

SILVERMAN: And discarded like pieces of meat.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is about to get real.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That was three teams rated by federal agent.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The DEA hasn`t ever done anything like this before.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Teams are (inaudible) are being investigated.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They searched players and medical staff for
prescription drugs.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Part of the old Wild West culture that went on NLF.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Now, there`s has bit controversy.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The NFL`s image has taken some hit.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You would think that the NFL would clean its act.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Good to have you with us tonight folks thanks for watching.

Sometimes in life we witness things that we just are never going to forget.
I will never forget this night, August 12th 1978. I was a young aspiring
quarterback on the sidelines with the Oakland Raiders when Jack Tatum hit
wide receiver Darryl Stingley of the of the New England Patriot and this
hit paralyzed Stingley. And at that moment I realize just how fast it
could end and how fragile life can be in the National Football League.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In a Saturday pre-session game in August of 1978,
Stingley was hit by Oakland Raiders defense back Jack Tatum. He was almost
totally paralyzed.

DARRYL STINGLEY, FRM. NFL PLAYER, NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS: When the injury
first occurred, I -- actually I`ve never got a chance to hear what the
doctor are saying because I was too busy fighting for my life. And as a
result of the accident I was able to actually sit and spend more time and
develop a relationship, you know, for my family and of friend.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Hits like that take place every week in the NFL. Getting players
back on the field is the mission of every team. Some teams may have gone
too far. The NFL was back under the microscope, this time the attention
coming from the Justice Department.

Four teams were surprised on Sunday when authorities launched an
investigation in a possible illegal drug -- use of drugs.

The San Francisco 49s were inspected by federal agents after their game
against the giants in New Jersey. Seattle Seahawks were inspected
following their game against the Chief in Kansas City. And DEA agents met
with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers at the Baltimore-Washington Internal Airport
following their game.

And it`s not clear if a full inspection took place with the Buccaneers.
The Cincinnati Bengals were also inspected by agents following their game
in New Orleans.

The NFL released a statement on Sunday saying, "Our teams cooperated with
the DEA today and we have no information to indicate that irregularities
were found". According to the Washington Post the DEA is looking into
allegation that NFL teams dispense drugs illegally to keep players on the
field in violation of the Controlled Substance Act.

The DEA is also looking into, "Possible distribution of drugs without
prescriptions or labels and dispensing of drugs by trainers rather than
physicians".

Now depending on the outcome of the investigation civil fines or criminal
persecution is possible. A DEA spokesperson told the Washington mostly
investigation was triggered by a class action lawsuit filed by more than
1,300 former NFL players in May.

The lawsuit allergist, "The NFL has illegally and unethically substituted
pain medications for proper health care to keep the NFL`s tsunami of
dollars flowing".

Here is a report on the lawsuit from the Associated Press.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The lawsuit names eight players as playing tips
including 1985 super bowl champion and Chicago Bear`s quarterback Jim
McMahon.

SILVERMAN: The players are shut up like cattle, there brought to market,
I.E. the games and they`re discarded like pieces of meat.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Steve Silverman is a lawyer representing more than 500
players that have signed on the suit spanning at least four decades in
professional football. He says in many cases the players were sent on to
the field unaware of how serious their injuries were.

SILVERMAN: The NLF is putting profits before player`s health.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Silverman sights Keith Van Horne is an example. The
former offensive lineman for the Chicago Bears broke his leg during play.

SILVERMAN: Instead of being told by the doctors that it was broken, you
know, he was simply given anti-inflammatories and painkillers and pushed
out there for the rest of the session.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Former San Francisco 49s center Jeremy Newberry is also listed in
the lawsuit. The lawsuit alleges Newberry suffers from kidney failure and
high blood pressure due to overuse of painkillers. Here is what he told
CBS News back in May.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NEWBERRY: Some games I`m taking two or three Vicodin before the game, two
or three Vicodin at half time, taking a shot of Torodol before the game.
Then I`m getting both shoulders, hands shot before the game. This is same
story everywhere. This is a NFL culture, not just a team by team thing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: The NFL has asked the court to throw up the lawsuit. The league
claims they are not responsible for medical care. This isn`t the first
time the NFL has come under fire for issues involving drugs. In May of
2010, San Diego Chargers safety Kevin Ellis on was arrested for having 100
Vicodin pills without a prescription. The incident prompted DEA agents to
inspect the Chargers` office.

In 2010, DEA looking into the allegations of the New Orleans Saints,
covered up a "stealing Vicodin from a medicine cabinet." Speaking about
the current investigation, the President of NFL Physician`s Society said
today, "The NFL team doctors strive to comply with all regulations in
prescribing and dispensing drugs to our patients, the players".

No matter the outcome of this investigation. It is no doubt another
problem for the NFL during and already tough session. But keep in mind, a
player wants to stay in the league as long as he possibly can. He`ll go
along to get along. That`s the fear of it all. If you don`t play it`s
hard to stay on roster. On the other hand it`s all driven by big money and
nobody wants to win more than NFL owners.

Get your cellphones out. I want to know what you think tonight. Tonight`s
question, "Do you think NFL owners are hiding a massive drug problem?"

Text A for yes, text B for no to 67622, leave a comment at our blog at
ed.msnbc.com. We`ll bring you the results later on in the show.

I want to bring in former NLF running back who played his time with the
Atlanta Falcons Jamal Anderson. Mr. Anderson, good to have you with us
tonight.

JAMAL ANDERSON, FRM. FALCONS RUNNING BACK: Pleasure Ed. How you doing?

SCHULTZ: Very good sir. Thank you. I just want to clarify for our
audience. Are you part, are you one of the 1,300 players involve in this
lawsuit?

ANDERSON: I am not one of the 1,300 players involved in this lawsuit.

SCHULTZ: And obviously you were aware that this was taking place?

ANDERSON: Absolutely aware of it and I`ve spoken about it a few times. So
I`m familiar with the -- what`s going on right now.

SCHULTZ: There some pretty strong accusation here that the NFL only cares
about profit not players. From your experience in the league, where do you
stand on that?

ANDERSON: Ed, you know, it`s interesting in your opening you made some
great points about playing football and how things were in the past. And
in fact the one statement you`ve said about the players wanted to be on the
football field. There`s no question on my mind several years ago that the
culture in the NFL was one of -- the doctors who hired by the teams
individually.

Whether or not those doctors were there for best interest of the players or
the make sure the players stayed on a football field. But the flipside of
that Ed, as well as, the popular saying among -- plenty of players and in
the fact in NFL, you cannot make the club in the tub. Meaning, if you`re
always an injured player the chances of you having any longevity in NFL are
going to be greatly minimized if you are constantly injured.

So it`s that, you know, there was -- there`s certainly was a different
culture, you know, if you where on a good team that had -- that hired good
doctors who -- and the doctors were the type of people who cared about the
player`s interest, you`re probably not involve in this. But there are
plenty of doctors out there whose mantra, I`m certain was keeping out guys
on the field particularly the big start, because if your big star are
missing you`re not going to win games and people aren`t going to come those
games.

SCHULTZ: So the culture of this that your speaking of is that there is an
in ordinary amount of pressure by the players to sustain their career, to
do whatever it takes with the mindset that, "Hey, I can mindset that, hey I
can get healthy on the off session". What about that?

ANDERSON: Well, you know, and the thing Ed. I think is, what really needs
to take place is you hope as an NFL player that doctors or the team doctors
on the staff when you`re -- when you have an injury, you hope that, number
one they`re looking at your -- what`s going to happen with your life moving
forward? What`s the type of injury, what the severity of the injury...

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

ANDERSON: What happens if you continue to try to play on this injury as
oppose to, "Hey, let`s just throw him out on the field and wear him out and
pump him up out with some pills."

But again, it`s that same situation, you know, you don`t want to be one of
those people who are always injured because clearly, you know...

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

ANDERSON: ... it`s about guys being healthy and being on the football
field.

SCHULTZ: Jamal, do you think that there are players that don`t know what`s
happening to him. That they`re just doing it trusting the doctor and
whoever administering their medical care that their just going to go ahead
and do it because they want to be in the game and they want to make money?

ANDERSON: Well, the fact is you`re dealing with doctors. And again I want
to be very clear. I think the culture in the NFL, in the way that they
operate now. And you look when it comes to concoctions they are outside
doctors who know (ph) football field. I would be shocked if in this day
and age and with teams in the NFL the way it is now that if this was still
actually occurring.

But years ago when I got on the league, I mean I heard plenty of stories
about different doctors whose mantra was just keep him on the football
field.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

ANDERSON: Keep on him on the football field till we get another guy. And
that`s a difficult part because again, you can`t be one of those people
who`re constantly injured. But you hope Ed as, you know, and there`s
people know who are watching. You hope that your doctor...

SCHULTZ: Sure.

ANDERSON: ... your physicians are going to give you the best advice
necessary to have a long and healthy life if possible.

SCHULTZ: And finally Jamal. Do you think the league has a problem with
this?

ANDERSON: There`s no question that there was definitely a problem before.
There`s no question in my mind it was impart of it is going to be what the
doctor were doing. And if the doctors were doing what they thought was
best for the players.

SCHULTZ: Sure.

ANDERSON: And part of that is going to be guys who want to be on the
football field, guys who try to do their best to try to maintain their
check and maintain their health and be out there. So, it`s got to be one
of those situations -- it`s going to be very interesting to see what there
resolution is and how this whole outcome comes out...

SCHULTZ: All right.

ANDERSON: ... because there are certainly players who are culpable of
trying to do whatever they can to be on the football field as well.

SCHULTZ: All right, former NFL running back Jamal Anderson with us tonight
here on the Ed Show. I appreciate your time so much.

For more...

ANDERSON: Thank you Ed.

SCHULTZ: ... you bet. Let me bring in Rand Getlin of Yahoo Sports, NFL
Insider and also Dr. Corey Hebert Professor at LSU Health Science Center,
great to have both of you with us. Rand you first, is there an
undercurrent of conversation in the league that this is widespread?

RAND GETLIN, YAHOO SPORTS: You know it`s been known for a very long time
that there is a drug culture insofar as players as Jamal and you were just
discussing. Have to figure out a way to stay on the field. In such a
brutal sport, you have to have painkillers and things of that nature in
order to be able to play at a high level. So has there been chatter about
it behind the scenes that this is prevalent and has been for many years?
Absolutely, it`s 100 percent given.

SCHULTZ: So, the authorities are saying the reason why they`re doing this
is because of this lawsuit that has been filed by over a thousand NFL
players. Why has it taken a lawsuit for the law to be upheld or this to be
investigated if it`s so widespread amongst the players Rand?

GETLIN: It`s a great question and we always have to ask that question.
What is the impetuous something occurring now? In this case if the lawsuit
is in fact the thing has spurred this inquiry. One would have to question
why it took that to get to this point. I`m not sure, but once players
starts speaking up in mask and saying, look these are the realities behind
the scenes and Newberry was speaking of that very effectively in the clip
that played earlier.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

GETLIN: It`s very difficult for the DEA and other regulatory bodies to
simply ignore what`s going on. And in fact there are some elements of
truth to everything to everybody is saying. But as Jamal aptly pointed
out, perhaps things have change in the last few years. But there is no
question that at point in the past the NFL and specific teams have had an
issue with drugs and the dispense...

SCHULTZ: Sure. Dr. Hebert. This is a doctor`s worse nightmare isn`t it?

COREY HEBERT, LSU HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER: Yes, it is.

SCHULTZ: And to be investigated is not professionally easy thing to go
through.

HEBERT: No.

SCHULTZ: What do you make at the story as a physician?

HEBERT: Well, I mean we have to know that. You know, doctors by and large
do what they`re supposed to do. But -- and one bad apple will in fact
spoil this bunch. And the reason why is because this is driven by an
economic machine. We said it over and over. People are trying to stay on
the field. So you have the doctors trying to keep the people on the
field...

SCHULTZ: Sure.

HEBERT: ... who plays on the field. And you also have the players wanting
to stay on the field and asking for these types of medications and wanting
pay big money so they get this medication.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

HEBERT: The problem is we have athletic trainers that are dispensing the
medication. We have doctors that are using medicines off-label. And then
we have medicines that are very addictive that can cause a lot of side
effects, a lot of problems long-term. So do I think this is a prevalent
problem? Yes, I do.

And I think until we do something about it in the way that was done last --
yesterday as a matter of fact. Then it will continue to be a major
problem.

SCHULTZ: And, you know, doctors are fans, team doctors want their team to
win.

HEBERT: Sure.

SCHULTZ: They get hung-up in this whole thing. They get hang-up, "Oh I`ll
get out there, I`ll see what we can do to make things right."

HEBERT: Sure.

SCHULTZ: How do you map this up doctor? What do you -- what you`re
anticipation, if you`re physician for an NFL team what your expectation?

HEBERT: Well, what you must do is first do no harm. that is the oath we
take. And you have to remember that. When you`re talking about shooting
somebody up with Torodol, giving somebody steroids to decrease the
inflammation, those things are make brittle bone and so that means they`ll
have fractures later on life.

When you add -- and MS Contin, and Percocet, and Percodan, those things
cause serious addiction problems. So when you`re not playing anymore and
you can`t get the medicines, you can actually die from the withdrawals.
So, the first thing that doctors must do is examine who is or she is and
just they first do no harm.

SCHULTZ: Rand, how can the owners not know? I mean some owners are really
close to what`s going on, on the field and the locker room. The guy down
in Dallas, there`s not whole lot of things shaking around the Cowboys that
he doesn`t know about. What about that?

Not to indict the Cowboys in anyway. But I think the point -- the point
here is, that there are some owners who are very, very involved in their
team and you view what I just about Jerry Jones has complement. He loves
his product, loves the Cowboys. But, you know, how cannot the owners not
know?

GETLIN: It`s a perfect point Ed. There are 32 teams, 32 different
cultures, 32 different levels of involvement in terms of ownership, et
cetera. You know, how can the owners not know, by and large I think owners
are disconnected from the day to day in terms of dispensing of medication,
et cetera.

But, as you mentioned, I am quite sure that there are some owners that are
far more aware of what`s going on that locker room than others.

Ultimately I think it`s a question of, what is our purpose here with this
sport to the extent that players know what they`re getting themselves into.
There is some informed consent there, they have assumed the risk. I think
as a human being, at least an individual stand point, I`m OK with some of
the risk that they assumed so long as they are informed of exactly that was
their assuming.

I think the question with the concussion lawsuit and things like this is,
how much did they know in terms of what the long-term impact would be?

SCHULTZ: Sure. Rand Getlin and Dr. Corey Hebert, great to have both of
you gentlemen with us tonight, thanks so much.

GETLIN: Thank you.

SCHULTZ: Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the
screen. Share you thoughts with us on Twitter@edshow and on Facebook.
Always want to know what you think.

Coming up, the Obamacare success story the right-wing doesn`t want to hear.

Plus new detail of the Keystone XL project.

Ed Show coming right back, stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Time now for Trenders, social Media. This is where you can join
up with the Ed Team, facebook.com/edshow, twitter.com/edshow and
ed.msnbc.com. We do a podcast everyday. It`s free on iTunes 24/7.
They`re all archived and you can get it wegoted.com, rawstory.com and
ringoffireradio.com.

Ed Show social media nation has decided and we`re -- now wait a minute, no
you decide it, that`s right. We`re the ones that are reporting.

Here`s today`s top Trenders voted on by you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTFIED MALE: Whoa, whoa, whoa, (ph) no, no, don`t touch the desk.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The number three trender, vice.

BILL O`REILLY, FOX NEWS POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Napolitano claims it`s
unconstitutional and impeachable. Do you see anybody going down that road
in the house?

REP. TREY GOWDY, (R) SOUTH CAROLINA: Have you met Joe Biden?

JOE BIDEN, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: That`s a bunch of malarkey.

GOWDY: Nobody is discussing impeachment except pundits and commentators.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The GOP`s view of the bait (ph) keeps impeachment
talk down.

O`REILLY: Do you see it as a bait that you`re not going to take?

GOWDY: I`m not going to take it because I`ve met Joe Biden.

BIDEN: Let`s get real here...

O`REILLY: Explain the Joe Biden reference.

GOWDY: He would be the new president.

BIDEN: Are you joking? Is this a joke?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The number two trender, whiskey business.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I would enjoy having some
Kentucky Bourbon with Mitch McConnell.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you drink this, you`re going to have one less shot.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: McConnell says the Bourbon summit is a go.

OBAMA: I don`t know what his preferred drink is.

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL, (R-KY) MINORITY LEADER: The best way to drink it, in
my opinion, is to take a Manhattan.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: An SNL gives us a taste of the event.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mrs. Hillary Clinton, you`ve won an all-expense pay
trip to...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... getting whooped in 2016.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I can`t dance like you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (Inaudible). So I guess there`s nothing getting done
in the next two years?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not a damn thing.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And today`s top trender, vital signs.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Obamacare is one of the hottest issues on Capitol
Hill.

OBAMA: Over the past year more than 10 million Americans have gained
financial security and peace of mind that comes with health insurance.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The uninsured rate has dropped by 25 percent. The
average premium has gone down for 2015.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Healthcare.gov gets over 100,000 applications in the
first weekend of 2015 open enrollment.

OBAMA: We`ve spent the last year improving and upgrading healthcare.gov.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The government promises this year there are more
options and it won`t take as long to enroll.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In January the new Republican majority in Congress
takes office, promising to dismember the law.

OBAMA: If you haven`t signed up for insurance yet, this is your chance.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Joining me tonight here in studio New York, Senator Bernie
Sanders of Vermont. Senator good to have you with us tonight.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS, (I) VERMONT: Good to be here.

SCHULTZ: These numbers, over the weekend, what does that tell you, the
number of people that singed up round two?

SANDERS: It tells us that you have a program that is working well, that
they have overcome the problems that they initially have. It tells me that
about 75 percent of the people who are on the exchanges think that the
health care that they`re getting is good. And I think this is making our
Republican colleagues very nervous.

SCHULTZ: What could they repeal as you see it?

SANDERS: Nothing, because Obama will veto it and we will sustain that
veto.

SCHULTZ: OK, now a recent poll as you mentioned just a moment ago, Gallup
Polls says that 7 in 10 people who purchased insurance through the
government exchanges this year rate their coverage as excellent or good.
But the overall approval rating for the Affordable Care Act sits at 37
percent, where`s the disconnect?

SANDERS: Well it is -- not everybody is in the Affordable Care Act and
people who have maintained their old policies are hearing negative things
about it over and over again and I think they`re responding to that
negativity.

SCHULTZ: Do you think the media coverage has a lot to do with it?

SANDERS: Absolutely, but I think what we should understand Ed, is
Republicans want to destroy the Affordable Care Act, which is by the way a
modest proposal. If you recall developed by Republican think tanks,
implemented a message here since by Romney. They want to destroy it not
because of what it is but because it is the federal government doing
something to protects ordinary people and that is not what they like.

These are the same guys who want to end Medicare as we know it, convert it
into a voucher program. Make massive cuts in Medicaid in other federal
health care programs. Ultimately at the end of the day what they want is
all Americans to go into the private sector exclusively for their health
care and if you don`t have any money and you can`t afford it, tough luck.

SCHULTZ: So you think that they`re so ideologically driven that there`s no
statistic out there that would make them step back and say, "You know,
maybe this isn`t so bad after all."

SANDERS: No, you have something like social security which his enormously
popular. You`ll recall what Bush tried to do to Social Security. These
guys do not believe the federal government should play a significant role
in protecting the lives of ordinary people. And it`s not even just health
care programs it is environmental protection programs. That is the right-
wing ideology.

Meanwhile, we remain the only major country on earth that does not
guarantee health care. All people as a right, we end up spending almost
twice as much per person as health care as do the people of any other
nation.

SCHULTZ: So, why do they want to continually harp on the fact that they
want to repeal it, it`s all ideology? Or do you think they have a better
planned out route?

SANDERS: Better plan, you tell me the better plan. What have you heard
about their better plan? They have no better plan, they have no plan.
They have no better plan for social security.

What these guys want to do is to tell the American people, "Hey you think
government could do something for you? It can`t, only the private sector
can do things for you and you didn`t have to come out and vote because
government is irrelevant to your lives." That`s what this whole thing is
about ideologically.

SCHULTZ: What`s your reaction to the profits that have been sustained by
the major insurance companies since the Affordable Care Act? WellPoint at
37 percent was the highest one, but most of them are between 18 and 37
percent return on investment. I mean it doesn`t seem like it`s changed the
insurance industry too much.

SANDERS: It hasn`t, we are - not only are we the only country on earth
that doesn`t guarantee health care to all people, we are the only major
country on earth that allows private insurance company to make huge profits
off of health care. Look at the end of the day, I voted for the ACA, I
support it, but I believe we`ve got to do what other countries are doing.

Guarantee health care to all people, move toward a Medicare for all single
payer program. Get the private insurance out of the health care business.

SCHULTZ: How do you read what the Supreme Court is about to pick up that
the federal subsidies are a problem, that low-income people would not be
able to constitutionally take subsidies, what about that and how do you
think they`ll rule it?

SANDERS: I don`t know how they`ll rule it, but, you know, they`re already
caused massive problems by giving Republican governors the ability to opt
out of the Medicaid expansion program. Look, Obama was talking about 9 or
10 million more people now having health insurance. That`s a step forward.
There would be a lot more people if the Republican governors did what we
wanted them to do and what we expected would happen, expanding Medicaid.

SCHULTZ: And Senator, your thoughts on the right-wing that says that,
"Well, you know, millions of people have lost their policies too." The
Affordable Care Act, correct me if I`m wrong has standards that the
industry must meet. In another words, for a lack of a better term, junk
insurance, junk insurance might not be to me what it is to you or vice
versa. But the fact is we have industry standards now.

SANDERS: Right.

SCHULTZ: That`s really the framework of the law isn`t it?

SANDERS: Yes, the mistake that Obama made is saying, "Look if you want to
keep it, you can keep it." The truth is, what the ACA did is get rid of
these junk policies which meant that people thought they had some coverage
until they got sick and they understood that it had sky high out of pocket
expenses, deductibles and copayments. So there -- there were minimal
standard set and those policies were done away with. So, yes people lost
their junk, health insurance policies.

SCHULTZ: Senator Bernie Sanders, good to have you with us tonight. Thank
you so much, I appreciate it.

Coming up, a dire warning about the Keystone XL pipeline vote. Plus the
Governor of Missouri declares a state of emergency ahead of Ferguson Grand
jury decision, new details ahead.

Ed Show continues, your question coming up at Ask Ed Live right back here
on MSNBC.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show, appreciate the questions. We have
time for only one tonight because we`re tight on time.

Our first question comes from Tom. "What would you get speaker John
Boehner for his birthday?" I guess the honorable speaker is 65-years-old
today. What would I get him? Let`s see, a cart and a camel, a filtered
Crown Royal and a bus ticket back to Cincinnati because he`s not doing
anything in Washington. Stick around Rapid Response Panel is next.

MARY THOMPSON, CNBC MARKET WRAP: I`m Mary Thompson with your CNBC market
wrap.

A mixed day for stock, the DOW climbs 13 points, the S&P rises 1 to finish
at another record, it`s 42nd of the year. The NASDAQ though, fall 17.

Oil field services giant Halliburton is buying Baker Hughes for about $35
billion. The deal unites the second and third biggest firms in that
industry.

And Actavis is buying Botox-maker Allergan for $66 billion. The deal would
end a seven-month quest by Dalian Pharmaceuticals to buy the company.

That`s it from CNBC first in business worldwide.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. The Senate is expected to vote on
the Keystone XL Pipeline tomorrow. There are new developments tonight
surrounding the Keystone issue. Harold Hamm, one of the largest oil
producers says the Senate is wasting it`s time.

Hamm told political over the weekend, "That thing needed action on it six
years ago, I just think it`s too late and we need to move on." The CEO of
Suncor, Canada`s biggest oil producer in September said, "An individual
project like Keystone XL is not critical to our plans to get our products
to market." And a spokesman for giant independent oil refiner Valero said,
it has "Found other methods" to ensure its gulf coast refineries can get
Canadian heavy crude.

Russ Girling who is the CEO of TransCanada is confident the pipeline will
be built and get the 60 vote.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUSS GIRLING, CEO TRANSCANADA CORPORATION: Since we started the project,
you know, the demand for it has just continued to increase. Production in
the U.S. is up by about two million barrels a day. And in Canada it`s up
by about a million barrels a day. The need for transportation continues to
grow and the place for these producers who want to put those barrels is
into the Gulf Coast of the United States.

So, our shippers have not wavered one bit, over the last six years they
still want this to happen and as long as they`re there we`re going to
continue to push to make it happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: There will probably be 60 votes because some Democrats believe it
will help save Mary Landrieu and her Senate runoff. Senator John Thune,
Republican of South Dakota reacted to the upcoming vote.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN THUNE, (R) SOUTH DAKOTA: This is a cynical attempt to save a
Senate seat in Louisiana. If the Democrats were serious about this we
would have voted on this years ago. This is an issue, a no-brainer in the
eyes of the American public which finally, finally is coming to the floor
of the United States Senate, not because they`re worried about American
jobs but because they`re worried about the job of a Senator from Louisiana.

SCHULTZ: Well Senator some residents from your state of South Dakota don`t
see it that way. The Native Americans are astonishingly against the
proposed pipeline, they say tribal elders have not been consulted and House
Vote violates the 1851 of the 1868 Fort Laramie treaties. The president of
South Dakota`s Rosebud Sioux Tribe called the House Vote an act of war.
Here`s what President Cyril Scott and Chairman Bryan Brewer of the Ogalala
Sioux Tribe told me back in April.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CYRIL SCOTT, PRES., ROSEBUD SIOUX TRIBE: We are willing to die over the
act of (inaudible), our way of life (inaudible) and the water.

BRYAN BREWER, PRES., OGALALA SIOUX TRIBE: Our people are so passionate,
our people are ready to die. What people had come up said, we want to be
on the front-line. We are willing to give our life to stop this because
they know what it`s going to do to the people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: War is never the answer but it is deeply personal for members of
the Sioux Tribe. The oil producers are saying, "They don`t need it."
There is no reason for Republicans in Congress to be pushing for it. If
Keystone XL is built, the United States will take all the risk and get none
of the reward and, oh by the way, what about carbon emissions? Why put
that back on the market?

Joining me tonight, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island. Also with
us this evening Jane Kleeb, Executive Director of Bold Nebraska.

Senator, you first, what`s your reaction to some of the most wealthy and
most productive people in the oil industry now saying that Keystone is not
necessary?

SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, (D) RHODE ISLAND: Well that`s kind of been their
line all along, that`s part of what the State Department said, they`ll just
find another way to get it to market so there won`t really be any
environmental harm. We think that that`s badly mistaken. The Canadian
Energy Research Institute says that the break-even price for the tar sands
is $85 on the oil market and we`re at $75.

It cost about $15 per ton to roll the stuff out on rail. So, I think
there`s a real environmental difference than stopping Keystone, and I think
it`s important to push on that and it`s important for the White House to
have our back and back us up with a veto if -- either now or in January we
can`t hold the line in the Senate.

SCHULTZ: And do you think that`s where the President is leaning right now?

WHITEHOUSE: We`re informed that that`s where he`s leaning but we certainly
don`t have a hard assurance of that.

SCHULTZ: Well Senator, so 60 votes. It sounds like the 60 votes are going
to be there because of election politics and also some conservative
Democrats who come from oil producing states. So, the President vetoes it
but then the Republicans come back on just about every bill with an
amendment, where does it end there?

WHITEHOUSE: Well I think at some point this is going to result in some
conversations between the new Republican leadership and the White House and
they`ll sort out their political modus operandi and will start going
forward. But I think it`s very important for the President to be firm
right at the get go and not start this relationship by getting rolled.

SCHULTZ: Jane with all of these happening in the Senate and the
possibility of a veto, this all hinges on a Supreme Court ruling in
Nebraska. No one can move that, correct?

JANE KLEEB, BOLD NEBRASKA: The President. There`s no way that the
President could approve the pipeline.

South Dakota doesn`t have a construction permit and the Nebraska Supreme
Court still has not weight in. And, if it goes to the Public Service
Commission, meaning, if the land owners win, they`ve already want them to
lower court. So if they continue to win, the PSC could change their route
which would then, need whole other State Department Environmental Review.

The way the President can stop this and the way that the President can
continue to stand up with farmers and ranchers and native communities is to
reject the Keystone XL tomorrow. He does not have to wait for the Supreme
Court for that. There`s no reason to continue the dialogue. We know that
it`s bad for climate and we know that as part for water. And so that`s our
message with the PAN campaign that we have going on right now with the
President.

SCHULTZ: Senator, what about the Native American tribes that are saying
that this violate several treaties that they have with the United States?

WHITEHOUSE: Well, these tribes go back with that land for many, many
generations and they take their tradition of environmental stewardship
very, very seriously. And when you put them up against the big oil
companies that want to rip all the ground up and what this filthy tar sands
steel into our air. My but is -- you go with the people who care about the
land.

SCHULTZ: You know, what`s interesting in this most recent election, in
Nebraska Lee Terry, a Congressman, a Republican from Nebraska lost. It
didn`t get much attention nationally. Jane, did this issue have something
to do with that?

KLEEB: There`s no question. There were a lot of contributing factors of
why Lee Terry lost. Immigration was another one. There`s a growing Latino
community in Omaha. But folks in Omaha are progressive and they`re
moderate Republicans. And, the moderate Republicans know the reality of
this pipeline.

If you live in Nebraska you know exactly what President Obama said last
weekend. This is a pipeline cutting through our land and water in order to
get tar sands to the export market. The only people who want this are the
tar sands producers in the Alberta government which makes a lot of money on
the royalties of tar sands.

And so, we continue to stand up with the President and we`re asking
Americans all over the country to send a veto pen and a rejection pen to
the President which they can buy on boldnebraska.org.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

KLEEB: And it has a simple message Ed, and it says, "These machine stops
pipelines", and that`s what we`re looking for the President to do.

SCHULTZ: And finally Senator isn`t the best argument or your thoughts,
there was an oil spill in Tioga, North Dakota a year ago. Millions of
galloons of oil and its still not cleaned up. What happens if that happens
over the aquifer in the middle of the country?

WHITEHOUSE: Well, the Ogallala Aquifer is one of our great national
treasures and it supports the economies and the agricultural markets of a
great number of states. There are probably hundreds of thousands of
farmers, tens anyway who depend on that resource and to play around with it
with the pipeline of this magnitude is taking a very big chance.

And, we don`t need to take that chance and we`re certainly adding that in
to a known climate harm of the equivalent of nearly 6 million additional
cars on the road just from the dirty fuel that would come through this
pipeline. So we got a known harm and a very big risk of harm...

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

WHITEHOUSE: ... and it really doesn`t make sense to just keep the oil
industry pacified.

SCHULTZ: Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Jane Kleeb, great to have both of you
with us tonight. I appreciate your time so much.

Coming up, the National Guard is on alert in the State of Missouri ahead of
the Ferguson Grand jury decision.

We`ll have breaking details ahead. Stay with us. We`ll be right back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The struggle goes on. And it`s not only Ferguson.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. An estimated 1,400 people have been
killed since ISIS took over parts of Syria and Iraq in June. The death
toll includes the beheadings of non-combatants

Peter Kassig is the latest fatality in the hands of ISIS bringing the total
of three Americans beheaded.

Kassig was a former Army Ranger who returned at the Middle East as an aid
worker.

NBCs Richard Engle has the latest.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RICHARD ENGLE, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: At a vigil in Indianapolis.
Friends, supporters and Peter Kassig`s parents remembered the young man who
decided to dedicate his life to helping others but paid for it with his
own. President Obama called his murder by ISIS, an act of pure evil.

The 26-year-old former Army Ranger who served in Iraq traveled to Syria
last year to volunteer as a medic. ISIS militants stopped him at a
checkpoint and kidnapped him.

Kassig has said to have endured torture in captivity along with the mental
trauma of watching some of his European cellmates released reportedly after
their governments paid ransoms. French Journalist Nicholas Henin shared
food and a blanket with Kassig, who converted to Islam and changed his name
to Abdul Rahman.

NICHOLAS HENIN, FMR. ISIS HOSTAGE: He wanted to help the people involved
in the humanitarian drama that is taking place in Syria. And he thought
maybe it was naive, but he thought that he could help.

ENGLE: Kassig also watched his American and British cellmates taken out
one by one to be murdered. He knew his time would come.

Last month, his father read a passage from a letter Kassig wrote to him.

ED KASSIG, PETER KASSIG`S FATHER: Don`t worry, dad. If I go down, I won`t
go down thinking anything but what I know to be true, that you and mom love
me more than the moon and the stars.

ENGLE: Described as humble and generous, Kassig tried to help victims of a
war, and ended up becoming one of them.

Unlike previous execution videos this one did not include a specific treat
to murder another Western hostage. But ISIS is still holding other Western
hostages.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: NBC`s Richard Engle reporting. NBC News is not showing any
images from the video out of respect for the family.

Coming up, tensions are high in Ferguson, Missouri as we await a grand jury
decision in the Michael Brown shooting. Keep it here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. Governor Jay Nixon has declared a
state of emergency in the State of Missouri.

Nixon signed an executive order today activating that National Guard to
mitigate possible unrest.

New recordings have emerged from the day of Michael Brown shooting. Video
shows Officer Darren Wilson leaving police headquarters two hours after
shooting Brown.

Wilson left with other officers in his union lawyer to be examined in a
hospital. Audio obtained by the Saint Louis Dispatch indicates the
encounter leading to Brown shooting lasted less than 90 seconds.

The Saint Louis grand jury has been meeting since august 28th to decide
whether to indict Officer Wilson for shooting the 18-year-old unarmed
teenager.

Now Ferguson is gearing up for unrest. The Ku Klux Klan has distributed
flier threatening "legal force" against protesters.

The Area School District announced their plan to transport students home
ahead of the announcement about Officer Wilson.

Police Chief Thomas Jackson said if the grand jury does not indict Wilson,
he can return to active duty. Wilson would be subjected to an standard
internal review from the police department before being reinstated.

If the grand jury does return in an indictment for felony, Chief Jackson
says Officer Wilson will most likely be fired.

Officer Wilson has been on paid administrative leave since the shooting.
Community demonstrations have remained consistent since then.

Sunday`s peaceful demonstration marked the 100th day of protest.

Joining me tonight, MSNBC Nation Reporter, Trymaine Lee and also Political
Analyst Contributor to theGrio.com, Zerlina Maxwell.

Trymaine, what is the sense on the ground about these new recordings that
have been released by the Saint Louis Dispatch? What light does that shed
and how does that add to the emotion of the situation? What are you
hearing?

TRYMAINE LEE, MSNBC NATIONAL REPORTER: Well, the newly released audio and
video kind of give us a glimpse into those moments before the fatal
shooting of Michael Brown about to Darren Wilson.

It really does little, one way or the other to folks on the ground. While
the temperature outside remain really frigid, frustrations and emotions are
really running high.

People are convinced almost to a thought that if the grand jury decided not
to indict Officer Wilson there will be problems in the street, perhaps a
return to those fiery old days of August. And people are quite, frankly as
tired if they are, as frustrated if they are. Many of them are quite
frankly scared of what may come.

SCHULTZ: Trymaine, what is the reaction of the community to what the Ku
Klux Klan are saying?

LEE: Well folks have been saying for a long time, if you follow what the
Southern Poverty Law Center has done and a bunch of other folks who follow
these groups. Missouri has long been a hot bet for this kind of activity.

And so, it`s still -- while some folks are, you know, again fearful -- a
little fearful of what the possibilities are if the Klan is involved.
Others say that it`s just a few loud mouths who are just taking this as an
opportunity to get a little attention.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

LEE: And so, whether it`s real or not, who knows but it`s still another
indication of this kind of racially froth of violent we`re in right now.

SCHULTZ: Zerlina, what does the releasing of this videotape of officer
Wilson just hours after the shooting mean anything?

ZERLINA MAXWELL, THEGRIO.COM CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think, you know,
obviously, when you`re looking at this tape and also the family`s attorney,
Mike Brown`s family has noted that you don`t necessarily see some of the
injuries that were early reported and those reports actually were debunked
that he had a broken eye socket and a number of very serious injuries.

You don`t necessarily see that obviously if this can be more enhanced. But
I think, you know, the bottom line here is that there is a righteous and
justifiable level of outrage that has been there in Ferguson and in the
Saint Louis area, since this happened because an unarmed kid was killed.
And that`s really what this is about.

And there is such a long history of this. You know, we`re in a state of
emergency in terms of black lives, and whether or not we as a people, as an
American people think that they matter, and whether or not that an unarmed
person who is killed by a police officer can actually get justice in
today`s America.

SCHULTZ: If you were on the grand jury would you want to see this
videotape of the officer just hours after the shooting?

MAXWELL: Yes absolutely. And I think in terms of this grand jury, one of
the things I think that is important for the public to understand is that
this is -- so many things in this private grand jury and the secret grand
jury based on the little that we know is an unprecedented. The fact that
Darren Wilson was able to come in and, you know, basically make his case
and make his defense.

That`s unprecedented. That is highly unusual. And so I think that, you
know, if it comes down to no indictment, I don`t necessarily think that
there will be violent riots but I do think that there is a justifiable
level of outrage that we will see in the form of non-violent protests.

And hopefully maybe at cultural shift so that black lives matter to --
going forward.

SCHULTZ: Trymaine, has there been somewhat of a militaristic buildup by
law enforcement down there? And what is the reaction of people of what
Governor Nixon has done, called out the state of emergency and called in
the National Guard?

LEE: We haven`t seen any buildup as of yet. There just have been some
reports that Department of Homeland Security vehicles have kind of been
massing by the federal building.

I happened to see a few guards -- I mean, just yesterday but we haven`t
seen that big kind of buildup of amassing of troops.

Now, Nixon said the last week in a press conference that he would be
redeploying the National Guard if necessary. The first time when we heard
back in the early days of this unrest, we heard about the National Guard
coming and there was concern that the National Guard would be policing the
protester, you know, activated for some sort of crowd control.

Instead, they kind of guard the command center, there were in a shopping
center. And so I`m getting that that`s the plan this time as well that
they`ll be guarding command centers, firehouses and other kind of
specialized targeted areas as opposed to kind of interacting and enforcing
any kind of law with the protesters. So...

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

LEE: ... yeah.

SCHULTZ: And finally Zerlina, there was only a 90-second encounter between
the shooter and the victim. People may draw conclusions. There were a lot
of decisions made in that short period of time that the victim would have
really had to do something disastrous...

MAXWELL: Right.

SCHULTZ: ... to have ended in this. What are your thoughts on that?

MAXWELL: Well I think the thing that I think about the most is that shot
at the top of the head, when we`re thinking about the autopsy. Because,
when you`re talking about someone who is unarmed and you`re talking about a
police officer who`s shooting someone in the top of the head and -- like
you have said in just a 90-second span, that is very, very unsettling.

So I think that`s what I`m thinking about. It`s no good.

SCHULTZ: Zerlina Maxwell, Trymaine Lee, great to have both of you with us
tonight and of course MSNBC will stay on this story.

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

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.







  MORE FROM THE ED SHOW  
  
The Ed Show Section Front
 
Add The Ed Show headlines to your news reader:
 

Sponsored links

Resource guide