Skip navigation

PoliticsNation, Tuesday, November 18th, 2014

Read the transcript from the Tuesday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

POLITICS NATION
November 18, 2014

Guest: Ryan Grim; Michelle Cottle; Emanuel Cleaver, Tara Dowdell, Erika
Andiola, Jose Patino, Chuck Nice


REVEREND AL SHARPTON, MSNBC ANCHOR: Good evening, Ed. And thanks to you
for tuning in.

We start with breaking news. Right now, the Senate is voting on the
Keystone XL oil pipeline, a project that stirred up huge divisions and an
issue at the center of political and environmental fights for years. Sixty
votes are needed to bring this to the president`s desk. The fight is over
a plan to bring oil from Alberta, Canada down to the gulf of Mexico.

Tonight`s vote hinges on getting approval to building the last portion of
it from Canada to still city of Nebraska. If built, oil would flow through
about 2,000 miles of Canada and the United States. Supporters, mostly
Republican say it is all about job creation and oil independence from the
Middle East. Opponents say it could be devastating to the environment.

The process to get the oil procedures around and to produce even more
greenhouse gases than regular drilling contributing to climate change.
They also say we could see more spills like this one in Arkansas last year.
And even if the Senate approves tonight`s vote, it is not clear if
President Obama would sign it.

It is a high drama on Capitol Hill. The vote is happening right now. Will
it pass? And what will the president do?

Joining me now are Michelle Cottle and Ryan Grim. Thank you for being
here.

MICHELLE COTTLE, WASHINGTON REPORTER, THE DAILY BEAST, NEWSWEEK: Thanks,
Rev.

RYAN GRIM, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, HUFFINGTON POST/MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR:
Thanks for having me.

SHARPTON: Ryan, supporters of the pipeline needs 60 votes to overcome a
filibuster. How close is this vote going to be?

GRIM: Well, here is a prediction that could be wrong immediately. It`s
going to be extremely close but Mary Landrieu said today that she is quote
"very comfortable" that she has at least 60 and maybe even more. And
people have gone broke betting against Mary Landrieu on the Senate floor.
She is a tremendous politician and tactician, whatever you want to say
about here. And if she thinks that she is going to be able to get to 60 or
slightly above then I think that they will get to it. There are a lot of
people who do seem concerned that she will stop short -- Landrieu`s
supporters, that she will stop short just at 59. If I had to put a bet on
it, though, I think she gets the 60 today.

SHARPTON: Now, Michelle, here are the key differences on Keystone.
Supporters say it would create 42,000 jobs while opponents say only 50
would be permanent. Supporters also say the pipeline won`t have much of an
impact on the environment while opponents say it will mean more greenhouse
gases and possibly spills. And while supporters say the pipeline would
mean cheaper gas opponents say that`s not the case and it may even raise
prices. I mean, how big is the divide on this?

COTTLE: It is enormous. And at this point both sides tend to exaggerate
their arguments because it has become a symbol. I think -- you know, the
state department has had to do a review of this. And just taking one of
the arguments they decided and kind of discovered that it would not have
the devastating environmental greenhouse effect because is in fact because
if it is going to happen anyway.

We are talking about the pipeline here, not the actual, you know,
extraction of the oil. So there is a lot of exaggeration because it is a
great rallying point for both teams. The Republicans can say the president
doesn`t care about jobs or the economy. And it is a great thing for
environmentalists to be able to point to a specific problem that they say
that shows Republicans don`t care about the environment.

SHARPTON: Now Ryan, President Obama said he doesn`t want to make a
decision while there is still disagreements over the route of the pipeline.
Here is what he said on Friday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My position hasn`t changed.
That this is a process that is supposed to be followed. Right now, you
have a case pending in Nebraska where the pipeline would run through in
which a state court judge has questioned the plan. And until we know what
the route is it is hard to finish that evaluation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: I mean, Ryan, does anyone know what the president wants to do?
Does anyone know?

GRIM: It`s a virtual certainty that he will veto this for a few reasons.
One is that he just came back from China where he struck a climate change
accord. And it would just look awful politically if he comes back and even
if it is symbolic gesture as even you want to concede that, just to make
that symbolic move against climate change advocates right after he struck
the deal kind of unravels a lot of agreement with China.

And at the same time, he wants to continue to have this as a bargaining
chip with Republicans. So, if Republicans bring it -- if he signed it
right now he would be giving it away for nothing because it is just one
bill at this point. So maybe he wants a payroll tax cut. Maybe, you know,
who knows what the president thinks he can get out of Republicans for
agreeing to this in January, February or March, whenever they bring it back
to him again. And for sure, we are going to see this again.

SHARPTON: So, interesting. Give me the politics of that, Michelle. You
heard what Ryan said. He is suggesting -- I want your response to that --
that the president will veto. He just made a climate deal in China and it
gives him a bargaining chip to negotiate including some of these newcomers
to the Senate later on. I mean, what is the politics of that and the
strategy on that, if you agree?

COTTLE: I think Ryan is pretty dead on on this one. He has been trying to
kick this can down the road for as long as he can. He has got the ruling
that he can use as an excuse this time to veto it. Not that he wants to
sign it, but it is a good reason to kick this once more until he gets the
new Congress in and then he can extract some concessions.

I mean, I think there has been a certain segment of advocates who have
wanted him to use this as a bargaining chip for a while now. And it seems
like at this point that is going to be the way to go.

SHARPTON: You know, today`s vote was really pushed by Louisiana senator
Mary Landrieu who is in a tight, tight runoff race in Louisiana next month.
In the primary, she only beat her Republican opponent by a point.

So Ryan, will this help her? And if so how much?

GRIM: You know, it`s hard to see how this helps her a ton other than if
she gets a win then it gets covered in the press as a win and people like
winners. So the policy itself, though, doesn`t directly benefit Louisiana.
This is Canadian oil that is being shipped through the United States into
Texas and then being exported.

So, you know, it`s not obvious that anybody in Louisiana directly benefits
from this. But like I said, you know, people do like to rally behind a
winner. If they see in the news that Mary Landrieu won something in
Washington that say, well, let`s send her back and keep winning.

On the other hand, her opponent, Cassidy, has been offered a seat on the
energy committee. If he wins and because of the role the turnout plays in
the runoff like this, I haven`t met anybody that thinks Landrieu has a good
shot.

The only reason anybody is at all optimistic on her side is that she has
pulled out so many close races in the past. But the numbers are strongly
against her.

SHARPTON: Give me -- when you talk, Michelle, let me revisit something you
said. When you talk about a bargaining chip with the president, what kind
of things would he bargain for? What could he use this chip for assuming
the scenario is as you and Ryan suggest he vetoes it and uses it as a
bargaining chip later, for what? What could he get out of this?

COTTLE: I`m not going to try to second guess what he is going to do.

SHARPTON: I got to try.

COTTLE: But this is a big symbol for both sides. And so, if he plays his
cards right he can take this and try to get concessions on other budget
deals or other things that Republicans would never want to give an inch on
otherwise. Because this, as you note, has been a huge rallying point for
years now. And you know, we have had both sides making grand claims and
saying they will never ever concede anything. So, you know, depends on
kind of what the issues are at the moment that he really wants to deal
with.

SHARPTON: You know, Ryan, most presidents in their second term after a
midterm that their party didn`t do well have the fight for relevance. Is
there any doubt that this president is the center of American politics and
Washington politics right now?

GRIM: No doubt at all. And part of that is a function, I think, of how
our system is evolving. And you know, Republicans kind of deserve a lot of
responsibility for that in the sense that, you know, six years ago, they
kind of made the conscious decision that we are going to oppose everything
that the president does so that it doesn`t appear bipartisan. We can
polarize things and we can eventually take over. And it worked for them.
In January they will take full control of Congress.

But they have broken Congress in the process. Power efforts of vacuum. So
the power has flowed out of Congress and into the executive and into the
judiciary. The president is the beneficiary of that strategy and it kind
of paradox the way. So, the last two years, you know, he is going to be
able to use that power, you know, in ways that other presidents haven`t,
you know, that -- you know, on issues like climate change, immigration,
neutrality and even war, foreign policy. He could make sweeping NSA
reforms if he wanted to. All of the major issues that we talk about other
than taxing and spending at this point he has a lot of flexibility from the
White House.

SHARPTON: All right, Michelle Cottle and Ryan Grim, thank you both for
your time. We`ll stay on tonight`s breaking news from Washington.
Senators voting on the keystone pipeline. Sixty votes needed to pass it.
Live reaction from the White House ahead.

Also, Speaker Boehner is back with that bogus lawsuit against the
president. We`ll tell you about that and some new impeachment talk from
the right.

And the human side of the immigration debate. We`ll hear from two young
dreamers whose lives could be changed by the president`s executive action.

All that plus dirty tricks from dot-com startup and why is Charles Manson
being allowed to marry? It is ahead on conversation nation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SHARPTON: Developing news tonight out of Israel where Israelis are reeling
after a deadly terror attack at a synagogue in Jerusalem. Early this
morning, Israeli police have confirmed a fifth person, an Israeli policeman
has died. Four rabbis are also dead, three of them were American citizens.
At least six more people were injured. Two alleged Palestinian suspects
were killed in a shootout with police according to authorities. They were
armed with gun, knives and axes.

Our social media community has been expressing condolences all day.

Judith wrote another sad day for any person wanting peace in the world.

Tom said so sad for their families. What a gutless act.

I agree, Tom.

Johnny posted praying for peace.

I am, too.

Share your thoughts with us on facebook page or on twitter @politicsnation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SHARPTON: Today, the Republican plan to sue President Obama over the
health care law is back on the political docket. This suit has been an
embarrassment for the GOP ever since Speaker Boehner announced it back in
June. At first he couldn`t even explain what the suit was about. Then two
straight law firms backed out of the case. Now Speaker Boehner has
lawyered up again. He is eyeing a new lawyer to handle the case amid
reports he will expand the lawsuit to include the president`s action on
immigration. Although a few minor questions remain.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: Speaker Boehner, now that you`ve hired
another lawyer to handle this lawsuit against the president when do you
expect to go forward? What is the next step?

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Soon.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: They don`t know when and they don`t know exactly what. All
Republican know is they are going to do something extreme in response to
the president`s immigration plan.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think the outrage will be so great that it will
support a number of events that will support our efforts to defund the
executive order amnesty and not giving the money to execute it. I think it
will support lawsuits and more it face support other acts, as well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: Defund, file a lawsuit, maybe even impeach. The GOP answer to
immigration crisis, more political games.

Joining me now Democratic congressman Emanuel Cleaver from Missouri. Thank
you for being here, Congressman.

REP. EMANUEL CLEAVER (D), MISSOURI: Good to be with you, Reverend.

SHARPTON: Is Speaker Boehner really still going ahead with this lawsuit
that everybody knows is just a political stunt?

CLEAVER: Well, I think the speaker has to go to his base with this kind of
foolishness. But I don`t think the lawsuit is going to go anywhere. We
are doing a favor for the speaker and the Republican conference because
when the president does his executive order, he will take off the table the
most controversial component of the immigration reform legislation and that
is dealing with amnesty. So, they ought to take the blessing and wait for
the benediction and go home.

SHARPTON: I concur. But let me bring you back to the beginning of this
because when Speaker Boehner first announced the lawsuit in June, he hadn`t
even decided what he wanted to sue over. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: Speaker Boehner, what specific executive
action are you planning to challenge in court?

BOEHNER: When I make that decision I will let you know.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: And then later he said he was going to target the health care
law and then he added in immigration. We still don`t know when it is
happening.

Congressman, is this lawsuit just a show for the base as you suggest?

CLEAVER: That`s all it is. He wants the base to say these guys are going
to continue to punch Barack Obama. And it doesn`t matter that he is not
going to file the suit. He can just continue to talk about it. And
executive orders have been done since George Washington. If you wanted to
look at somebody who may have overdone it, FDR did over 3,000.

So I think it is a mistake for Mr. Boehner and the conference to start
talking about filing suits and even impeachment.

SHARPTON: Today, "Politico" reports that the GOP is scrambling for an
immigration plan. Quote "House and Senate Republican leaders have been
finally discussing the potential of introducing targeted immigration reform
bills in the coming months. The discussions were secret until now."

So after years and years of delay they got a super secret immigration plan
in the works. I mean, do believe this, Congressman?

CLEAVER: No. I don`t think they will be able to get it out of the
Republican conference. Because there are a lot of people in there who are
going to resist any attempt at immigration reform. The president made a
pledge to the Latino community in this country. And I think he is going to
keep that pledge to do some kind of executive order after the November
election. So I think it is on its way.

SHARPTON: Congressman, we just got news that 41 votes in the Senate voted
no against keystone which means it fails that Senator Landrieu cannot get
the 60 votes. There are 41 no votes. What does that mean with the vote
against keystone? What does that mean and what does it mean for Senator
Landrieu?

CLEAVER: I really think we have overplayed this keystone pipeline as a way
of victory in the Senate. There are people who could have voted either way
in this last election as a Democrat and would have still lost. I think
that we still have a chance down in Louisiana. I don`t think anybody will
hold the keystone vote against Senator Landrieu. She stood up, said her
part, but she lost. And I don`t think that`s a reason to vote against her.
But I don`t think if it had passed it would have made her reelection any
easier.

SHARPTON: All right, Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, thank you so much for
your time tonight.

CLEAVER: Good to be with you, Rev.

SHARPTON: Again, we are watching that breaking news from the Senate. The
keystone pipeline has failed to get the 60 votes needed for passage. A
dramatic show down tonight in Washington. No one was sure if the votes
were there or not, but the pipeline has failed to pass.

We will get live reaction from the White House. It has failed for now to
pass the Senate. Go to the White House next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SHARPTON: We`re back with breaking news from Washington. The Senate had
voted to block approval of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline. The
final vote was 59-41 but 60 votes were needed to overcome the filibuster.
But the issue is by no means over as Republicans are sure to re-introduce
the issue after they take control of the Senate in January.

Joining me now is Chris Jansing, NBC senior White House correspondent.

Thank you for being here, Chris.

CHRIS JANSING, NBC SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Rev.

SHARPTON: What is the White House saying about this vote?

JANSING: Well, look. They are not shocked by it. Everybody knew this was
going to be a close vote. So now, this gives them time to plot strategy.
The question was would the president follow through and veto. He doesn`t
have to make that decision now.

But when you also look ahead to the makeup of the Congress even though,
obviously, Republicans gained seat in both the House and the Senate, they
are not veto proof majorities. And so, is there the possibility -- and
this is the tantalizing prospect, at least from some people`s perspective
that has been raised, could there be some sort of deal.

As you saw rightly pointed out, this is something that the Republicans want
very badly. They want this XL pipeline to go through. If they bring it up
for another vote and it goes to the president`s desk, could there be some
sort of negotiation that would involves some of the policies that are high
on the president`s priority list.

Whatever the decision is, the president doesn`t have to make the veto
decision now even though throughout the last couple of weeks and certainly
today as we heard in the White House briefing, every indication was that if
he had to he would veto it. That decision now gets put off until next year
-- Rev.

SHARPTON: So right now, Chris, there is no reason for the president to
show his hand even though we have indication he may have vetoes. We are
not certain. But we are certain that it will be introduced and this could
be a bargaining chip or some negotiation, for what we don`t know. But when
the new Senate is seated which has more Republican seats, but even then is
not filibuster proof.

JANSING: Yes. You are absolutely right. And that`s why when we have
talked to members of the administration over the last couple of days,
again, including today there was never an outright statement the president
will absolutely veto this if it comes to his desk. They were hedging their
bets. Again, they knew this would be a close vote. And they have time now
where they can plan.

We know what some of the president`s priorities are. Many of them are
things that the Republicans might be able to stomach. Now, we should also
say that compromise is not a word that has had weight here over the last
couple of years. The White House does believe, however, at least they want
to believe that there is the possibility that with a Republican Senate and
the pressure on them, that they can`t say that blaming things on the
democratic house that they have to govern that there is the possibility to
get policies through here. And again, XL pipeline might be one way to do
it.

SHARPTON: All right, Chris Jansing, thank you for your time tonight.

JANSING: Thank you.

SHARPTON: We`ll be right back with the human face of the immigration
fight. That`s next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SHARPTON: We are back with more on the immigration debate, a conversation
that should be about people, not politics. President Obama made this clear
this summer that serious immigration reform could help millions of people
all across the country.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRES. BARACK OBAMA (D), UNITED STATES: Maybe more families who have been
living here for years whose children are often U.S. citizens, for our
neighbors and our friends and whose children are our kids` friends and go
to school with them and play on ball teams with them, maybe those families
would get to stay together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: A recent documentary "The Dream is Now" shows the struggles of
some of the young people in those families like Erika Andiola who shares
the heartbreaking story of how her mother was arrested by immigration
officials and how she fought to bring her back home.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIKA ANDIOLA, DRM ACTION COALITION: I`m talking to you right now because
my mother was taken away by immigration.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Erica posted her story and sent it to everyone she knew.
Her mother was on a bus headed for Mexico. At 8:00 a.m., Erica held a
press conference appealing to the nation for help.

ANDIOLA: Stop pretending that nothing is wrong and we are just living
normal lives because we are not. This could happen to any of us.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Within hours 18,000 people signed her petition and
thousands called immigration headquarters demanding her mother`s release.

ANDIOLA: And then I got a call from my mom.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: At 12:00 noon the bus returned.

ANDIOLA: The community stopped, the country realized and they stopped the
bus.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: Jose Patino`s story is in the film, too. He is a college
graduate who couldn`t find work because of his undocumented status.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Jose was a top math scholar and dreamt of being a
mechanical engineer, he was awarded a full scholarship to Arizona State
University.

JOSE PATINO, IMMIGRATION ACTIVIST: I have my diploma over here.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: When Jose graduated in 2011 there was a shortage of
mechanical engineers in the state. But he could not apply for the jobs his
other classmates were seeking because he was undocumented.

PATINO: Now I`m working. When you think about it you realize, I have my
degree, I have all of this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: Joining me now are Erika Andiola and Jose Patino. Thank you
both for being here this evening.

ANDIOLA: Thank you for having us.

SHARPTON: Erika, the President has said he may use executive order to make
immigration reform happen. I know it`s been a long wait. But are you
hopeful it will finally happen now?

ANDIOLA: I am. I think that it has been a long battle and been a
struggle. We have seen many promises right, about from the president. And
I think after elections, the President realized that it was, you know, it
was a failed strategy of delaying immigration. And now that, you know,
there is really not a lot to lose for him. But instead of really gaining.
One being able to help so many people in this country like my own family
and two, you know, being able to gather as Latinos and getting them back to
vote in 2016.

SHARPTON: You know your mother was sent back to Mexico. Give people a
sense of what`s at stake in immigration in this fight. What`s at stake
with families? Far away from the talk in Washington.

ANDIOLA: You know, I was so fortunate to be able to I actually stop, we
were able to stop her deportation before she was leaving for Mexico on the
bus. And she is here with me but unfortunately she was given one year
stay. Basically, every year, we will going to have to be renewing, you
know, I guess they can anytime decide to deport her. And so, I think for
me this fight has been very personal, it has been very hard. But at the
same time my mom has been that inspiration. And, you know, I don`t know if
she`s going to be included in this package of reforms on policy. But I am
ready to keep fighting for her and I`m ready to continue fighting for the
rest of the community that has been going through what she went through.

SHARPTON: Jose, as we saw in the documentary you struggled to find a job
in your field. You are now a teacher with teach for America. How
important is this immigration reform to you?

PATINO: It`s everything. It changed my life. I`m working in -- being a
teacher. It changed the lives of many parents and families. If it happens
to be together and stop the separation. So, it`s huge. It`s my life.
It`s my number one thing. I do it for my mom, she did everything for me.
So, it is everything to me.

SHARPTON: Jose, what`s amazing is that you now have this job but you can`t
get a driver`s license in Arizona because of your status. It just seems
illogical, doesn`t it?

PATINO: Yes. Well, the politics of the state with the government run, the
republican-run legislature and our Governor Jan Brewer. So, it is very
weird. Because we have -- I am able to be a teacher and teach but I`m not
eligible to have a driver`s license.

SHARPTON: Wow! Erika, you are a true activist. I mean, I know you stood
up to one of the most vocal immigration critics, Congressman Steve King. I
want you to watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDIOLA: For you to be fighting so much against DREAMers --

REP. STEVE KING (R), IOWA: This is not what I do. This is not what I do.

ANDIOLA: Calling us names saying that we have calves like cantaloupes.

KING: I don`t call you names. I say no, no, that drug smugglers.

ANDIOLA: I just don`t understand.

KING: Please, please, you are very good-stop a minute. You`re very good
at English, you know, what I`m saying --

ANDIOLA: I was raised in the United States.

KING: As I said, I spoke of drug smugglers. Now, you`re not here to tell
me you`re one of them, are you?

ANDIOLA: Do I look like a drug smuggler to you?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: Does it make you nervous to directly challenge lawmakers who
think you shouldn`t even be in this country?

ANDIOLA: No. I think we have gotten to the point that not anymore. I
feel like we have been able to really make a case for the American people
that, you know, I think the majority of Americans really want some sort of
path, you know, for legalization for immigrants. And people like Steve
King who really want to take this issue and make it, you know, very, very
controversial for himself. I am not afraid anymore to go and really ask
him to really rip up my card. If he really believe that we shouldn`t have
-- if he thinks I shouldn`t be in this country, then why not take the card
and rip it apart and call immigration on me. He didn`t do it because he
knows that is not what should happen. And he`s going to continue to use
the issue for his own political reasons and we`re going to continue as
dreamers and documents folks to continue to confront those people and
especially protect what the President does if he does it.

SHARPTON: You know, I want to ask both of you, it has been a long time
coming. But give us some sense of the feelings in the community about the
possibility of reform.

PATINO: For me it is a lot of excitement and a lot of joy but also
anticipation just because we don`t know what is going to be in it. That I
hear and then I read at the news is parents of citizens are going to
qualify but parents of Dreamers are not. And that will be mom, that will
be my dad and people that I know of. So, it`s weird. I`m excited but at
the same time it`s -- I don`t know if it`s going to cover my parents.

ANDIOLA: Yes. And same here. My mom has to return to us in December.
She has an appointment. And anything can happen. They can keep her there,
they can deport her, they can detain her or they can let her go again. And
I think to me like my mom doesn`t have any U.S. citizen children. It`s
just us. We are all Dreamers or undocumented and my siblings. So, I`m
just really worried that, you know, if the rumors are true and parents of
Dreamers are not included or other folks who don`t have U.S. citizen
children then I`m going to have to again keep fighting for my mom year by
year and continue living the fear of her getting deported and separated.

SHARPTON: Yes. Jose, you know if the President signs it, it won`t be
over. There will still be a big fight, a lot of opposition. What are
your plans personally if he does sign it? How will that effect you and
your plan?

PATINO: For me I`m basically going to help my mom and the people I know
apply for it as much as I can. It`s a large I`m teaching at, very
dominantly Hispanic community and a lot of my students are undocumented and
their parents are undocumented. So it will help my community. And then
despite, keeps going on as you said, that is not permanent. It`s
temporary. So we have to win a legislative battle beginning with
immigration reform in order for us to stay here permanently.

SHARPTON: Erika, what would be your plans? You are the activist?

ANDIOLA: We have to defend what we get and we got to keep pushing for
more. We`re going to continue, like I said, right, whatever, or any number
of individuals who are not included in this, we are going to have to
continue stopping their deportations one by one if we have to. We`re going
to have to continue defending what we get and republicans are going to have
to realize that if they really want to get something for the Latino
community in 2016 they are either going to have to, you know, put out a
legislation after the President announces or they can say good bye to
Latinos in 2016.

SHARPTON: Let me ask you this, Jose. What do you say to viewers that are
watching that are not sure about where they are at on this issue on
immigration reform or even executive action? What couldn`t you say to them
that may make them understand what you feel?

PATINO: It`s not an issue. It`s your family. It`s the person who raised
you. The person who gives you birth. The person -- she took care of you.
The person that taught you everything that you are today. So, it is about
family. And I think that is what people don`t see. It`s not a number,
undocumented person. It is my mom. It is someone I go to Thanksgiving and
share Christmas with her. It is your parents. Imagine if you`re there and
you couldn`t have your parents with you, what would you do?

SHARPTON: What you say Erika to somebody watching that`s really undecided
where they are on this immigration reform issue?

ANDIOLA: I would say that we have proven as Dreamers that deferred action
has not, you know, she world hasn`t ended after deferred action was
announced in 2012. And Dreamers were able to give a lot to this country
and we have been able to give a lot to this country. And they can expect
that our parents and our siblings and those folks who are going to be
helped this time around are going to do the same. And we`re going to prove
that and I think eventually the American people are going to see that we
are their neighbors. We are, you know, folks who live right next to them
and will going to continue to be in this country and try to help our
community as much as we can.

SHARPTON: Erika Andiola and Jose Patino, thank you both for your time this
evening and for sharing your stories.

ANDIOLA: Thank you, Reverend.

SHARPTON: We hope to have you back on the show very soon.

PATINO: Thank you, Reverend.

ANDIOLA: Thank you.

SHARPTON: We`ll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SHARPTON: It`s time now for "Conversation Nation." Joining me tonight,
comedian Chuck Nice and democratic strategist Tara Dowdell. Thank you both
for being here.

CHUCK NICE, COMEDIAN: It was a pleasure.

TARA DOWDELL, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Thank you.

SHARPTON: I want to start with a controversy at one of the hottest tech
companies. Emil Michael, an executive for the ride sharing service Uber is
under fire for suggesting the company, quote, "Digged up dirt on
journalists. BuzzFeed broke the story when an editor heard Michael
suggested spending a million dollars to higher four top opposition
researches, and four journalists to help Uber fight back against the press.
They looked into your private lives, your families. Give the media a taste
of its own medicine. Michael apologized for saying he regretted making the
comments.

Chuck, are you taking Uber back home tonight?

NICE: No, I`m a subway guy myself.

(LAUGHTER)

That`s because when I`m on there you may recognize me, I`m the guy that
goes, excuse me ladies and gentlemen of the subway, I mean no disrespect.

SHARPTON: You`re the guy with the --

NICE: I`m the guy with the little -- I got a little cup that I go around
the subway.

(CROSSTALK)

Exactly. You know, I can`t do that on Uber. You know, now this guy, he
really doesn`t get help people relate to the media. Because I don`t care
what the guy who is reporting does in his own spare time. You know what I
mean, I don`t care if he is a drug addict. I just want him to get the
facts right.

SHARPTON: Right.

NICE: You know?

SHARPTON: And we don`t necessarily believe everything they say anyway.

NICE: But I mean, what is it? Here is a high tech big company, huge
company guy saying this?

DOWDELL: Well, this is the last thing that they needed because this is not
their first controversy. They are in trouble already because they are not
abiding by the same regulations that the taxi cab industry has to abide by.
But this is actually a very scary because there should be, if someone
writes a story about you -- and remember, he was targeting women. So, the
bulk of his anger and his angst was directed specifically at a woman
reporter and women reporters generally so that is disturbing. But I think
he was upset because he got caught. He is not upset about what he said.
That was a very definitive declaration.

SHARPTON: He got caught not in the negative story but caught same --

DOWDELL: He`s upset, because he is regretting he got caught saying what he
said.

SHARPTON: Right.

DOWDELL: That was a very specific, very poignant declaration he made at a
private dinner with other executives.

SHARPTON: Yes. And he thought he would get away with it.

DOWDELL: He thought he could get away with it. And now he is back
pedaling. But I think that is a sentiment. And he makes you wonder --

(CROSSTALK)

Exactly. And then it makes you wonder about the culture of the company
where he felt that was acceptable.

SHARPTON: All right. Now to a restaurant controversy in Colorado.
Illegal Pete`s, a Mexican restaurant is at the center of a debate over a
term some are saying is insulting to undocumented immigrants. One group
calling it painful and offensive.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: The word illegal regardless of what it meant in 1995
when he started the first restaurant when used it`s in reference to human
beings is offensive and dehumanizing in 2014.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: Pete, the owner is defending his restaurant saying it has been
around for 20 years and is named after his father. Tara, is it offensive
or are they overreacting?

DOWDELL: Well, I do think that the term illegal has become a slur, it`s
become a bludgeon that people use to attack their opponents particularly
people who are undocumented into the country and people who support people
who are undocumented into the country. But the issue here is though, I
think this is a difficult one because clearly this restaurant is 20 years
old. So, I do not think he intentionally came about with this name of it
as a slur.

SHARPTON: But Chuck, intentional or not, in this area, illegal, and she
says a slur to some, should he consented it?

NICE: I mean, I have to say that I`m not proud to say it but I used to
call people illegal. And somebody explained to me why it was a slur.

SHARPTON: Yes.

NICE: And I don`t say it anymore. You know, but I`m an individual. Here
he has a business. You know, it`s named after his father. You know, so
it`s directly relating to his father. Maybe this father did a lot of
illegal stuff, you know?

SHARPTON: Well, I mean, we have all said things that we agree to not say
again.

NICE: Right.

DOWDELL: Amen to that.

NICE: Well, let`s stay with me, we are coming right back. Charles Manson
is getting married. Yes. I`m serious. Next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SHARPTON: We`re back with our panel Chuck and Tara. Let`s move to a
wedding we didn`t see coming. Imprisoned murderer Charles Manson is ready
to tie the knot. Manson and his fiancee, 26-year-old Aften Elaine Burton
have obtained a marriage license from King`s county California. The
license is good for 90 days. And Burton says, they will be married next
month. Ten guests are allowed to attend. Chuck, how in the world can he
be allowed to get married?

NICE: I have no idea.

SHARPTON: He is still in prison.

NICE: He`s still in prison. Maybe this is the California penal system`s
way of getting back at Charles Manson. You know, he`s like setting a steak
dinner outside of a lion`s cage. You know, he can`t have conjugal visits.
He can never be with his wife, you know, but he can marry her. That`s all
he could do is marry her. But the real issue here is for every guy out
there who says I can`t get a woman, you can no longer say that.

SHARPTON: There is somebody for everybody.

NICE: That`s right. There is somebody for everybody.

SHARPTON: But who would want to marry Charles Manson, Tara?

DOWDELL: Apparently this woman wants to marry Charles Manson. So, yes,
you`re right, our parents said that -- don`t worry there is someone for
everybody. Clearly there were spot on. I mean, it is crazy. And also
what is sad is in certain some parts of the country, you know, if you are
gay, if you`re LGBT you can`t get married but Charles Manson can get
married. So, that`s the ultimate irony right there, it tells you all you
need to know.

SHARPTON: That is a very good argument.

NICE: That`s a very good argument.

(CROSSTALK)

DOWDELL: Yes.

NICE: Okay, now I get it. When you put the picture they just had up of
her explains everything. So, I didn`t realize it. They just put a picture
of her up, you know, with her head shaved and an X on her head. And now,
there it is. So, now when you say who would marry Charles Manson, you show
me that picture and I`m like, that makes sense, this all makes sense.

SHARPTON: But the point is that they allow it legally but a lot of people
are upset about this, Tara.

DOWDELL: And they should be upset about this. I mean, we shouldn`t be
rewarding Charles Manson for anything. And to me being able to get married
is a reward. It is something that people aspire to do. Just like the LGBT
community aspires to get married universally in this country. And so we`re
rewarding this guy? This guy needs to get married?

SHARPTON: Well, obviously I think that there is cause to be pausing on
this one.

DOWDELL: Oh, definitely.

SHARPTON: And we will be talking about this one. We`ll see what happens
in the next month with the wedding. Chuck and Tara, thank you both for
your time tonight.

DOWDELL: Thank you.

NICE: Thank you.

SHARPTON: We`ll be right back with a Texas sized blunder from Rick Perry
on ObamaCare. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SHARPTON: Tonight there`s a big old republican mess in Rick Perry`s Texas.
The GOP governor has been rallying against the Affordable Care Act and
Medicaid expansion for years.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Who can stand on this stage, look Obama in the eye and
say ObamaCare is an abomination for this country.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: I think they ought to defund ObamaCare because it is not
going to work.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Medicaid is a failed program. To expand this program is
not unlike adding 1,000 people to the titanic.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: Giving low income Americans health care is like adding people to
the titanic? Come on, Governor. Even for you that is pretty bad. The
truth is expanding Medicaid would help cover nearly a million Texans.
People all across your state. But Governor Perry doesn`t seem to care too
much about that. He`ll fix health care his own way. Gosh! Darn in. In
2011 he appointed a panel of medical professionals to improve health care
in the state. And now that same panel is coming back with his
recommendations. According to the Texas tribune, the board says the state
should provide health coverage to low income Texans under the -- wait for
it -- Affordable Care Act. Unbelievable. Rick Perry`s own panel wants to
implement the law that he hates, that he spent so much time trying to stop.
Everything really is bigger in Texas, especially the irony. Surely the
governor has some way to explain that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. RICK PERRY (R), TEXAS: I can`t, sorry. Oops.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: Oops, sorry. Couldn`t have said it better myself. Nice try,
Governor, but we got you. Thanks for watching. I`m Al Sharpton.
"HARDBALL" starts right now.

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.
Transcription Copyright 2014 ASC LLC ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is
granted to the user of this material other than for research. User may not
reproduce or redistribute the material except for user`s personal or
internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall
user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may
infringe upon MSNBC and ASC LLC`s copyright or other proprietary rights or
interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of
litigation.






Sponsored links

Resource guide