Skip navigation

The Ed Show for Wednesday, April 22nd, 2015

Read the transcript to the Wednesday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

Date: April 22, 2015
Guest: Daryl Parks, Joe Cirincione, Sherrod Brown, Marcy Kaptur, Barbara

ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Welcome to the Ed Show live from Pensacola,

Let`s get to work.




SCHULTZ: Tonight.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Our officers, our task force are interviewing witnesses
to the event.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No justice, no peace.

SCHULTZ: Later, Trans-Pacific Partnership.

progressives are suspicious...

now but hell no.

OBAMA: Generally because of the experiences they saw in the past.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If it doesn`t stop, we will be railroaded.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I hope you`re listening because this is so serious.

OBAMA: In places like this, folks don`t have time, we don`t have time, you
do not have time to deny the effects of climate change.


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

We start this evening with the latest out of Baltimore, Maryland. The
death of Freddie Gray has grabbed national attention.

The protests in the streets of Baltimore are expected to continue this

Gray was arrested on April 12 after a foot chase with the police.
Baltimore police said he was arrested without force or incident.

Gray died on April 19th. His family said that 80 percent of his spinal
cord was severed. It`s not clear when or how he got injured.

NBC`s Kurt Gregory has the latest.


KURT GREGORY, NBC: ... this department announced Tuesday it`s conducting
its own investigation into how Freddie Gray suffered a fatal spinal cord
injury while in police custody.

On Monday, police released a timeline of the arrest.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get off him yo.

GREGORY: Gray was taken into custody around 8:40 A.M. Seen here in
cellphone video provided by the family`s attorney.

Sometime between this moment, and paramedics being called less than an hour
later, Gray`s spine was nearly severed.

The 25-year-old succumbed to those injuries Sunday.

we need to get to is how that injury occurred.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We will fight for Freddie Gray.

GREGORY: In the days that have followed, hundreds have taken to the
streets. Peaceful but persistent in their search for answers.

C.D WITHERSPOON: We`re very, very concerned that this is a pattern here in
Baltimore City.

GREGORY: Over the past four years, more than 100 people have won court
judgments or settled with Baltimore over police brutality and civil rights

Even more gathered Tuesday, marching the spot Gray was arrested to a police

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I have a son, and I would never want this to happen
to my son.

GREGORY: Tensions growing in Baltimore, the latest city to come under the
glare of the national spotlight at harsh questions concerning their police.


SCHULTZ: The Baltimore Sun reports that there are four separate
investigations currently underway into the death of Freddie Gray. There is
a criminal review that will be sent to the State`s Attorneys Office by May

There`s an internal investigation to determine if officers should be fired
or disciplined.

Baltimore Police Commissioner Anthony Batts has set up an independent panel
to review this situation. And the Justice Department has opened a civil
rights investigation.

Baltimore Police have released the names of these six officers involved in
Gray`s arrest. They have all been suspended with pay.

The Baltimore Sun also reports that the Justice Department is already
conducting a collaborative review of the Baltimore Police Department.

The city has reportedly paid $5.7 million in court judgments and
settlements in more than 102 lawsuits alleging police misconduct since

So, the big question tonight is this, why is this kind of behavior and
police misconducts still continuing after these settlements?

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

Tonight`s question, you can vote on this, "Do you trust the ongoing
investigations by law enforcement?"

Go to to cast your vote. We`ll bring you the results
later on in this show.

For more, let me bring in Daryl Parks, Attorney and Partner at Parks and
Crump, also with us tonight Dr. James Peterson, MSNBC Contributor and
Director of Africana Studies at Lehigh University. Gentlemen, good to have
you with us tonight.

Mr. Parks, you first, what`s the chance of these investigations having
different outcomes?

those investigations will don`t -- will actually be aligned with each
other, and we`ll gather some of the same information at the same time.
We`ve seen this in other investigations.

However, the problem that we are going to see early on in this case is the
issue of transparency.

I was just listening to press conference by the Police Union, and already
they are playing a game of not giving the public full information.

I think the one thing that this case calls for and all the other cases that
involved the police calls for early transparency. The game of saying,
wait, wait, wait, is something that the American public is not willing to
tolerate, at least not at this point as it makes (ph) to the police.

SCHULTZ: Mr. Parks, do we know who is inside the medical van with the
deceased? Do we know who was with Freddie Gray? Was there a police
officer in the van when he was transported?

PARKS: Not normal you wouldn`t find a cop in there. I`ll be surprised if
we find one inside the van (ph). However, Ed, I think, given what we`ve
see on those tape thus far, I`m highly suspicious that Freddie Gray may
have possibly suffered what we call a takedown injury when the cops took
him down.

When you observe the condition and the position of his body as the cops are
walking him from the sidewalk to the paddy wagon, you noticed a lot of
obvious thing.

You noticed his legs are very limped. You notice the position of his neck.
You noticed -- those things are obvious thing that there possibly was some
type of injury to the cervical area of Mr. Gray. So, those are serious
concerns that I think that may have already happened even before he got
into the paddy wagon that what we saw after what was the residual thing
(ph) to a possible cervical injury that it already taken place with the
initial encounter with the officers.

SCHULTZ: And Mr. Parks, from a legal perspective, how damaging is this
video tape?

PARKS: Ed, it`s a powerful video tape, and it gives us a clear glimpse of
what was taken place with the officers when they were putting too much
pressure on him, and he was asking for help, and they continued to -- they
really turned a deaf ear to him.

We`ve seen this time and time again. You know, even when people are in
distress officers tend not to believe him, not to give them proper aid
during that time, and they go on with -- with what they would normally do
in terms of effecting the arrest.

And, I think the injury had happened already while he was on the sidewalk.
Once, he was inside the van, he`s in the paddy wagon, hopefully, there
maybe a recording of the video camera there.

I know there was a video camera in that paddy wagon, for what I`ve been
told thus far. We`ll just have to see if there was a recording at that

SCHULTZ: All right. Are you -- so, back to my original question, do you
think there`ll be any discrepancies? What`s -- what`s your gut feeling
here that there will be some discrepancies? Or do you think all of these
reports are going to come back with the same analysis, same conclusion,
same facts?

PARKS: Well, I had to say facts, Ed. And I think, the one thing we have
to be careful about is similar to what we`ve seen in other cases including,
let`s say, the Michael Brown case in Missouri.

You could have the same set of facts but different investigators maybe use
that different set of rules and laws in terms of how they judge the facts.
Well, the difference will be, the rules and laws that they are using that
judge the facts in each case.

SCHULTZ: OK. Dr. Peterson, despite the judgments and settlements that
have taken place in the city of Baltimore, the videotape suggests that
nothing has really changed. Your reaction.

JAMES PETERSON, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Well, that`s the reason why we have to
look at these things in aggregate, Ed. Because when they`re settling these
cases and when we sort of treat them in the media as individual case, we`re
starting to get more aggregated data and look at these things across the
nation which helps us to understand the systematic nature of their problem.

But Attorney Parks is absolutely right here. And what he means by
transparency is, someone from law enforcement in Baltimore whether anywhere
from the Mayor to the Commissioner, or someone needs to say why they
arrested him in the first place, what was the probable cause?

Running while black is not a reason to be arrested. So, please, release
that information. It will help to restore a little bit of the trust
between the community and law enforcement.

Number two, if there is -- if there are autopsy documents and an autopsy
report that provides information about exactly what happened to him and how
sort of what were the sort of categorical reasons for his murder or his
death. They need to release that information.

Transparency is the key here because all those settlements suggest to the
people, that community that not only has the erosion of trust going to
epidemic proportions between law enforcement and the community Ed, but
also, they can`t be trusted going forward even if they`re caught.


PETERSON: And so that`s where you get frustration, that`s where you get
frustration in the community.

SCHULTZ: It is almost crucial that this doesn`t spiral out of control.
There`s been a lot of emotion on the streets of Baltimore because of

PETERSON: Ed, it`s already out of control, Ed. Law enforcement is already
out of control.

We often want to talk about protesters being peaceful. We want people at
Baltimore to be peaceful. Everyone knows that.

But this is already out of control. How many times are we going to cover
these stories on your network?

SCHULTZ: Well, we`re going to cover them when they happen, that`s for
sure, but the point you -- are you suggesting that these protest should be
a little bit more ramped up than what we`ve seen? I mean, I just want to
get some clarification here.

PETERSON: Not at all. I`m suggesting that if we`re going to call for
peace, we need to direct that at law enforcement.

Law enforcement is already out of control. It`s the law enforcement that
we should be directing our calls for peace because they`re the ones who are
murdering unarmed civilians in the streets.

SCHULTZ: From a prosecutor standpoint, Mr. Parks, how would you prove that
the injury took place and what was inflicted by police officers? I mean,
proving that even with the videotape is still going to be pretty hard if
they all have the same testimony, isn`t it?

PARKS: Not necessarily Ed, I`ve had similar cases to this where a person
suffered a cervical injury on take down. And what you will see is -- I
think what you`ll see in the medical records in this case, you will detect
whether there is (ph) bruising to some part of his neck or some part of his
head that we (we) have a shift, you know, fig (ph) that would have caused
this type of injury.

So, right now we don`t have any the medical records, you don`t know about
any bruising to the head, to the neck area, to the upper part of the tarso.
You don`t know those things. So once you learn that type of information
you`ll know lot more but the mechanism of injury, once (ph) the mechanism
of injury, there are folks who would certainly do -- whether an orthopedic
surgeon who could tell you how his injury more than likely happened from
medical standpoint so...


PARKERS: ... we see this kind of injuries all time at take down

SCHULTZ: Well, something is not right here. We obviously -- we have a
dead person on her hands in Freddie Gray, yet the police are saying that he
was arrested without incident. So, was a billy club involved? We`re any
of these officers carrying a nightstick? Were they taken out of their

I mean these are the basics that are going to have to lead us down the path
of the investigation. And I would assume that the investigation Dr.
Peterson would be asking those questions. What equipment was used in
apprehending this 25-year-old guy off his bicycle?

PETERSON: They certainly -- they are...


There`s no evidence on the video tape that suggest that -- that at least in
terms of the video tape that I`ve seen it suggest, they actually beat him.
Attorney Parks is right here, maybe there was -- something happened in the
take down. My point is, is that, be more transparent in forthcoming.

Why do we have so much delay in getting us access to that information? And
if there is more video or if they do know what happens, why is -- why do
they make the community feels that they`re trying to get their story
together instead of being transparent and releasing what would...


PETERSON: ... you know, so we`re not making this sort of gestures and
guesses about what happened or what didn`t happen, set their record
straight with the (inaudible)...

SCHULTZ: Well I`m not making as a guess. What I am suggesting, I think
that that needs to be part of the investigation. And certainly that should
be something that should be release in the public. Daryl Parks you have a
thought on that?

PARKS: Yeah, without question. Ed, the problem you`ve seen in all this
case that we`ve seen around the country is when authorities fail to be
forthright in the information. Normally that`s what makes the public begin
to fester when they authorities fail to give out -- I`ll give you a good
example was -- when we saw the cop that was killed in Los Angeles I was so
impressed on how the City of Los Angeles quickly gave out plenty of
information regarding what happened.

In this...


PARKS: ... case here, I think the authorities are the ones (ph), to give
out information is going to be a big problem in the City of Baltimore.

SCHULTZ: All right, Daryl Parks, James Peterson, gentlemen thanks for the
conversation tonight. Remember to answer tonight`s question...

PETERSON: Thanks Ed.

SCHULTZ: ... at, we`ll have the results right after the
break. Follow us on Twitter and watch my Facebook feature "Give me
minute". You can get my video podcast at

Coming up, Republicans at war over war. We`ll look at Rand Paul and
Lindsey Graham`s national security scuffle.

And later, Paul Ryan promotes the TPP. Congressional Democrats join me to
discuss the latest on fast track fight and more. Stay with us we`ll be
right back.


SCHULTZ: And here`s where we stand on tonight`s Bing Pulse Poll.
Question, "Do you trust the ongoing investigations by law enforcement?"

79, 80, 81 percent of you say "No", right now its 79 percent. Some of the
folks out there say, no, they don`t trust the investigations.

More coming up with the Ed Show. Stay with us we`ll be right back.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. So who`s the biggest hawk in the
party? A war of words over national security is heating up in the
Republican Party. Presidential hopeful Rand Paul is trying to defend his
credentials by firing back at hawkish Republicans.

Here`s what he had to say about Senator`s John McCain and Lindsey Graham.


SEN. RAND PAUL, (R) KENTUCKY: I`m really the one standing up to President
Obama and these people are essentially the lapdogs for President Obama and
I think they`re sensitive about that.


SCHULTZ: Here`s how Senator Lindsey Graham responded.


GRAHAM: Rand`s a libertarian...


GRAHAM: He`s view of the world I don`t share.


GRAHAM: He said that we should have any troops in Iraq. He agrees with
Obama, that was a disaster. When there was a chance to do something
constructive about Syria with the no-fly zone he said we don`t need one.
Generally speaking he`s been more wrong than right. He has isolationist
view of the world that I don`t share.


SCHULTZ: It sure seems to me that the Republican feel is trying to
distance Rand Paul from their party. I`m joining tonight Michael Steele
MSNBC Political Analyst and Former RNC Chair, also with us tonight Joe
Cirincione, President of the Ploughshares Fund. Gentlemen, great to have
you with us.


SCHULTZ: Michael you first what`s going on here? This is very unusual
that Republican candidates would breakout in a war of words over how to
defend the country or interact with the world when it comes to military


SCHULTZ: Is Rand Paul facing skepticism for his non-interventionist views,
what`s happening here, what`s unfolding here?

STEELE: I think you got your finger on it a little bit there Ed. It is
sort of breaking out because you got someone who`s injected something into
the conversation that`s contrary to the standard or status quo belief that,
you know, this is how we engage in foreign affairs militarily.

Rand Paul is in my estimation -- and I think the estimation of a lot of
Republicans around the country is taking a more common sense approach.
Where he`s agree with the president, he has stated that publicly and stood
by that, where he`s disagree with the president in handling certain matters
he`s done same thing.

And I think that wrinkles (ph) a lot of folks who want to be in sort of an
anti-Obama, you know, pro sort of interventionist position. And the
country is quite frankly I think in many respects tire of that. They`re
looking for levelheadedness, they`re not looking for mediate...


STEELE: ... responses and reactions. So I think Rand bringing that Ed to
the conversation and it upset a few people.

SCHULTZ: Well, I think what all of the candidates on the Republican Party,
it would be nice to hear what they would do what the USS Roosevelt right


SCHULTZ: I mean is President Obama doing the right thing in their mind by
sending an aircraft carrier and a fleet of ships to Yemen to possibly take
a shot at the Iranians when we`re involved in nuclear talks with them? I
mean that is the story, it`s not a question of whether you`re an
interventionist or not, broadly speaking.

We`re in the "now" business right now. Joe Cirincione this has a chance of
deep six (ph) and nuclear talks with the Iranians and the President is
staring them down. What do you make of this?

CIRINCIONE: You`re absolutely right Ed. This is the greatest threat we
would face. It`s not that they can`t come to an agreement in Geneva over
stopping Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. I think we can do that in the
next two months but not if a war breaks out, if a conflict breaks out, if
somebody makes the wrong move or the wrong miscalculation in the Gulf of

It`s a very serious issue and you would like to hear the members of
Congress debating this on the floor of the Senate or even over the
airwaves. You`d like to hear them taking up the actual authorization for
the use of forces that`s before them. On the question of fighting ISIS and
not engaging in theoretical debates about whether they`d be starting new
wars with Iran or not.

SCHULTZ: Michael, wouldn`t that be a good question for all the Republican
candidates right now? Is President Obama doing the right thing by engaging
a United States aircraft carrier at Yemen?

STEELE: I think it will be a fair question for everyone who`s thinking
about the entry in the Oval Office in a year and half.

I think that`s an important part of the discussion that is -- was just
mentioned that`s it`s not being discussed right now and instead we`re
trying to, you know, do this at a primary, you know, neocon versus
isolationist tango, which is not advancing the conversation in terms of how
you and I and other Americans are looking at this.

The President has cogged out of position now with respect to Yemen that
stands in contrast of negotiations he has in Iraq -- in Iran. What does
that mean? How do you respond to that?


STEELE: It ultimately -- what kind of deal would you get with Iran now
that those ships are moving in that direction?

These are important questions and -- this sitting tight (ph) back and forth
to me is just a destruction that supports the ultimate questions that need
to be answered.

SCHULTZ: Well, but Michael, doesn`t it sound like Rand Paul is making the
statement that, you know, you don`t have to carry a big stick to be
effective in foreign relations.


SCHULTZ: I mean he`s actually calling out the Republican Party that, you
know, you guys are too hawkish. We really don`t have to go down this road.
What about that?

STEELE: I think there`s legitimacy to that and that goes back to the point
I was stating earlier, how (inaudible) and I think most Republicans sort of
look at the -- sort of posturing of the party of the last seven or eight
years through that lens quite honestly, Ed. And I think Rand is calling
that out and at least he`s trying to put it on the table. Let`s have an
honest debate about how big our stick should be and when exactly we should
use it.

I refer to it, sort of commonsense foreign policy. You know you got to
stick in your pocket but just because it`s there doesn`t mean you always
have to use it.

SCHULTZ: Joe, how was this going to be received by the Iranians? I mean
clearly, they`re shipping arms into Yemen. They`re in the middle of the
civil war.

Their economy needs it obviously. What about -- How is this going to break
out? How damaging could this be to the overall deal? Expound a little but
more on what you`re talking about.

CERINCIONI: Well, the Iranians clearly want a deal and if you talk about
the Iranian people, they`re overwhelmingly in favor of a deal. So they`re
in the dilemma now. They want to support the Houthis in Yemen who they`ve
aided, but they`re -- by no means directing them. They didn`t start this
conflict in Yemen. They`re just aiding one of their allies.

But I don`t think they want to see any of that aid jeopardize the bigger
picture here, the bigger breakthrough. So I`m expecting the Iranian
government to try to show some restraint.

What you`re worried about is hard-liners in Iran including members of the
revolutionary guard who maybe in control of some of these ships. Who may
miscalculate or intentionally take a provocative move to kill this chance
of reconciliation, this chance of peace that we now have with Iran, just as
you`ve seen extremist blow up Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts. Just


CERINCIONI: ... they we`re this close to success. That`s the greatest
danger here.

SCHULTZ: Michael, why is it that the Republican candidates -- and I`m
picking on them (ph) because there`s only one Democratic candidate right

STEELE: Well, we`d like to...


SCHULTZ: But sometimes it`s hard to found out that too, the way things are

You know, but why is it that the Republican foreign policy comments or
position statements are always after the fact. What should we be doing
right now instead of reacting to what Obama is doing? And I think that
Rand Paul is trying to take the discussion in that direction.

The only thing we ever from Lindsey Graham and John McCain is a bunch of
criticism that the country is never doing anything right and so...

STEELE: That`s a good point -- Yeah, I think that`s a good point but then
here`s the danger with that. You don`t want to step over your schemes with
respect to what the President is or is not doing.

In other words, he is the final avert (ph) of what the foreign policy of
the United States should be. So, 90 percent of what you`re going to hear
and see will be reaction. But I think to your point about Rand Paul, what
he`s trying to do is a -- in addition to our reaction to what we don`t like
about what the President`s foreign policy stands for, let`s now look at it
through this lens, let`s now put these issues on the table. Let`s look at
it this way and see what our options are.

And I think that that at the end of the day is going to be at the stronger
position. What I`m looking forward to is that first debate in August when
this question of foreign policy comes out and how he handles it in the face
of all that opposition.

SCHULTZ: And finally Joe, give us some percentages here. 50-50 on a deal
with Iranians in the nuclear package? Is it better or worst on what it was
a week or two weeks ago?

CERINCIONI: I was just given the talk at Harvard and I said it was 80 to
90 percent chance of a deal. All the arrows are moving in the right
direction. I don`t -- I think there`s some differences, some difficulties
these can be overcome by the negotiators. It`s these external factors that
are the greatest risks at this point, somebody miscalculating, some
conflict starting that nobody really wants.

SCHULTZ: All right. I always enjoy buzzing (ph) with you gentlemen.
Michael Steele, Joe Cerincioni, great to have on the Ed Show. Thanks so

CERINCIONI: You bet (ph).

SCHULTZ: Coming up, Rand Paul is the President`s unlikely ally on the
Trans-Pacific Partnership. And the President`s Earth Day trip to the
Everglades puts the spotlight on climate issues in Florida.

We`ll look at why the Sunshine State is most at risk. Stick around. We`ll
be right back at the Ed Show.


SCHULTZ: And we are back. On this Earth Day, President Obama is going to
the front lines of climate change.

Earlier today the President took his first trip the Everglades. The
Everglades are 1.5 million acres of a mix of marsh land, fresh water and
salt water, its home to a large variety of animals and plant life. The
delicate balance of the Everglades could be threatened by the rising sea

President Obama addressed how climate change is not a partisan issue.


OBAMA: Yes, this winter was cold in parts of our country, including
Washington. Some people in Washington helpfully used a snowball to
illustrate that fact. But around the world, in the aggregate, it was the
warmest winter ever recorded.

This is not a problem for another generation -- not anymore, this is a
problem now. It has serious implications for the way we live right now.
Stronger storms, deeper droughts, longer wildfire seasons.

The world`s top climate scientists are warning that a changing climate
already affects the air that are children are breathing because in places
like these, folks don`t have time, we don`t have time, you do not have time
to deny the effects of climate change.


SCHULTZ: Florida is ground zero for the impact of climate change. Our
team traveled around the State of Florida to hear from the people who want
action to protect their homes and their environment.

Tune in all next week here on the Ed Show for Ed Show original series
"Rising Tide, The Climate Crisis".

It`s amazing. We talked to the scientists, we talked to the climate
deniers, we talked to the business leaders. And what is the future for
Florida as the water continues to come up.

There is a huge water problem in South Florida. We`ll bring it to you all
next week here on the Ed Show. "Rising Tide", all about climate change.

There`s a lot more coming up on the Ed Show. Stay with us. We`ll be right

HAMPTON PEARSON, CNBC: I`m Hampton Pearson with your CNBC Market Wrap.

Stocks end higher on another big earnings day. The Dow climbs 88, the S&P
adds 10, the NASDAQ rises by 21 points.

eBay shares are soaring after hours. The company posted an earnings report
that beat estimate by $0.7 a share. Revenue was also better than expected.

Facebook is moving in the other directions. Earnings came in ahead of
targets, revenue was slightly short however.

And Google has unveiled a new lower cost wireless service called Project
Fi. Shares rose 1 percent today.

That`s it for CNBC, First in Business Worldwide.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

If you think the conversation about trade in this country is boring or not
important, maybe it`s because those who think we should do fast track and
go with this huge trade agreement is that they`re not giving any direct

There is very little explanation as to what the heck is going to happen.

A day after President Obama made his case for the Trans-Pacific
Partnership, Republicans are speaking out on trade.

Earlier today, Congressman Paul Ryan said that the TPP would create
American jobs.


REP. PAUL RYAN, (R) WISCONSIN: We need to open up exports for our markets,
for our businesses, for our workers so that we can have more jobs.

Joe, 95 percent of the world`s consumers, they don`t live in America. They
live in other countries. And if we want to have more, higher paying jobs,
we need to be making grow things in America and send them overseas.

We have to open these markets. These trade agreements have a potential of
giving us access to a billion new customers, and that`s really critical if
we`re going to have higher paying jobs.


SCHULTZ: Now, those are great bullet points but its generic talk.

Let`s get some more generic talk. Congressman Ryan attempted to explain
how these jobs would be created in American.


RYAN: If you`re standing still on trade, you`re, basically, actually
falling behind because all these other countries are going around the world
getting better agreements for their countries and their markets and
therefore they`re winning and we`re losing.

There have been 48 trade agreements in Asia since 2000 alone, and we`ve
been a part to two of them. And as a result our share of trade in Asia,
our ability to export things to Asia is going down 42 percent. So, it`s
really important that we get on top of this because it means higher wages,
more jobs, and being of the key for manufacturing here in America, so we
can send things overseas.


SCHULTZ: Congressman, would you like to take a pay cut? Probably not.

The American people don`t want to take a pay cut. There is no data
anywhere that would support what Paul Ryan is saying about this proposed
trade agreement.

It`s a stable (ph) argument. Supporters of the TPP still need to make a
solid case on not only protecting American jobs but creating them.

Who? How? Where? When? Meanwhile, opponents of the TPP know that it is
crunch time.

Earlier today, Senator Bernie Sanders tried to block the Senate Finance
Committee from considering fast track, trade Promotion Authority which
would open the door for the President to do these trade agreements.

Sanders rejected a request for Mitch McConnell to let the committee meet
forcing the delay.

McConnell said the committee will be inconvenienced by Sanders` actions.
The committee still plans to meet after a recess.

More action on this. Today, the AFL-CIO took some action by doing this.
They released this commercial against fast track earlier today.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There`s a fast track trade bill being pushed through
Congress. If it doesn`t stop, we will be railroaded.

Fast track is just another bad trade deal. A deal that would give
corporations sweeping power, kill jobs, weaken the economy, drive down
wages and even allow toxic food to enter U.S. markets unchecked.

We know the price of these bad trade deals. Don`t let Congress railroad
America`s working families. This fast track deal must be stopped.


SCHULTZ: The AFL-CIO said today that this is a seven-figure ad buy. It`s
been a long time since they`ve done something like that.

For more, let me bring in Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio.

Senator, good to have you with us tonight.

SEN. SHERROD BROWN, (D) OHIO: Good to be back, Ed. Thank you.

SCHULTZ: All right. Can you explain to us where these jobs are going to
be created? Is Ohio going to see unemployment increase if fast track is
given to the President and he goes with the TPP?

BROWN: I don`t know anybody who really thinks that except Paul Ryan and
some newspaper publishers, "The Washington Post" and "The Plain Dealer" and
"The Dispatch" in my state.

The fact is, we hear this -- we`ve seen this movie over and over again,
during NAFTA, and it was President Clinton and the Republicans in Congress
that said this will lead to more jobs. Exactly the opposite.

Then, it was PNTR, then, it was the Central American Free Trade Agreement.
That time President Bush and Republican leaders in Congress. This time, we
see it again.

The fact is, every time our trade deficit goes up, every time we past a
trade agreement, our trade deficit goes up and up and up. And when the
trade deficit goes up, jobs go offshore.

When you`re selling fewer things than you`re buying it means you`re not
making those products or you ought to be making those products, where we
used to make those products, and you lost jobs. It`s pure and simple.

And I know what happens to communities -- where I grew in Mansfield, Ohio,
where I live now in Cleveland, I know that these trade agreements do. They
cause us jobs, they hurt our neighborhoods, they flatten wages, and that`s
one reason people haven`t had a raise in the broad middle class in the last

SCHULTZ: Senator, your name came up Tuesday in President Obama`s interview
with Chris Matthews on "Hardball", here it is.


CHRIS MATTHEWS, "HARDBALL" HOST: Why are they saying this? Rosa

OBAMA: I don`t know.

MATTHEWS: ... Sherrod Brown, they are saying, this a totally unfair deal,
it`s never been done before...

OBAMA: I know.

MATTHEWS: ... I want to bring in this -- you`re not Republican, I thought
you would be...

OBAMA: But the one thing I want to I just want to say about this though
Chris, is that I am happy to debate this and I`m sure Jerry (ph) and others
are based on the actual facts.


SCHULTZ: What are the actual facts? It seems that we haven`t gotten any
facts from the President, this administration or from and/or anybody
connected with this, in fact. And there`s one more thing I do want to
point out that is a fact. There is not a "Buy American" clause in this
trade deal.

And, most of this agreement does not deal with trade, only about 20 percent
of what`s written is what I`m told is part of the trade, it has a bunch of
others stuff in it. So Senator, what`s your reaction to the lack of facts
but yet the President is saying trust me on this, you know, I`m for the
middle class what`s your reaction to all of this?

BROWN: Because, I think the President is from middle class, the President
though eight years ago said he (ph) renegotiate the North American Free
Trade Agreement because he recognize that it didn`t work. This is not much
different from the North American Free Trade Agreement, a few different
bells and whistles but -- but we know what it does. We know that it will
cause us jobs.

And the first President Bush said -- his economic team said that that for
every billion dollars in trade deficit you lose 13,000 jobs and that`s what
we`ve seen. We`ve seen our trade deficit since PNTR with China, our trade
deficit with that country...

SCHULTZ: But you don`t know what facts the President that talking about, I

BROWN: Well, I mean, you know what else I know, it`s not only do they not
give us facts they don`t really let this trade agreements see the light of
day, there`s more secrecy around trade...


BROWN: ... with the Trans-Pacific Partnership than there is among -- about
some CIA documents. I ask people to come to, no fast
track, slash no fast track. Help us organize against this. We really need
viewers to weight in on this.

SCHULTZ: All right Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio. I appreciate your time

BROWN: Thanks always (ph).

SCHULTZ: Let me turn out now Congresswomen Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, and her
take on all of this. President Obama says that Elizabeth Warren and
Sherrod Brown and your some -- you`re just wrong. You`re just wrong on
this. What`s your response to just being wrong on this?

REP. MARCY KAPTUR, (D) OHIO: Well, you know, I had a privilege of serving
an office since NAFTA passed and I have been dealing with Japan for three
decades. Their market has remained close from what I seen happen to the
people of my entire state and region is the outsourcing of their jobs.

Hundreds of thousands of many manufacturing jobs in Ohio alone, 5 million
nationwide just in manufacturing. These trade agreements have literally
since the 1970s caused this country a loss of over 47 million jobs.

SCHULTZ: So where does fast track stand in the House right now
Congresswoman. Where is fast track right now?

KAPTUR: The Ways and Means Committee is going to hold a hearing tomorrow.
The bill is teed up in both chambers, in the Senate and the House so it`s
good time for you to have this on television, and it`s important for the
American people who`ve lost their jobs because of trade, with their
companies outsourced, their wages cut and all these imports coming in to
say, hey wait a minute we need time...


KAPTUR: ... out for America for a change.

SCHULTZ: OK. So Paul Ryan this morning when he was on "Morning Joe", he`s
wrong when he says that this will create jobs, is he right or is he wrong?

KAPTUR: Well, he`s absolutely wrong. It might create a couple jobs in
transportation, taking machines out of this country and putting them Mexico
or taking our jobs and putting them in Vietnam. You know, many of our
workers have had to train the workers of other countries to operate the
machines that they used to work on. Unless you live through it you can`t
really see what`s happening.

There are some communities that our government places like Washington D.C.
or the capital cities of our country in the various states. They don`t
depend on people actually making things.


KAPTUR: And therefore they`re immune from what is happening across our
country. We haven`t had a balance trade account for three decades in this
country so...


KAPTUR: ... that means more imports coming in here than exports coming out
and that translates into lost jobs every single year.

SCHULTZ: All right, Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur, always good to visit.
Appreciate your time tonight...

KAPTUR: Thank you.

SCHULTZ: ... thank you.

Still to come, e-cigarette ads are lighting up the airwaves. Senator
Barbara Boxer joins me with her plan to put them out. Stay with us, we`ll
be right back.


SCHULTZ: And in tonight`s two minute drill. Red faced, embarrassed. Can
I take that back? Cincinnati Reds Manager Bryan Price, well he`s
apologizing for his profanity-filled rand with the reporters on Monday.
Price was angry over a Cincinnati Inquirer article detailing the team`s
roster move prior to Sunday`s game against the Cardinals.

He`s, why are you guys telling what our roster is all about, well he vended
his frustration in a five and a half minute interview with reporters and he
drop the "F" bomb on them 77 times along with seven other bad words that we
can`t use.

Cincinnati Reds, well they posted Price`s apology on Twitter, said that he
stands by the content of his message but he`s sorry for the holy
inappropriate language.

All right, are you ready for some football? Well, the National Football
League has released its 2015 regular season schedule, it`s a dandy. Season
kicks off Thursday, September 10th.

NBC, it`s going to be Super Bowl champion New England Patriots hosting the
Pittsburgh Steelers. How about those packers are playing the bears in week
one, the Bears.

And your first NBC Sunday night football match up is going to be NFC
rivals, the New York Giants and the Dallas Cowboys. It should be a great
one and of course to celebrate the Super Bowl`s golden anniversary, the
league schedules 19 Super Bowl rematches this year in the schedule.

Week 10, brings a highly anticipated face off between the Patriots and
Giants. The Giants have beaten the Patriots in the last two Super Bowl
match ups. Only 141 days, until kick off.

Stick around, we got a lot more coming up on the Ed Show. We`ll be right


SCHULTZ: And finally tonight, a story about health. The numbers are
staggering e-cigarette use in this country has tripled among teens over the
past year, tripled in the past year.

A lot of people are blaming images like this.


JENNY MCCARTHY, MODEL: I`m Jenny McCarthy and I finally found a smarter
alternative to cigarettes, Blue eCigs.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is the 21st century smoke.


SCHULTZ: Traditional cigarette manufacturers agreed on a ban to television
advertising almost 45 years ago. E-cigarette manufacturers are now getting
the same pressure.

Joining me tonight, Senator Barbara Boxer of California, who sent a letter
to executives of the five companies, asking them to keep their e-cigarette
ads off of television.

Senator, great to have you with us tonight.


SCHULTZ: Why is this such a priority? What`s the focus here?

BOXER: Well, the focus for me is stopping another health disaster from
exploding in this nation. You know, so many of us saw what happened with
the tobacco companies denying that nicotine was addictive. We know it`s
addictive. We know it causes heart disease. We know it impedes brain
development in children.

So, now what do we have? A new way to deliver nicotine and the cigarette
companies just are going on the air, they`re advertising on shows that
teens watch, 2.5 million teens are now smoking e-cigarettes, and I just
feel -- we`ve got to get out ahead of this before we have a real problem on
our hands, which starting to have a problem right now.

SCHULTZ: What kind of response do you expect from the industry?

BOXER: I sure hope it`s better than when they Congress, when they lied to
Congress and said nicotine wasn`t addictive.

Look, Ed, we know that this is a nicotine delivery product. And we already
know the problem of nicotine. What people don`t focus on is there are also
chemicals in there, benzene, cadmium, formaldehyde, some of these cause
cancer. That`s being delivered to our youngsters. And, you know, they
always well, we`re not advertising to kids and then they have flavors like
bubble gum and gummy bear and cotton candy. We weren`t born yesterday.

So, I`m very concerned about this and I was hoping to appeal to the sense
of right and wrong, it`s a cigarette companies -- by the way, three of the
largest cigarette companies own these e-cigarette companies.

SCHULTZ: You would think that the cigarette industry might have learned
its lesson with the tobacco lawsuit and the settlement into the billions of
dollars and now they`re coming out with a product that would parallel
exactly what the cigarette industry did to this country and if it`s proven
that these -- that they are not healthy, don`t they run the risk of a

BOXER: Of course, they do. But you know they`re taking in those dollars,
just follow the money. Now, I want you to know that several of the
senators have joined with me and we`ve written to the FDA, the Food and
Drug Administration and we said to them, you put out a rule a year ago. It
would ban sale to minors which by the way we`ve done in California.

You would require that ingredients be disclosed on the package and it`s
taken them all this time and they still haven`t in fact...


BOXER: ... issued this rule. So I have some news, I did call the acting
commissioner today and he told me this was the highest priority. So I`m
prayerful that we will have this rule come out and maybe finally we can get
some action.

SCHULTZ: All right. I hope so too.

BOXER: I hope so.

SCHULTZ: The City of San Francisco may become the first city in the nation
to outlaw chewing tobacco from playing fields, what`s your take on that?

BOXER: Well, my take is Major League Baseball boxes because they know that
these players are heroes to these children. And this chewing tobacco, it
is not a benign habit. It causes oral cancer. It`s devastatingly painful.

So, they`re trying to say, you know, by this ban, let`s not have these role
models for our children starting on yet another dangerous habit.

So, you know, my state is -- I just have brag for a minute. They`re just
ahead of it and I`m so proud of them. But I`ve got to do my work here
because I don`t want any kids getting hooked on these e-cigarettes and on
nicotine, and formaldehyde and all these other things that are in these e-

SCHULTZ: All right. Senator Barbara Boxer, ahead of the game, no doubt
about it. Senator good to have you with us tonight. I appreciate it very

BOXER: Yes, OK (ph).

SCHULTZ: That`s the Ed Show. I`m Ed Schultz.

"PoliticsNation" with Reverend Al Sharpton starts right now.

Good evening Rev.


<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