The Ed Show for Monday, December 15th, 2014

Show: THE ED SHOW
Date: December 15, 2014

Guest: Michael Kay, Byron Dorgan, Jim McDermott, Joe Wilson, David Cay
Johnston, Tiernan Sittenfeld


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

At this hour it`s 9:00 a.m. local time in Sydney Australia. And Sydney
Australia was the focus of the new cycle throughout the world today. At
roughly 10:45 a.m. Eastern, a SWAT team stormed a Lindt Chocolate Cafe in
downtown Sydney where 17 hostages had been taken. The standoff started 16
hours earlier on lone gunman walk in to a cafe with a shotgun. Two
hostages and the gunman were killed. One police officer was shut and
suffered a non-life-threatening injury.

The center of Sydney`s shopping district has been on lockdown since the
standoff started. The gunman has been identified Man Haron Monis. Monis,
is a self describe Muslim cleric and activist, who is Iranian born. He is
no stranger to law enforcement in Sydney. Monis was previously charge was
sending offensive and harassing letters to widows of Australian soldiers
killed in Afghanistan. He called they late husbands murderers.

Here is a quick timeline of the recent events that unfolded in Sydney
today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Live Breaking News for us right here in the middle of
the CVV in Sydney. Heavily armed police presently converging on Martin
Place where a Sydney cafe right in the middle of Martin Place, you can see
hostages has been taken. This is a live shot.

SCHULTZ: 9:45 a.m. local time Monday, Sydney New South Wales. Police are
called to Lindt Chocolate Cafe.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A woman sees a man carrying a blue sports bag walking
in to the Lindt store in Martin Place. She believe there`s a gun in it and
she goes to tell police.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Heavily armed police have blocked up Martin Place.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Helicopters flying above as you`d imagine, the police
are doing a lot of work from the air.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You can see hostages with their hands against the
windows.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And as if they`re watching in the window.

SCHULTZ: 10:10 a.m. to hostages appear in the cafe window holding a black
flag.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I started see some shots on their (ph) screen of
hostages inside the Lindt shop.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not far from Lindt cafe are the government offices as
well.

SCHULTZ: 10:30 a.m. surrounding building are evacuated.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We just thought actually (inaudible) in single file
really fast.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s a target, rich environment for somebody held event
on causing death and destruction.

SCHULTZ: 12:30 p.m. Prime Mister Tony Abbott address the country.

TONY ABBOTT, AUSTRALIAN PRIME MINISTER: I can think of almost nothing more
distressing, more terrifying than to be caught up in such a situation and
our hearts go out to these people.

EMMA DALLMORE, REPORTING U.S. BUREAU: We heard directly from White House
just a short time ago in an e-mail. They tell me that President Obama has
been brief on this unfolding situation in Sydney.

SCHULTZ: 4:00 p.m. the first three hostages escaped.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It look as one staff member has manage to run outside
and (inaudible) customers as you can image quickly cowering behind heavily
armed police officers.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Police negotiators have had contact and they continue
to have contact.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Another woman running out of the building, so we are --
no, sorry that`s two from earlier. So at this point in time we have five
who have managed to escape. We still don`t know what his actually wanting.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He`s wearing a white shirt, a black cap, he`s unshaven
and he is carrying what appears to be a pump action shotgun. That gun
often coming into the frame of the windows.

SCHULTZ: 1:15 a.m. local time Tuesday. Police named allege hostage taker.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We can now say that he is an Iranian cleric by the name
of Man Haron Monis. He`s the man that seen to all that siege at the Lindt
Chocolate Cafe.

SCHULTZ: 2:15 a.m. a final group runs from the cafe.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And at my angle, it looks four or five hostages have
managed to either escape or be removed.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: More picture now coming through it. It looks like
there`s more activity going on.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Now that is certainly gun fire it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They throwing something (inaudible).

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It is happening just in Martin Place. The police are
throwing something.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They`re they throwing something into the doorway.
And that we just seen another hostage going out.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, that maybe stun grenade.

SCHULTZ: 2:45 a.m. the New South Wales police force confirmed the siege in
Sydney is over.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They was screaming, they was shouting and all of sudden
a large amount of very loud shooting.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Two decreased amongst the hostages, we also have a lone
gunman who has been shot and killed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Today we must come together like never before.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: And we`ll bring any new detail as we get them tonight.

For more let me bring in Michael Kay, former British Senior Officer and
International Affairs Correspondent. Also with us tonight Clint Van Zandt
former FBI Profiler and MSNBC Contributor. Gentlemen, let`s talk about
this possibly being the model. They said that there-- it was a target rich
environment.

If this is the way ISIS or any other terror group is going to operate.
There is target rich environment on every street corner in America.
Michael, is this the model that we`re going to see from ISIS moving
forward?

LT. COL. MICHAEL KAY, FMR. BRITISH SR. OFFICER [RET]: Yeah, I think it is.
I think this is an extension of this new world order that we`ve effectively
seen ever since we went into Iraq in 2003. You know, we completely destroy
the governance there, there were security vacuums all over the place, that
allowed sectarian violence to breathe that over spilled. And what we`re
seeing is this asymmetric threat. It`s no long with the conventional
versus conventional, it`s no longer soldier versus soldiers. It`s now
soldiers versus combatants that can blend in with other noncombatants.

These combatants, the insurgents have no rules of engagement. They didn`t
abide by any Geneva conventions. They use threats and weapon systems that
we find very hard to be able to discern against such IEDs and suicide vest.
But also we look -- we got to look at this more holistically. I think what
is absolutely, you know, cleaver about what they`re doing at the moment is
a way that they`re utilizing the technology that we see in terms of
globalization, the way that they using Twitter, Facebook, Youtube. I
covered a story a couple months ago about the chat rooms on Gran Turismo on
a PlayStation.

That`s where a model of these people exist, is where they have their
conversations. It`s about how they become disenfranchised. And I think
there`s number of facets to this Ed. Yes, what we see at the moment
playing out in terms of foreign policy is that the norm in which we usually
deal with these things bombs, bullets and mortars. But it`s not the answer
because there were consequences to those foreign policy actions, we`ve also
got to look at home, we got to look at the indigenous threat, the organic
threat.

What is it? Is this social economic? Is it what the Imams approaching in
the mosque? How did they become disenfranchise? What is the relationship
with society versus the ethnic minority? There the areas that we really
have to be exploring. America`s budget is $585 billion next year on
defense. $67.5 overseas operations, let spent some other money at home.

SCHULTZ: You`re connecting a lot of things to this. Clint Van Zandt your
take on this. Is this just a lone wolf or this potentially spiraling off
of some of the things we`ve seen on the world thing?

CLINT VAN ZANDT, FMR. FBI PORFILER: Well, let me exploit here with you,
Ed. Whether this guy is a lone wolf or I think is uncharacterized, named a
lone nut. You have to look at potentially this is a new form of terrorism.
I mean if you take any thing from whatever you call a Major Nidal Hasan at
Fort Hood, whatever calls the individual who beheaded a woman in Oklahoma,
whatever we call the guy who used a hatchet to attack two cops in New York
City or the guy who killed the young soldier in Ottawa.

This is a very low finance form of terrorism. Look if ISIS right now, all
you have to do is throw up inflammatory videos and rhetoric`s, wait for
somebody who`s kind of sitting on the edge of that emotional abyss, waiting
for a reason to jump off. You don`t have to give them money. You don`t
have to set him to a training school. You don`t have to bring them to the
Middle East and back again. You just have to throw it out there, wait for
their French of the French to take a bite out of something. In this case,
this guy with a shotgun all of a sudden gets the world`s attention because
he pulled black flag out of his back pocket.

And the reality Ed, he didn`t even had an ISIS flag. I mean, you know,
that should have been a BYOF, Bring Your Own Flag. And this guy couldn`t
even come up with a flag. Any other society with the exception of that
black flag and his back pocket, it would have been one more nut criminal
doing something stupid that brought about some deaths. But now because of
that flag and because of his background, we put the international flag of
terrorist over the top of this guy.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

ZANDT: And it brings the whole world attention. And Ed, what a training
school for those sitting out there on my edge of abyss, waiting to do
something and to see who cheap and how easy you can step up on the stage of
the world and demand attention. This is a low cost way to get internal
attention. And for somebody who have some deep seeded psychological
problems to know they`re brining about a suicide by cap, their brining
about their own death. But they get the attention of the world when they
do it. Somehow that gives him some positive feeling perhaps when they die.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. Well -- but Clint, this man was no stranger to authorities
in Sydney because of the contracts...

ZANDT: Absolutely.

SCHULTZ: ... that he had have with the families and the characterization
that he had made of those who had served in the military in Afghanistan.
So how do piece through that? I mean they clearly...

ZANDT: Well.

SCHULTZ: ... knew who this guy was.

ZANDT: Sure, they did. Sure did but what -- I mean, we know who a lot of
nuts are. We know who a lot of protesters are in this country. But this
is a guy, he chains himself to the front door, he holds up placards that
says he was tortured when he was in jail. He`s also somebody who`s accuse
of the violent murder of ex-wife of a number sexual assaults. You know,
should he have been in jail with the key, you know, should he have been
locked up and the key throwing away. Should they eject them out of the
country and said "Hey, we`re talking away your right to be in this
country." But until somebody crosses that line, Ed,...

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

ZANDT: ... the only option we have is to wait for them to do something
terrible or as police do sometimes send in an undercover person. See a few
can figure out what they`re up to. See if they really want to do something
criminal, something crazy and then arrest them before they do it. And when
you do that you`re charge with all you set the guy up. You know, law
enforcement you really made him do it and he wouldn`t have done this
otherwise. You know, your kind of on the horns of a dilemma, when you get
somebody this close to either being psychotic or simply over the edge
because he`s overwhelm by his whole life.

SCHULTZ: So where is the defense in all of these, Michael Kay? I mean,
it`s a chocolate cafe in Sydney Australia.

KAY: I think.

SCHULTZ: I mean this is the world we live in now. I mean there is target
rich environments on every street corner.

KAY: Yeah, it is. I think the big part of this is for the general public
really to kind of understand that there are these existential threats to
that exist. And to sort of try -- and so, you know, as you see on the
matter, if you can see something, say something, you know. If there`s a
package left and you don`t know who it belongs to, actually say something.
You know, I think that is a big part of this.

We`ve got to appreciate and respect that there was a big spectrum here, you
know, you got the lone wolf who or what terms the lone wolf in terms of
someone that can become disenfranchise and take upon themselves to go and
conduct something like what we`ve seen in state.

But then you got the terror network, you got the more coordinate terror
networks, they`re actually speaking to people in Syria. They`re actually
listening to the rhetoric. And then you got actually the hard-core ISIS
militant leaders that are operating out of Syria, you`ve got the Jihadist
coming from all over the world to fight in Syria, you got Al-Qaeda. I mean
there are so many different levels to this Ed, that I think that, you know,
it complex and what we need to do is we need to proportion more resources
and more intelligence to understanding how the seeds are actually planted
organically.

SCHULTZ: Michael Kay, Clint Van Zandt. Gentlemen, thank you for being on
the Ed Show tonight. I appreciate it so much.

Coming up, repeating history. How another bad budget deal stirs up
memories of the financial collapse on Wall Street.

Plus, defining torture, Dick Cheney flat out denies the U.S. tortured
terror suspects. Ambassador Joe Wilson joins us for the take. We`re right
back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN, (D) MASSACHUSETTS: There`s a lot of talk lately
about how Dodd-Frank isn`t perfect. There`s a lot of talk coming from
Citigroup about how Dodd-Frank isn`t perfect. So let me say this to anyone
who is listening at Citi. I agree with you. Dodd-Frank isn`t perfect. It
should have broken you into pieces.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. The budget bill the President push
so hard for us now on his desk. And I think that it would be the worst
bill he could every sign since he`s been on office. A Saturday night
Senate vote moves the CRomnibus bill to fund the government forward. But
not without push back. 18 Republicans, believe it or not, here`s
bipartisanship for you, 18 Republicans joins 21 Democrats and independent
Senator Bernie Sanders in voting against the 1.1 trillion budget.

Many oppose the provision in the bill written by Citigroup design to weaken
Dodd-Frank. It repeals the swaps push-out role which means that it`s going
to keep you, the taxpayer, from paying the price for banks riskily
derivatives trading. This isn`t the first time Washington has done the
bidding for the big banks.

Let`s go back to 1999 in Congress. They repealed the Glass-Steagall Act,
it followed -- it allowed Citigroup and others to grow into banks dean to
be just too big to fail. When they did fail, taxpayers where stuck with
the bill. And we had to bail him out. Remember those days? Back then,
North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan predicted all of these disaster was going
to take place.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FMR. SEN. BYRON DORGAN, (D) NORTH DAKOTA: There are some notions that
represent transcendental truths, that are true overtime. And one of those
in my judgment I fervently believe, is that we are with this piece of
legislation moving towards greater risk. We are almost certainly moving
toward substantial new concentrations and mergers in the financial services
industry that is almost certainly not in the interest of consumers, and we
are deliberately and certainly with this legislation, moving towards
inheriting much greater risk in our financial services industries.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: I`m joined tonight with the former Senator for North Dakota Byron
Dorgan and also with us Congressman Jim Mcdermott of Washington.
Gentlemen, good to have you with us tonight. Senator, I have to ask, what
are your thoughts when you hear Elizabeth Warren go on the Senate floor and
essentially say the same thing you were saying?

DORGAN: Well, you shouldn`t make the same mistake twice. And, you know,
it`s interesting everybody talks about this is being liberal and populist.
It`s not, it`s just common sense. You don`t put together a big budget bill
or preparation bill and put a prevision in it that says to the financial
services industry, the biggest financial institution of the country, "You
go back and you can begin doing what you use to do that nearly collapsed
the American economy." That`s a big wet kiss that should not have been
given.

And by the way let me make one important point. This President should not
have said he would sign it because the fact is I`m convinced to Speaker
Boehner would have taken it out because he would not want to be branded.
I`ve say that the President, you know, you veto this and say that the
Republicans, "If you want to shutdown the government because you can put
this special reward for the folks on Wall Street that will use it to do the
things that nearly collapse the economy. You want to do that? Let`s go
out and have that debate about it. We`ll brand that on your cap and see
whether that`s the brand your want for you party." I don`t they would, I
think they would drop it.


SCHULTZ: Congressman McDermott, this sets new boundaries for future
negotiations if this is the way it`s going to be. I agree with Senator
Dorgan on this. I mean I think it was very important for negotiations on
the part of the Democrats. Nancy Pelosi had the guts to stand up and say
this is hostage taking. But if this is the way it`s going to go, heck, the
next two years, if the Republicans want something they just got to wait out
the President.

REP. JIM MCDERMOTT, (D) WASHINGTON: Well Byron said -- what I would really
say is the President made a mistake by getting into this. He did not have
to say he would support it. That he wanted us to pass it. We were in the
midst of pulling it down in the Democratic caucus when the President
suddenly jumped in and said, "Oh, well I want this." And I`m - what is
very hard for me to understand is how he thinks that`s better for the
American people.

Byron gave you the history. He and I lived through the savings and loan
crisis and then through the one that went on later. And you got to say to
yourself when are you going to learn that people are greedy. And that
government has to have regulations to control their greed. This is going
to happen again as sure as I`m sitting here.

SCHULTZ: I had a gentlemen come up to me at an event on Saturday night and
say what`s not getting any publicity is the cuts that they are making to
the Federal Pension Fund and it could upwards of 30 percent for some
workers in this country. Companies that have fallen apart have thrown the
pensions onto the Feds. And now this budget cuts those pensions. I mean
this is a bad bill all the way across. There`s a lot of ways to fund the
government without changing policy on how the financial industry is going
to work. Senator, do you really think we could go down the road again of
getting ourselves into a financial quagmire where the American taxpayer
might have to write the big check again to save the financial system
because we were on the verge of collapse. And I think people forget that.
Could this happen again, Senator?

DORGAN: Sure, it could. Sure. I mean look this is adding substantial new
risk. We should have abolished something called naked credit default swaps
which is just going up to a casino table or a roulette table on gambling.
There is too much risk in the system. And to have this provision now be
signed into law, to allow much greater risk in these things called
derivatives, its unbelievable to me this is happening. I`m - you know,
look, we need banking institutions in this country. We need them. I want
them there. But I don`t want them too big to fail, number one. And number
two, I don`t want them taking on risk, the American people are going to
have to bail out later.

SCHULTZ: Well I want to also point that the banking industry is a lot
different today than what it was when you made that comment on the Senate
floor 15 years ago, Senator.

DORGAN: Right, much more concentrated, much bigger.

SCHULTZ: Much more concentrated. So Congressman, should we be concerned
that the next big failure could be the mother load. It could be the mother
ship. The next failure could be a heck a lot different from the one in
2008?

MCDERMOTT: We`re going to have to have a President who will act like Teddy
Roosevelt did and break up the banks. We cannot allow that much power to
concentrate in so few hands. That`s what Teddy Roosevelt did as the trust
buster. And what`s happened in this banking industry, the financial
services industry it`s got more and more powerful between, you know,
citizens united where they can pump all the money they want into the system
to buy elections. And at the same time go out and play with the people`s
money at the gambling table.

We have given them Carte Blanche to put us into something really
horrendous. And I really think that as Elizabeth Warren suggested that
bill should have broken up Citibank when it passed, the Dodd-Frank Bill.
We didn`t do it. And we`re going to pay for it down the road.

SCHULTZ: Senator, do you think that the power of Wall Street is so strong
right now in the Senate. It`s going to be hard for the Democrats and the
Progressive Movement to come up with a position that Elizabeth Warren has
and to be able to run a campaign that is going to be financed properly to
be able to compete. I mean this - it almost makes you feel like we`ve lost
the government.

DORGAN: Well they`re pretty powerful. But we`ve got reign them in on
these bad practices. And that`s not liberal or populace. Its just common
sense. If we don`t have the strength to do that we threaten the well-being
of this economy. This economy is the engine that makes everything else in
America work as you know. So we better behave and better start thinking
more carefully about what we`re going to allow to happen, with respect to
risk on Wall Street. This Bill will add much more risk. And, you know, I
hope this President and the Congress will be able to find ways to finally
succeed on these issues and reigning in the banking system.

SCHULTZ: Congressman, is the President legislatively nawould counsel him to make this move and to sell to the American people,
that is such a great budget when retirees or pensions are going to get hit,
the very people that voted for him to put him in office.

And also I remember cap and trade early on in the Obama Administration
where, you know, Rahm Emanuel goes to the House, tells you guys that you
got to vote for cap and trade, low and behold they didn`t have the votes in
the Senate and a bunch of guys lost their seats the next time around. In
2010 granted the economy had something to do with it.

But if there had been some legislative full pause beyond for this President
and this is one of them that may not be able to be unraveled. How are you
going to unravel this with the Republicans in control on the Senate and the
House the next couple of years? It has to go to the presidential.

MCDERMOTT: The President is going to have to listen to some people other
than the little group of people around him now. He is all by himself. He
doesn`t have the Senate to save him as they have in the last six years.
And he is really endanger of really doing some awful things because he
really doesn`t understand.

There is a story about Governor Ray of Iowa who was once asked about a bill
and he said listen I vote last. And that`s what the President should have
said when they asked him about this bill. I`m going to make my decision
after I see what the House and Senate do. But he got into it way to early
and put his cards on the table face up. You could see what he had.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

MCDERMOTT: And at that point he`s lost it.

SCHULTZ: Congressman Jim Mcdermott,

DORGAN: And Ed, let me just make one more point. There are a lot of good
financial institutions out there, big and medium and small. But the ones
that are doing this unbelievably risky business with derivatives and swaps,
you know, we just can`t allow that happen when the taxpayer has to pay the
bill.

SCHULTZ: No doubt. Senator Byron Dorgan, Congressman Jim Mcdermott, great
to have you with us tonight, gentlemen. Thank you. Still ahead, Dick
Cheney apparently can`t handle the truth. And later, the two minute drill
with Johnny football. Questions coming up next in ask Ed live. We`re
right back in the Ed Show. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. I appreciate all your questions in
our Ask Ed live segment. Our fist question tonight comes from Bilbo (ph).
He wants to know who do you - oh, who do you think is the most destructive
politician or government official in the last 10 years? Can we do a
multiple choice on this one tonight? Let`s see Bush, Cheney, Boehner,
McConnell. Normally, when I was in high school when there`s a multiple
choice, they only gave you four options. So that`s what I got to do with
you tonight.

Our next question is from George. He wants to know, "When do the Democrats
start to mobilize for 2016?" How about right now? Lots more coming up in
the Ed Show. Stay with us.

HAMPTON PEARSON, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I`m Hampton Pearson with your CNBC
Market Wrap. A tough session for stocks and oil prices. The Dow slides
about 100 points. The S&P sheds 12. The NASDAQ drops 48. OPEC says it
won`t cut output, so crude sinks again. Prices fell nearly $2 for 55.91 a
barrel, the lowest since May of 2009.

Our big buy out for PetSmart, the retailer is being acquired by private
equity firm BC partners for more than (inaudible) dollars. As factory
output jump in November rising 1.1 percent, that`s according to the Federal
Reserve. That`s it from CNBC, first in business, worldwide.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TODD: Does it plant any seed of doubt in you though?

DICK CHENEY: No.

TODD: No seed of doubt all?

CHENEY: Absolutely not.

TODD: All of this information in here, no seed of doubt that whether this
worked or not?

CHENEY: It worked. It absolutely did to work. It worked now for 13
years. We`ve avoided another casualty attack against the United States.
And we did capture Bin Laden. We did capture an awful lot f the senior
guys of Al Qaeda who are responsible for that attack in 9/11. I`d do it
again in a minute.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Is that Cheney complimenting the President`s techniques right now
to keep us safe? It has worked for 13 years. You mean we`re still doing
it? Welcome back to the Ed Show. Former Vice President Dick Cheney has
zero regrets.

Most Americans I think were shocked to learn the gruesome details of the
CIA`s enhanced interrogation techniques. The defiant Cheney is shrugging
it off. Cheney often rewrites history and makes up his own rules. It`s
the same old story when it comes to torture.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHENEY: Well, torture to me, Chuck, is an American citizen on a cell phone
making a last call to his four young daughters shortly before he burns to
death in the upper levels of the Trade Center in the New York on 9/11.

The waterboarding, the way we did it, was, in fact, not torture. Now, when
you`re dealing with terrorists, the likes of Al Qaeda or the likes of ISIS,
I haven`t seen them waterboard anybody. What they do is cut their heads
off.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Since the reports released there had been renewed calls for the
former Bush Administration and/or CIA officials being prosecuted for war
crimes. Last week a high ranking United Nation official called the enhance
interrogation technique "violation of international human rights law."
Cheney clearly sees it differently.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHENEY: I have little respect in the United Nations or for this individual
who doesn`t hear a clue and had absolutely no responsibility for
safeguarding this nation and going after the bastards that killed 3,000
Americans on 9/11.

TODD: Do you think the President should issue a blanket pardon to CIA
agents.

CHENEY: There`s no pardon needed. No crime is committed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Joining me now retired Ambassador Joe Wilson, author of the
Politics of Truth. Mr. Ambassador, good to have you with us tonight. It`s
been a while. Good to have you on the Ed Show. Appreciate your time.
Dick Cheney...

JOE WILSON, FRM. U.S. AMBASSAROD: Nice to be with you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: You bet. Dick Cheney, the former Vice President clearly is
playing on the emotions of the American people. Of course the country
wanted restitution, of course the country wanted revenge. And it seems
like that his best talking point right now is how we were supposed to feel
after we got hit on 9/11. As an Ambassador, how do you think the rest of
the world is viewing these comments for Cheney?

WILSON: Well I think these comments are actually pretty useful in the
event that anybody wants to another (ph) prosecution against him. My own
sense of this is that his bluff ought to be called. There will be
Republican Congress next year. One of the things that he has said
repeatedly is that the report was a Democratic report. And nobody was
questioned. I`d like to see him under oath up in front of the Senate
Intelligence Committee where he can be subjected to some cross examination.
I doubt that he would do it. But I still think that he`s bluff ought to be
called.

With respect to the international community when you regard the
international community with the disdain that he regards it with, you can
expect that they will regard us with the same disdain that going to down
the road. And I think you see that certainly in the Middle East and
elsewhere where the anger against the United States is if anything,
increasing.

SCHULTZ: It seems like he has no respect for any collection of countries
that want to achieve certain goals on this globe. He has no respect for
the U.N., League of Nations, you name it. It`s our way or the highway.
Moving forward, do you think that this country has to make a distinction
between what is right and wrong morally if were going to gain allies in
future conflicts which obviously will take place because of what were
dealing with ISIS right now.

WILSON: We`ll when it comes to torture that decision was made as early as
George Washington, the Revolutionary War, when he declined the opportunity
to torture German mercenaries. The CIA itself banned tortures and
interrogation technique over 35 years ago.

What you`ve got in the Bush-Cheney Administration and I think Mr. Cheney
bares a certain amount of responsibility for it, you have an aberration.
We are after all not just signatory to international conventions, but we
co-author and provided the stimulus for such treaties as a Geneva
Conventions and the U.N. Convention against torture.

SCHULTZ: Your wife Valerie Plame was outed (ph) by the Vice President.
And now he is saying that he has no problem with torture. How do you feel
about that? I mean isn`t it torture while he`s - isn`t it torture what
your family went through?

WILSON: Well I wouldn`t it characterize as that. But what I would say is
that -- what the Vice President also said that the release of the report
characterizing their misdeeds would make it difficult - more difficult for
us to recruit agents in the future. That`s absolutely not the case.

What would make -- what would makes it more difficult is what Cheney did,
Cheney and Levi and Addington everybody else did a decade ago in retrained
the identity of a covert CIA officer. How couldn`t you trust the
administration that will betray one of it`s own for political reasons.

SCHULTZ: The Vice President continually says that they were on legal solid
ground. And now, you know, we know that President Bush knew of the
techniques that of course has being verified by Former Administration
Officials.

The legal authority, people maybe wondering what that is and correct me if
I`m wrong, he keeps quoting the justice department. The head of the
Justice Department who at that time was John Ashcroft. White House Council
was Albert Gonzalez. This is who is he is quoting, correct?

WILSON: Well, I think it`s even worst than that but the Attorney General
and his deputy refused to give the CIA a blanket indemnity for the
techniques that they were going to use so they went to middle level officer
such as John Yoo and Jay Bybee and got them to tying off on it.

SCHULTZ: When asked about the 26 individuals who were wrongfully detained,
Cheney said that he has no problem with that as long as the country
achieves its objective. Is this the new standard?

WILSON: Well, again, I think the more Mr. Cheney speaks the more he opened
himself up to international prosecution if not domestic prosecution. And I
do believe that the President and the Justice Department ought to reopened
investigations in to everything that these people did. They really made us
a much less safe country in addition to the moral turpitude that is on
their hands.

SCHULTZ: Let`s take one of their best comments for defense on all of this.
They claimed that in the Senate report that key players were not
interviewed. And I guess when I hear Dick Cheney talk I`m thinking well
they knew what the heck he was going to say, why I talk to him.

Are there people that should have been in -- to your knowledge, that should
have been included in this report or vetted before this report? How
credible do you think the senate report is? How detailed is it? And are
you satisfied with it? I know there`s a lot there but I want you to expand
on all of that.

WILSON: Well, first of all I think that it would appropriate to release
many more of the materials that the Senate Intelligence Committee
collected, the idea that all of this has been redacted and a lot of it and
a several thousand, several tens of thousands of patriots have been
classified when this is part of the history of the country rather than
sources and methods. I think that they should release a lot more. And
Senator Wyden suggested in an interview yesterday.

With respect to what Mr. Cheney and a lot of the other Republican have been
saying over the weekend that they will -- nobody had been consulted.
Again, the Republicans will take over the Congress and the Senate in
January. They will chair the Senate Intelligence Committee. I would
suggest they might make that right by calling all these people up and
question them under oath and subjecting them across examination.

And finally, with the respect to Mr. Cheney, I believe that that his
actions and actions of his office in pressuring the CIA and then pressuring
the Justice Department constitute, if not treason certainly a violation of
the National Security of our country.

SCHULTZ: And finally, Mr. Ambassador, considering your history with the
Vice President, why do you think Dick Cheney is doing this?

WILSON: I think it`s a good -- the best defense is a good offense. And I
think he is challenging both the Administration International Community
College`s bluff, and I believe they should. And once they do, you can see
him docking behind the executive privilege much as he did in the case that
we try to bring against him and the special prosecutor for (inaudible), try
to bring against the White House and the betrayal of my wife`s identity as
a covert CIA officer.

SCHULTZ: All right. Ambassador Joe Wilson, good to have you with us
tonight on the Ed Show. Always appreciate it. Thank you so much.

Coming up, how the price of oil could be the biggest weapon in the fight
against the Keystone XL, keep it here.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And the price of oil fell below $60,000 of barrel which
is so low. That`s also a pretty good deal on barrels.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: All right, throw the flag, it`s two minute drill. Marcus
Mariota, I tell you, you can argue with this guy`s numbers. University of
Oregon, the Duck`s quarterback, 12 in one, take some of the hardware, the
Heisman Trophy on Saturday night.

Mariota, he is quick. He touches the ball on every play. He`s got a great
arm. Is he NFL? Probably. He bit up Melvin Gordon of Wisconsin Badgers
and also Alabama wide receiver Amari Cooper, both great players. I
actually thought that Melvin Gordon was going to get it because he is the
first running back to get over 2,000 yards on the number of carries that he
had.

Former Heisman trophy winner Johnny Manziel made his first start in NFL on
Sunday. Can I just say that he is not Doug Flutie? Browns losing the
Bengals 30 to nothing, 10 of 18, 80 yards, two picks try the wishbone next
time.

Coming up, why is the record oil dropping of prices affecting everything
when it comes to the Keystone Pipeline, the conversation a little different
now?

Punch Out coming up. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. This is the story for the folks who
take a shower after work. The world is seeing a record drop at oil prices.
This is giving new fuel to the arguments against TransCanada`s Keystone XL
Pipeline. Here are the numbers. Crude sudden blow $58 a barrel on Friday.
Look at Monday, crude oil prices fell nearly $2 today, it close at 55.99 a
barrel, the weakest level since May of 2009.

OPEC has refused to cut production despite of global supplies. And of
course consumers are saying good things happen at the gas pumps. The
prices have dropped to five year low. According to Triple A, the national
average for a gallon of gas is $2.55. I got it for $2.33 a gallon in Lake
Park, Minnesota on highway 10 this weekend. I saw it $2.33 boom, I was in
there.

North American Energy Ministers are met again in Washington today to
discuss the Keystone XL Pipeline. And falling oil prices opponents of the
pipeline are also waiting to hear from Nebraska State Supreme Court. The
court is deciding whether TransCanada`s methods of obtaining land rights
for the proposed route were constitutional. A ruling could come by the end
of this week.

Extracting oil from the tar sand is difficult and expensive but it`s simply
prices need to be high to make an extra effort profitable. Within
abundance of oil on the market and prices this low there`s no need to drill
or build the Keystone XL. Tell me why we should?

Joining me tonight, David Cay Johnston, Tax specialist and Columnist. Also
with us Tiernan Sittenfeld, who is the Senior Vice President of Government
Affairs for the League of Conservation Voters. Great to have both of you
with us tonight.

David, you first, what are these market forces going to do to all these
pipeline talk. We`re supposed to be in the 11th hour of a decision here.
And I think that most folks will say, well why do we need it if prices are
what they are. Your thoughts.

DAVID CAY JOHNSTON, TAX SPECIALIST AND COLUMNIST: Well the Canadians are
in this for the long haul, Ed. Prices are going to go I think lower than
they are now. Some experts think they might go to $40 a barrel. But they
will also go back up. Right now everybody who can buy oil and (inaudible)
is doing it, the Chinese are doing it, I`m sure the airlines are trying to
get what they can. But oil is mostly sold in the spot market. This may
delay the Keystone Pipeline. And it might kill it. But the Canadians want
all those foreign earnings from selling that high bitumen energy to our
country. And so they are not going to walk away from this unless prices
stay low for a long time. And I think that`s unlikely

SCHULTZ: Well OK, the prices stay low for a long time. You think that`s
unlikely? And by my question was going to be, when do you think they`re
going to bounce back. I mean we`ve got this big effort for green (ph)
technology in America, unlike we`ve had other dips in the past. How would
this be any different?

JOHNSTON: Well we`ve seen oil prices be very volatile now for the last 40
years because most oil is sold in spot markets not long term contracts.
And so look at the big change we have seen during the Obama Administration.
It wasn`t that long ago we had $10 a barrel of oil, maybe that`s $25 in
today`s money. So we will see changes. This will clearly slow down the
fracking business because costs are relatively high, roughly in the
neighborhood of $70, $80 a barrel to justify any new investment.

SCHULTZ: Tiernan, how do you view this? It`s good news for pipeline
opponents?

TIERNAN SITTENFELD, LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS: Hi Ed. I would say
this is absolutely good news. We have long known that Keystone XL is bad
for climate change. It`s bad for our water. It`s really a bad deal for
the American people all around. It`s basically all risk and no reward
except perhaps to pad the profit of a foreign oil company. And as you know
with oil prices plummeting, that`s now in question. So we are more
confident than ever that this dirty and dangerous pipeline is never going
to be built.

SCHULTZ: Your thoughts on the Nebraska States Supreme Court. If the
ruling comes down favorable for TransCanada, what does that mean? And what
do you think the timeline is? I mean there would be no reason for the
President not to make a ruling one way or the other once that Supreme Court
gives a ruling. It maybe this week.

SITTENFELD: Yes, it could be this Friday. It could be any Friday to come.
We think that regardless of that decision, of course, we are optimistic
that it will go and favor the land owners. But regardless, the facts
remain the same. This is very bad for climate change. It`s the dirtiest
oil in the planet.

As President Obama continues to express his concerns about the pipeline and
the lack of benefit, again, we are just more competent than ever and we
would love to see his decision as soon as possible. Secretary Kerry
recently said, he`d like to see one sooner rather than later. We continue
to believe that President Obama and Secretary Kerry have all the
information they need to object in this pipeline today.

And of course the fact that even the markets have moved on, that it`s just
radical Republicans and Congress at this point who are really so
obsessed...

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

SITTENFELD: ... at the pipeline and pushing for it makes us even more
confident.

SCHULTZ: David Cay, who are the winners in this economy? I mean I pulled
in a pump at $2.33 a gallon. I felt like a winner. Now what`s this - what
could this do? I mean we`ve had what? 58 months of private sector job
growth. We have added some big jobs the last month. Where this going to
go?

JOHNSTON: I think this will be very good for job growth. Lower income
Americans spend the largest share of their incomes on gasoline than the
rest of us. And this will be very good for them. Those companies that
make products in the U.S. that depend on oil feed stocks and natural gas
feed stocks are going to enjoy lower prices that allow them to improve
their margins and that may result in more investment and more jobs.

The Chinese are buying up every bit of oil they can. They have sent the
price of tankers through the roof. It`s roughly quadrupled. But Tiernan
is quite right that, you know, the underlying issue we have to keep in mind
here is that low oil prices have other effects. Not only do we have the
dirty oil from Keystone but low oil prices discourage wind, they discourage
solar, they discourage more efforts to reduce energy consumption.

SCHULTZ: What about that, Tiernan?

SITTENFELD: We are, you know, absolutely feel strongly that regardless of
oil prices that we need to continue to transition to a clean energy
economy. Part of the reason that we are seeing oil prices lower is that
the Obama Administration has done a lot to increase fuel economy for cars.
There`s been s much progress made. And we need to continue that progress.
We need to rely on our American ingenuity and really continue that
transition.

SCHULTZ: I mean, it would just seem to me that the United States we`re
putting so much oil on the market. How could that not affect the price
globally? That`s -- So I see it, it`s a different dynamic that`s pointed
out in front of us this time around.

Great to have you with us tonight. David Cay Johnston, Tiernan Sittenfeld,
appreciate your time...

SITTENFELD: Thanks Ed.

SCHULTZ: ... on the Ed Show.

That`s the Ed Show. I`m Ed Schultz. Politics Nation, Reverend Al Sharpton
right now...

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.>