Skip navigation

The Ed Show for Tuesday, March 31st, 2015

Read the transcript to the Tuesday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

Date: March 31, 2015
Guest: Ed Delaney, Ryan Anderson, Robert Katz, Joe Sestak, Bart Chilton,
Lanny Davis, Mercedes Schlapp, Steven Bucci, Steve Clemons


ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Later, deadline day.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And the deal be reached today (ph).


SCHULTZ: Plus, the oil connection.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Iran is one of OPEC largest producer.

SCHULTZ: And the left quest for a candidate.

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN, (D) MASSACHUSETTS: No. I`m not running and I`m not
going to.


SCHULTZ: Good to have you with us tonight, folks. Thanks for watching.
We start with breaking news.

People in Indiana, they are not alone.

Within the last hour, the state of Arkansas has passed their own Religious
Freedom Restoration Bill. The bill now heads to the Governor`s desk of
Governor Asa Hutchinson and we will bring you any developments from
Arkansas on this one.

So the people in Indiana, how are they reacting? They are calling for a
full repeal of Governor Mike Pence`s religious freedom law. Things have
gotten so bad for Pence. He had to hold a press conference today to
clarify the law.


GOV. MIKE PENCE, (R) INDIANA: The Religious Freedom Restoration Act was
about religious liberty not about discrimination. As I said last week, had
this law been about legalizing discrimination, I would have vetoed it.
This law does not give anyone a license to discriminate.


SCHULTZ: As we outlined on Monday show, the language in the law does
provide the platform, the avenue, and the opportunity to discriminate.
Under heavy pressure, Pence said he wants the state legislature to fix the


PENCE: I`d like to see on my desk before the end of this week, legislation
that is added to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in Indiana that
makes it clear that this law does not keep businesses a right to deny
services to anyone.

Let me say, I believe this is a clarification but it`s also a fix. That is
a fix of a bill that through mischaracterization and confusion has come to
be greatly misunderstood.


SCHULTZ: Yeah. Nobody understands anything, do they?

Pence said very little details on the future fix.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What would the legislation say?

PENCE: That`s still under discussion and consideration but that`s the


SCHULTZ: He doesn`t know how to fix it. Pence doesn`t know how to fix
this because this isn`t in his culture as I`ve stated before.

Let me show you what is in his culture and in his background. Let`s go
back to 2000. Pence`s campaign website said this.

"Congress should oppose any effort to recognize homosexuals as a discreet
and insular minority entitled to the protection of anti-discrimination laws
similar to those who extended to women and ethnic minorities."

How clear can it be, folks? This is -- this whole thing comes from Mike
Pence`s heart. This is what he believes. This man is a homophobe. This
man believes that based on sexual orientation, there should be
discrimination and they should extend the law to businesses, to
corporations, to organizations, based on what their religious beliefs may
guide them.

I mean, I just find this amazing. This man is more concern with the spin
than he is to consequence.

Now, this law right now in Indiana, it needs to be rewritten so religious
organizations and businesses are not classified as persons or back to the
Mitt Romney campaign days, aren`t we?

Finally, Pence answered the question today that he refused to answer six
times on Sunday.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I like to ask you again, under this law as it`s
written. Is it legal for a florist to deny services to same sex couple,
citing their religious belief?

PENCE: This law does not give anyone a license to deny services to gay and
lesbian couples. And look, I could handle that better this weekend.


SCHULTZ: See, it`s how he handles it. It`s how it comes off. It`s all
about the spin, and the sound, and the presentation. But what is the law?
The law clearly opens the door for discrimination.

But this is the platform of the right-wing in this country, discrimination.
They`ve never -- and ever embraced homosexuals and lesbians and the LGBT
community in this country and they never will.

By the sound to that press conference, there`s no doubt, Pence is reeling.
He don`t know where he stands on any of this right now, de don`t know what
to do. He is politically trapped.

Indiana Democrats, they`re not buying any of it. They don`t like his
remarks. Earlier today, they called for what there should be a full repeal
of the law. And so far Pence`s comments have not calmed the storm at all.

Let`s add them up. 17 businesses and sports organizations have come out an
opposition of the law. Two businesses, and AFSCME, the union, they have
taken meaningful action. The biggest hit came from Angie`s list. The
company said we`re not going to do business here. They were going to
expand. They pulled a thousand jobs, proposed jobs project from the state
of Indiana. Wilco has canceled a concert in Indianapolis and comedian Nick
Offerman has canceled a comedy show in May. It`s just getting worse.

2016 presidential hopefuls on the Republican side, well, they`re speaking
out in favor of their buddy Pence. They`re not going to leave the
fraternity. We`re talking Jeb Bush, we`re talking Ted Cruz, Rick Perry,
Bobby Jindal, Ben Carson, they`re all lined up in support of the Indiana
law. Marco Rubio would not directly endorse Indiana`s law but said
religious freedom laws do make sense, whatever that means.

Meanwhile, a similar situation is playing out not far from here in the
state of North Dakota. Get (inaudible) to this. I did know this. Under
current law, North Dakota law, it is legal, that would be, L-E-G-A-L, legal
to discriminate based on sexual orientation. Gays and lesbians in North
Dakota can be denied business from a store or fired from a job.

Now, the State Senate passed an anti-discrimination bill that would reverse
the current law on the books on sexual orientation. The bill of course,
would have been a huge step forward for the state of North Dakota.

Earlier today, the State House Human Services Committee voted not to
endorse the bill to keep the law the way it is. The fight is far from

Democratic lawmakers in the state are working to get more support for the
final vote later this week. And if it passes, all the pressure is going to
be put on again, a Republican Governor Jack Dalrymple.

Similar bills in the past to the state of North Dakota, well, passed two
legislative sessions in North Dakota have failed and upholding

Get your cellphones out, I want to know what you think.

Tonight`s question -- are we peeling the scab after Republicans Party
again? Let`s talk about Mike Pence. The question tonight, "Does Mike
Pence need to clarify the way he feels about gay and lesbian Americans?"
Text A for Yes, Text B for No to 67622, we`ll bring you the results later
on the show.

Clearly, it was on his website, in his 2000 campaign, and now he`s got it
signed in the law in Indiana.

For more let me bring in Indiana State Representative Ed DeLaney, he`s with
us tonight, Ryan Anderson, a Heritage Foundation Marriage Scholar and also
Robert Katz, a Law Professor at Indiana University. Gentlemen, I
appreciate the conversation. Thanks for being with us tonight.

Representative DeLaney, I`ll start with you. What are the chances of a for
repeal here, this bill and starting over because that`s what our reporters
on the ground keep hearing that the people in Indiana want to repeal, what
about that?

STATE REP. ED DELANEY, (D) INDIANAPOLIS: The chances are null (ph), this
Governor will not allow his -- priced (ph) bill to be repealed. That won`t
happen. New studies going to have on this, Thursday we`ll have
instantaneous vote on (inaudible).

We may have the lyrics of the song "Kumbaya" or something like that. They
would be asked to adapt. There is one chance in 10 that they decide to
protect people who have different sexual orientations but that`s the
highest as I give it (ph).

SCHULTZ: OK. So they`re going to repeal it as you`re got checked right
now. Mr. DeLaney...

DELANEY: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.

SCHULTZ: If the state won`t repeal what kind of words are going to be
used? I mean, for this clarification that we keep hearing about, what
about words like forbid or mandate instead of clarify, how strong do you
think this is going to be?

DELANEY: It won`t be strong and the problem, Ed, is that on Sunday, my
Governor went on television and refused to answer questions and said that
it`s not on his agenda to protect people from different sexual orientation,
to protect their rights, he said that. He can`t take that back. He`s not
going to change that. He hurt our state I`m very concerned about that. I
don`t want anymore damage but I don`t see him as the man that ends the

SCHULTZ: Ryan Anderson, how does this law open the way for discrimination?
I would imagine you`ve take the position that the Governor is doing the
right thing.

RYAN ANDERSON, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Oh, of course. He is. This law
doesn`t open the door for discrimination. This is the law that`s been on
the federal books governing federal law and federal courts for over 20
years and it governs over 30...

SCHULTZ: Wait a minute, OK, hold it. -- That`s not true...

ANDERSON: It is true.

SCHULTZ: ... because it does not have the definition of person connected
to a corporation, would you agree?

ANDERSON: Sure. No, no, it does. I mean the federal RFRA as the

SCHULTZ: Oh, it does.

ANDERSON: ... Court held -- the Supreme Court held just last term that the
definition of person in the federal RFRA includes corporate persons, most
churches are corporate persons, most charities are corporations. So the
idea that our Industry Administration Act doesn`t protect corporations
really has a very little basis in the law. The Federal Dictionary Act
which governs what federal terms mean, under the term "person" it includes
corporate persons and there is no reason why you would think that if you`re
a corporate form, you can`t exercise religion.

So the good thing about this law...


SCHULTZ: I`m not a -- Mr. Ryan, you`re not corporation. You`re a human
being. Now you may work for a corporation but the...

ANDERSON: Well, I assume that MSNBC is...

SCHULTZ: ... but the rights -- wait a minute -- the rights of you far
exceed that of a corporation, and this right now, if you connect the two
opens the door for blatant discrimination.

ANDERSON: That`s not true. That`s not true. And hold up...


SCHULTZ: But it is true...

ANDERSON: Organizations do have right. The New York Times has free press
rights. It goes not just to each individual reporter but to the

So in the same way...


ANDERSON: ... MSNBC has rights as a journalistic organization. And the
same way, people who form organizations also have their religious liberty
rights protected and this is the law for the whole federal government...

SCHULTZ: Mr. Anderson, we`re down to the fundamentals here.


SCHULTZ: We are down to the fundamentals if a gay couple walks into a
restaurant and I own it, you`re telling me in Indiana if I own that
restaurant, I can tell them to get the hell out of here and you don`t think
that`s discrimination, that`s the position of the right-wing, correct?

ANDERSON: I don`t think that`s the position of the right-wing. I don`t
know anyone in this debate if that is the -- please, please point the names
of people who are saying that restaurant owner should be kicking gays and
lesbians out of their restaurants. You`re demagoguing (inaudible)...

SCHULTZ: Well, that was the question that was put to your Governor and he
couldn`t answer...


ANDERSON: And that`s -- no, no. That not the question. George
Stephanopoulos was...

SCHULTZ: That was the very question that was put to your governor and he
did not answer it...

ANDERSON: (Inaudible), first of all, he`s not my Governor. He`s not my
Governor and...

SCHULTZ: Professor Katz, your thoughts on this.

ANDERSON: ... wait.


ANDERSON: You just kept slandering the Governor. The question that George
Stephanopoulos put to the Governor...

SCHULTZ: Mr. Anderson...

ANDERSON: ... was what`s more precisely quite...


SCHULTZ: Hold on wait a minute.

ANDERSON: It involves a wedding cake.

SCHULTZ: No. No. I`m not going to let you...


ANDERSON: It didn`t involve the restaurant...

SCHULTZ: ... filibuster. We`re going to a conversation on this.

ANDERSON: You`re not going filibuster.

SCHULTZ: Mr. Katz, I want...

ANDERSON: You just slander the Governor, you called him a homophobe. I
think that`s really inappropriate...

SCHULTZ: Cut his mic off. Cut his mic off. I`m not going to -- I gave
him a chance to -- we`ll bring him back if he wants to be courteous.

Mr. Katz, Law Professor at Indiana University, I want you to take on this.

Where is the flaw (ph) if there is one in this law?

ROBERT KATZ, INDIANA UNIVERSITY: I don`t think that the texts of this law
is what`s most interesting or significant here. I think it`s the context
of this law, the timing.

Most -- almost all the other RFRAs were enacted before same-sex marriage
was legalized. This law was enacted not coincidentally.

Several months after same-sex marriage was legalized in Indiana and I think
that the law is, first of all, unnecessary because I think Indiana law was
already very productive and really (ph) just rights.

I think what`s going on here if the state government was using this statute
to communicate to people with profound religious objections to same-sex
marriage that they are, OK, that they are not bigots. And that a culture
that recognizes same-sex marriage is not going to infuse the entire state.

SCHULTZ: All right. I`d like to get your response to that Representative

DELANEY: I think that`s a pretty fair summary. That the notion, I grew up
in a very religious family, I consider myself that way.

The notion that a corporation has a faith is stunning to me. And the only
reason they want us to have faith is -- so they can deny service to people.

The Governor apparently didn`t...


DELANEY: ... read (ph) the press releases from the people who supported
the bill. Go look under Advance America, they were the ones who lobbied
for it, they were the ones who are in the photograph with him. They want
to discriminate against people. They wanted this law to showed up at the
signing which was the public wasn`t allowed.

So the Governor must...


DELANEY: ... not have talked to this lobbyist. He gives no explanation
for this bill. There is an explanation...

SCHULTZ: All right.

DELANEY: ... the fire (ph) that the world was caught on.

SCHULTZ: I want to bring back Mr. Anderson again. Mr. Anderson, if the
Governor is so correct on this and if you`re so correct, why are so many
businesses responding the way they are in leaving Indiana, threatening to
not do any business in your state, the list is rather lengthy, are they

ANDERSON: Yes, they are. They`re also hypocritical.


ANDERSON: Those businesses are saying they want the freedom to run their
businesses in accordance with their values, and so their boycotting a state
that has tried to protect the freedom of religious schools, religious
charities and religious businesses to run their organizations in accordance
with their values.


ANDERSON: It`s really hypocritical.

SCHULTZ: So Tim Cook at Apple is wrong. So Tim Cook at Apple was wrong.

ANDERSON: Yes. So I wrote an article that -- just yesterday.

Tim Cook is boycotting...


ANDERSON: ... the state of Indiana. He`s also said that certain Christian
apps can`t be on the App`s Store. So if Tim Cook (inaudible) is this...


SCHULTZ: OK. And we have just got -- we`ve got Angie`s List, we`ve got
the NCAA, we`ve got the NFL. We just have a whole bunch of people that are
just not understanding what`s going on in the state of Indiana.

ANDERSON: Well, we have...

SCHULTZ: I mean the list is growing everyday.

ANDERSON: We have big business that is throwing small family businesses
under the bus. We have big businesses that are saying we want...


ANDERSON: ... rights first so that we`re not going to grant other people.
Besides (inaudible) they got to run their businesses in accordance with
their beliefs. Why can a mom and pop...


ANDERSON: ... photography shop runs their business in accordance with
their beliefs? I mean if there`s anyone empowered...


ANDERSON: ... in this debate, it seems to be the left.

SCHULTZ: All right. We want to hear all sides even with the accusations
of slander. I`m, good enough (ph) to bring you back...

ANDERSON: You called the Governor a homophobe. I mean...

SCHULTZ: Your way -- your -- well, in my opinion, he is.

ANDERSON: Well, I mean...

SCHULTZ: That is my opinion.


SCHULTZ: Go to his website in -- go to -- I don`t care what it is.

ANDERSON: I`m just saying, you know, that`s the only person was uncivil
with you...

SCHULTZ: You can go to his website in 2000 and you can see exactly what he
wrote on his website when he ran for office in 2000 and if you don`t think
that`s discrimination, you...

ANDERSON: It`s not discrimination...

SCHULTZ: ... you need to be counsel up in a big way.

ANDERSON: To think that marriage is...


SCHULTZ: Good to have you with us, gentleman. I appreciate this. I
apologize for the gap from the Heritage Foundation who can`t have a civil
conversation. We attempted to do that.

Representative DeLaney and also Professor Katz, I appreciate your time

Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the screen and
share your thoughts with us on Twitter @edshow and on Facebook. You can
get my video podcast on this subject at

We`re less than hour from the nuclear deal deadline and Ann Curry joins us
live from Switzerland where negotiations are down to the wire. Plus, the
buzz on Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Clinton in a liberal push for a

Stay with us. We`ll be right back in the Ed Show.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. Thanks for watching tonight.

There are new developments in the Iran nuclear talks.

The State Department said enough progress was made in the last few days to
merit an extension of tonight`s 6:00 P.M. self-imposed deadline for deal.

Its official, Diplomats in Switzerland will be back for another round of
Iran Nuclear negotiations tomorrow. At this point, it`s unclear if
Secretary State John Kerry will successfully walkaway with a deal.

NBC`s Steve Handelsman has the latest.


STEVE HANDELSMAN, NBC CORRESPONDENT: As midnight approach in Switzerland,
the Iranians, the Americans and the others agreed to keep talking with
still no nuclear agreement in writing.

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN: If we are making progress toward the
finish line, then we should keep going.

HANDELSMAN: It may look like failure or falling short for Secretary State
Kerry but many in Washington are pleased.

JOE CIRINCIONE, NUCLEAR EXPERT: We`re doing well. This is tough stuff.

HANDELSMAN: Nuclear expert Joe Cirincione says, even though the Iranians
have not agreed to give up their uranium or agreed to 10-year deal, they
have agreed verbally to take most of their bomb making year off line and to
allow intrusive inspections.

CIRINCIONE: We`re going to slash the Iranian program, freeze it, lock it
up and put a camera on it. We`re now just negotiating the details of
exactly we how to do that.

HANDELSMAN: So this is a win for the U.S.?

CIRINCIONE: This is major win for U.S. national security.

HANDELSMAN: With the deadline for a written deal now June 30th, President
Obama will push to keep sanctions in place.

NICK BURNS, AMBASSADOR: Iran`s only at the table because of the sanctions
and a sovereignty of the sanctions.

HANDELSMAN: Some in Congress wants sanctions happen (ph).

REP. BRAD SHERMAN, (D) CALIFORNIA: They`ve got to come up with something
from Switzerland or there will be a move to impose additional sanctions.

HANDELSMAN: But President Obama warns. He`d veto any move by Congress that
he thinks could jeopardize the talks.


SCHULTZ: Joining me tonight is Ann Curry reporting for NBC news, and great
to have you with us tonight. How confident are negotiators that this is
heading in the right direction and there is substance to all of this?

ANN CURRY, NBC REPORTER: You know, Ed, good evening. And since you asked
me that question at this very moment because just a short time ago, we
heard not just from United States but also British negotiators but also
Iranian negotiators, that some significant progress has been made in recent
hours. And so the words people are using are upbeat and hopeful so -- and
the Iranians have used that word hopeful. So I think its fair to say that
there believe -- they believe not only do they see the finish line, but
that they will cross it.

SCHULTZ: What are the main obstacles at this point standing in way of
finalizing a deal? What is the biggest hurdle as you as you see?

CURRY: Well, we heard some of them as outlined by the reporter we just
heard from Steve Handelsman. But essentially, what they seem to be and
this is based on information from multiple sources collecting all that
information a lot of that information is off the record because they`re not
really allowed to talk publicly in those cases. But what seems to be the
hurdles are -- the research and development capability for Iran from years
11 to 15, from year 0 to 10 that seems to be fairly resolved.

The issue as we heard from the Steve about what to do with material whether
or not Iran will allow material that it could be use for untoward purposes
to be sent out of the country for to potentially to Russia another
potential of another big issue for the Iranian especially is what to do
about U.N sanctions.

Now, there is already been a deal, Ed, and we feel pretty strongly that we
have this that we can say this categorically because this comes from so
many multiple sources. But that they`re seems to already have been nailed
down a deal on sanctions, U.S. sanctions, and other international

And it would be a quid pro quo kind of deal. In other words, Iran would
have to do X and then this particular sanction would be a reversed or would
be rolled back. And that would happen over the course of many years to get
through all those sanctions.

But what is still not resolve in terms of the sanctions for Iran is what to
do about the U.N sanctions. And that`s a very big deal for Iran because
they want those sanctions rolled back because it would say to the world
that they would no longer be an outlier in the international community.

SCHULTZ: All right. Ann Curry, reporting tonight from Switzerland, I
appreciate your time. And thanks so much for joining us on the Ed show.

Joining me now is former Pennsylvania Congressmen Joe Sestak. Admiral good
to have you with us tonight, what do you make at the latest news...

FMR. REP. JOE SESTAK (D) PENNSYLVANIA: Good to be with you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: ... that your first take on it.

SESTAK: Well, I hope that we are going to be successful another day or to
try to get to this agreement is what worth our security.

Look, Ed, we already had Iran a year ago within one month of having a
nuclear device. They had already been setback one year because we degraded
their uranium from 23 percent all the way down to 4 percent and destroyed
the centrifuges that they need to get back up there.

If we can now solidify that as well as this research and development issue
where we don`t want them to be able do anymore research except for a
nuclear infrastructure from medicine for example.

If we can do these types of things our security is so much better because
the only other option is war. And this conflict would be a tough one, we
can do it but it would be very challenging.

SCHULTZ: And, you know, Joe Sestak with us tonight whose running for the
Senate in Pennsylvania, who spend 30 years in the military, in navy
intelligence, what do you make at the piecemeal effort here if Iran does X
the world would do Y when it comes to sanctions and relieving of sanctions.
Is this really the carrot and stick going to work?

SESTAK: This is exactly how it should be. Look, Iran wanted the sanctions
all lifted off immediately, no way. Negotiations should hurt and we want
them to understand that those sanctions are going to be re lifted only when
they adhere to an agreement, and there will be step by step.

Not only that, we want T.V. eyes right there day in and day out with
surprise inspections to make sure just like President Reagan did with the
Soviet Union when he did this -- the talks in nuclear arms, trust but

I think if we are successful with this that we will have an Israel and the
United States of America with our troops in that Persian Gulf so much more
secure because, Ed, as I`ve said before, our militaries can stop a problem.
We can`t fix it and we can`t strike them...


SESTAK: ... but in a study I was involve with, with 40 other generals and
admirals we can only stop it for four years if we strike the nuclear

SCHULTZ: Well, Mr. Sestak, looking at this, the opposition to these
negotiations obviously is more sanctions will really strangle the Iranians
to the point were they`re going to have to capitulate in negotiation.
That`s a big conversation that`s going on in Washington right now.

As you see it, is there a time when the United States would walkaway from
the table or we just never going to walkaway from the table? And Iran`s
going to be able to play this to the very end as long as they can. Your

SESTAK: If we must walkaway from the table, if we are not able to make
sure that there uranium and their plutonium is so degraded or shipped out
of the country, with verifiable means that it`s locked in. And second,
that they are not able to have the fabrication of centrifuges once again,
the ones we destroyed, they get enriched that uranium once more. And
third, to make sure that in the final use of an agreement, they can`t speed
up and do the research in order to get into the new type of development.
No, we must walkaway if this is not locked in.

SCHULTZ: All right. Admiral Joe Sestak, great to have you with us
tonight. Sir, always great to get (ph) your take and insight on things.

SESTAK: Great to be with you, Ed. Thank you.

SCHULTZ: I appreciate it. You bet.

Next, we`re going to dig in to the nuclear deal what it is really all
about. The global economy, what Iran needs and that`s oil production,
they`re big player. Plus, Elizabeth Warren on Hillary Clinton in the 2016

We`ll be right back on the Ed Show, stay with us.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

One issue which is largely overlooked in the media coverage with the Iran
nuclear talks is oil.

Oil is a huge part of the civility of Iran. They depend on it, greatly.
The world oil markets are paying close attention.

CNBC`s Jackie Deangelis has more.


JACKIE DEANGELIS, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: It`s all about Iran at the moment
when it comes to oil but the deadline for a nuclear deal looming large.
Oil traders think that it at least the framework will be reached to clear a
path forward.

That`s because Iran is one of OPEC`s largest producers. With break-evens
with the country reported that over $100 a barrel, U.S. imposed sanctions
are hitting the country where it hurts.

ANTHONY GRISANTI, PRES. GRZ GRISANTI: The Iranians, what they do is, they
subsidize a lot of things that happen in their country such as gas sales
and things like that. And they aren`t able to do that if they`re not
selling the oil. So -- really the citizens on the street feel it.

The international side is that the Iranians can`t sell oil. They can
barely fund things that they need to do infrastructure projects, things
like that. So definitely the last two years of sanctions have hurt them

DEANGELIS: But a nuclear deal could lead to sanctions being lifted and
that could add to the decline that we`ve already seen in oil prices.
That`s because more Iranian oil would only add to an already oversupplied

GRISANTI: If there is a nuclear deal cut, Iran doesn`t get a nuclear bomb
but the Southeast have to deal with Iranian oil coming back immediately
because that`s what the Iranians want.

If there is no nuclear deal, then the Southeast have to worry about the
Iranians getting a bomb and that really ups the mistrust, the distrust and
also the geopolitical problems in the Middle East.

I`m sure that the Southeast don`t want another million barrels of oil on an
already oversupplied world market. So I think they`ll do everything they
can behind the scenes to make sure Iranian oil doesn`t comeback on the
market anytime soon.

DEANGELIS: We already know that U.S. supplies are robust last week after
another strong bill. The IEA said that the level of crude and storage
remains at an 80-year high for the 11th consecutive week. And at the
moment, there are no signs that global demand will pick up.

So it appears the crude conundrum continues with some of the big Wall
Street firms calling for oil to go to the 30s maybe even the 20s if the
supply-demand situation doesn`t work itself out.


SCHULTZ: And there is by partisan support in Congress for more sanctions.

We turned out tonight to Bart Chilton, Former CFTC Commissioner and Senior
Policy Advisor at DLA Piper and he joins us. Bart, good to have you back
with us tonight.

The nuclear deal, let`s say that there is a deal, sanctions are lifted,
more Iranian oil thrown on the market. I mean, where does the oil market
go? How low do you think prices could actually go if there`s a deal?

BART CHILTON, FRM. CFTC COMMISSIONER: Ed, the experts that I listened who
tell me it could go down into the 20s which, you know, for most of the
viewers, you think, well, that will help me out on gas prices, and it

Currently, the average price of gas is 242 a gallon, oil which as you know,
was up about $117 a barrel last summer is down now as $47.47 just a little
bit ago. So it could have a big impact all this added increase in -- if
the sanctions are lifted with Iranian oil.

SCHULTZ: So oil prices could really drop further if there is a deal. And
if that happens, where does that leave the Saudis? There are the oil
businesses big as anybody.

CHILTON: Well, I mean this is -- oil is really a global commodity now, you
know, between not just the Southeast and OPEC but the Russians and the U.S.
We produced about 9.6 million barrels a day to give you -- and Venezuela
also, by the way. But to give you an idea sort of landscape of what oil
is, is that the International Energy Agency says that 93 million barrels
are produced -- or are needed a day, 93 million needed but we produced 94
million a day.

Now, Iran alone produces 1.2 but in the past, Ed, they produced 4 million.
That`s a lot of numbers but the point is that, with there are sanctions
being lifted, Iran actually could even further flood the oil markets and as
we`ve talked about before, there is a lot of surplus out there today.

SCHULTZ: They could and that`s what they want to do because they need
money to run their country, their society, and of course, their
infrastructure what was well documented in that story.

So their society, their people need this nuclear deal to have a better
country and to be better funded but that of course is going to affect the
world market and the supply and demand. I mean it`s really an amazing that
economy that`s playing out here.


SCHULTZ: Bart Chilton, always great to have you with us. I appreciate
your time tonight. Thank you.

Coming up, Elizabeth Warren says that she will not run. Rapid Response
Panel is next.

Stay with us. We`ll be right back in the Ed Show.

KATE ROGERS: I`m Kate Rogers with your CNBC Market Wrap.

Stocks fell off with the close. The DOW flies 200 point landing in
negative territory for the year, the S&P falls 18 points and the NASDAQ
shedding 46.

Another move higher for home prices today, the latest figures from
S&P/Case-Shiller show prices growth 4.6 percent across the U.S.

And consumers are feeling more confident according to the conference board.
Sentiment was much better than expected in March due to an improving
outlook on employment.

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


SCHULTZ: And we are back.

Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts isn`t budging on her presidential


WARREN: I`m not running and I`m not going to run. You know, I`m in
Washington, I`ve got this really great job and a chance to try to make a
difference on things that really matter.


SCHULTZ: Warren doubled down on her pledge to stay out of the race.

Despite the progressive push, Senator Warren will leave the field wide open
for Hillary Clinton.

No serious Democratic competition has emerged but one contender is taking


FRM. GOV. MARTIN O`MALLEY, (D) MARYLAND: We need a president who is on our
side, a president who is willing to take on powerful wealthy special

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC HOST: And Hillary Clinton is not the candidate
to take on those powerful special interests?

O`MALLEY: Oh, I don`t know. I don`t know where she stands. Let`s be
honest here, the presidency of the United States is not some crown to be
passed between two families.


SCHULTZ: Martin O`Malley wants to challenge Clinton but he needs voters to
learn his name first.

The former Maryland Governor is struggling for recognition in a sea of
voters (ph) who are "Ready for Hillary".

He is not putting any real pressure on her camp, that`s for sure. Hillary
Clinton, what does she have? The resources, the resume, when we should ask
this, what doesn`t Hillary have?

I mean, across the board, she`s just qualified as anybody, life experience,
professional experience.

The longer Hillary Clinton waits, the stronger she gets.

I want to talk more about this with a Rapid Response Panel Lanny Davis,
former Special Counsel in the White House and Columnist for the Hill
Newspaper. Mr. Davis is a longtime friend of Hillary Clinton but is not
officially speaking for. Also with us tonight Mercedes Schlapp was a
Republican Strategist and former Spokesperson for President George W. Bush,
great to have both of you with us tonight.


SCHULTZ: Lanny, what`s the strategy here? I mean patience seems to be the
policy. When is this going to happen?

DAVIS: Well, I don`t have any inside knowledge. I wish I did but I
suspect it`ll be sooner rather than later.

I think we`re already for Hillary. Now, it`s time for Hillary. They`d be
ready for Hillary and I think it`s probably sooner rather than later, Ed,
but that`s just my guess.

SCHULTZ: Well, you know, Governor O`Malley brought up an interesting
comment. He says I don`t know where she stands. You know, when I think
about that, we have unheard what Hillary`s economic platform is in eight
years. That the issues are different, where is she stand on trade of the
TPP and fast track? How aggressive is she going to be on the environment?

I mean, is there a possibility that the Democrats won`t have a fully vetted
candidate and I know we`ve known her for 37 years but the issues are
different now. What about that, Lanny?

DAVIS: Well, Governor O`Malley is my Governor. I voted for him thrice.
He supported Hillary Clinton in 2008.

She voted over and over again in United States Senate for a term and a half
before she became Secretary of the State on multiple votes taking
progressive positions in favor of the minimum wage, in favor of the
consumer finance protection board and certainly, supports Dodd-Frank and
lots of other heavy regulation on banks that are too big to fail.

Martin O`Malley knows that she is a Progressive Democrat as he is that`s
why he supported here. It was a quick throw away line to George
Stephanopoulos, you know, he`d love to take that line back.

SCHULTZ: Well, I`ve like to know where the Progressive Democrats stands on

Mercedes Schlapp, what does it mean that Elizabeth Warren isn`t going to
run? What is that do to the Democratic competition as you see it from a
Republican standpoint?

is no Democratic competition. Obviously, Secretary Hillary Clinton is
going to, again, have all the resources she needs, that she now already for
Hillary raised $9 million and that`s pennies for her in 2014.

And again, when you look at the poll numbers itself, I mean, Democrats
support 62 percent that support Hillary Clinton.

What`s interesting is that, Hillary Clinton`s problem, her challenge is
going to be her self. So the quieter that she is, the less mute she make,
which actually helps build this aura around her about, oh, being the first
woman president.

But once she start stepping more into the limelight, once she announce it,
that`s going to be the key where if she is going to be able to bring that
liberal based to support her, those people that are really empty (ph) and
really wanting Elizabeth Warren to run.

SCHULTZ: What about that, Lanny? Will the liberal base be there for

DAVIS: Well, she comes from that base but she also has worked with
Republicans and in the Senate was very effective as a Senator that could
work with the other side of the deal.

I`m just so amused almost went at losing my voice at seeing my compatriot
here on the Republican side. They`re (ph) so concerned about Hillary
Clinton whether she is going to be stronger or not.

You have to ask yourself, why are the Republicans so preoccupied with
Hillary Clinton with attacking, and attacking, and attacking when they
still don`t have a single idea how to get universal health care in this

Their ideas are lacking so all they know how to do is attack, attack,
attack, I hope they stay on that course. We`ll have Hillary Clinton as our
next president if they do.

SCHULTZ: Mercedes, what about that?

SCHLAPP: Well, I mean, you know, absolute -- Republicans need to have
their own solutions when it comes to a variety of issues which is we`re
going to see in this 2016 race. There`s going to be a lot of these
candidates that are going to be coming up with these very different
policies that we`re currently seeing under President Obama.

So the interesting point will be here, you know, again, who is going to be
able to build this broader coalition of independence, women Hispanic voters
on the Republican side. And so, I think for Hillary`s advantage, there is
a fact that she is a sole...


SCHLAPP: ... person running and so there is really not going to be that
debate within the Democratic Party.

And plus one big issue for Hillary will be, can the American people trust
Hillary. That`s an issue that seems to be coming up more and more as we`re
seeing with the e-mail server with the foundation money.

So, again, those are going to be questions that she is going to need to

SCHULTZ: Well, for the foundation money is on a lot a good things for a
lot of people, Mercedes. I mean that would be a tough area, I think, for
Republicans to criticize her end.

But I want to -- I got a confession to Lanny Davis here tonight. Lanny,
you mentioned universal health care. If Hillary Clinton is for universal
health care, I tell you what, I`m buying a ticket to get in that -- on that
bandwagon because that`s really where we got -- that`s where we got to go.
That`s where the country is got to go.

Lanny Davis, Mercedes Schlapp...

DAVIS: Thank you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: ... great to have both of you with us tonight.

SCHLAPP: Thank you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: I appreciate it so much. Coming up...

DAVIS: Thank you. Thank you.

SCHULTZ: Coming up, Iraqi forces have taken back the city of Tikrit.
Story ahead, stay with us.


SCHULTZ: ISIS is handed a huge defeat we`ll tell you about it next stay
tune we`re right back.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

And finally tonight, official say Iraqi forces have taken back to city of

Tikrit has been under control of ISIS since last June. Operations are
retake the hometown of former President Saddam Hussein began on March 2nd.
There were major advances over the past 48 hours.

Earlier today, the Iraqi Prime Minister said on state TV, joint forces
recapture the city. The push into Tikrit comes days after a series of U.S.
led air strikes targeted ISIS controlled spots around the city.

Joining me tonight Steve Clemons is a Washington Editor-at-Large at the
Atlantic, also with us tonight is Steven Bucci who is the Director of the
Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at the Heritage

Mr. Bucci, let me ask you first. Is this a turn of events, how would you
characterize this turn of events? How big is this in the fight against

STEVEN BUCCI, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Well, it`s an important step in the
fight against ISIS. I wouldn`t say its really turn any great corners if
your going to liberate Mosul, you got to go through Tikrit first.

So it`s great first step. Hopefully it will improve to work itself out but
there still a lot of emptiness (ph) about this.

SCHULTZ: Steve Clemons, is this is a sign that the strategy is working the
coalition forces can defeat ISIS?

STEVE CLEMONS, THE ATLANTIC: Well no it`s not because this is basically
showing that the underlying tensions between the Abadi government which is
dependent enormously on Iranian support and Shiite militias fought ISIS in
Tikrit, but we`re unable to bring any substantial Sunni forces and Sunni
young men in mass into that fight. And they remain skeptical and on
sidelines. And Mosul is untakeable without the Sunni participation.

So if this was a staging ground for Mosul while it may look good today
because of what we see with ISIS, it ultimately as a failure because the
broader equation has not yet been put together to bring that country back

SCHULTZ: Mr. Bucci, your thoughts on what the United States needs to do at
this point?

BUCCI: Well, the United States needs to do more than just provide air
support. They need to help the Iraqi government do exactly what my
colleague just said. They`ve got to get the Sunni`s involved. They can`t
do this just with the Shiite militias who are all advice right now by
Iranian Quds force commandos.

We should have our special operators in with some of these Iraqi units to
try in help because we`re not just there yet.

SCHULTZ: Well, is that what the American people want. I mean is that
whether it`s popular or not something that just absolutely has to be done?

BUCCI: I think that we`re seeing a shift in the public opinion and
frankly, putting our special operators in there. It`s not exactly like
deploying marine battalions and regiments. Those guys are not really boots
on the ground that`s there job, is to go work with other militaries.

I think there would be support for that.

SCHULTZ: What about that, Steve, is public opinion turning on this?

CLEMONS: Well, I don`t know public opinion is treading (ph) but this is
step before I think the injection of troops. I understand exactly where
Steven is coming from.

But right now, the Abadi government in Baghdad is blocking the army of the
Sunni tribes. They have asked for U.S. support, they have -- and European
support, they said they would fight with us against ISIS.

Our administration, the Obama administration, has said that we won`t allow
an arming of them without Baghdad approving. And right now, Baghdad is
still overwhelming dominated by Shiite who don`t trust the Sunni.

So there`s a step before what Steve talks about which is removing that
blockage and telling Baghdad that they must allow the arming of potential
Sunni allies where Mosul won`t work.

SCHULTZ: And, Mr. Bucci, how is this our fight? And I`d like your
thoughts on how is this our fight. I think that`s where a lot of Americans
are right now.

BUCCI: Well, it`s not our fight in that, you know, ISIS is about to come
over the beaches into America. But we have interest in the region, we have
allies in the region, and ISIS has said they were going to come after you
no matter where you are in the world.

We need to deal with this hopefully in conjunction with allies and friends
not just ourselves. But if we`re going to continue to be a global power,
this is where the problem is right now.

SCHULTZ: All right. Steve Clemons, Steve Bucci, great to have both of you
with us tonight, I appreciate it. Thanks for being on the Ed show.

That is the Ed Show, I`m Ed Schultz.

PoliticsNation with Reverend Al Sharpton starts right now. Good evening,


<Copy: Content and programming copyright 2015 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Copyright 2015 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>

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

Sponsored links

Resource guide