Skip navigation

The Ed Show for Thursday, June 4th, 2015

Read the transcript to the Thursday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

Show: THE ED SHOW
Date: June 4, 2015
Guest: Erin Merryn, Wendy Murphy, Paul Henderson, Rosa DeLauro, Lori
Wallach, Jim Moore, Harold Cook


ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Americans and welcome to the Ed Show
live from the Detroit Lakes, Minnesota.

Let`s get to work.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tonight, Duggar`s on defense.

MEGYN KELLY, POLITICAL COMMENTATOR ON FOX NEWS: They`re speaking out for
the first time, finally addressing that molestation scandal.

JIM BOB DUGGAR: He was just curious about girls, as parent you`re not
mandatory reports. And a law allows for parents did what they think is
best for their child.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Plus, that only (ph) again.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you want to find out everything about your self. I
mean like everything. Somewhat isn`t true run for president.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Later, the pressure is on.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Trade is important to America.

REP. PAUL RYAN, (R) WISCONSIN: I believe that the House will past it very
soon.

REP. JOHN BOEHNER, (R-OH) HOUSE SPEAKER: Liberal special interests have
been ratcheting up about their threats. But this is about doing the right
thing for American.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And bad joke.

SEN. TED CRUZ (R) TEXAS: You know, Vice President Joe Biden. You know the
nice thing? You don`t need a punch line.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

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

We start tonight with a bombshell interview from the Duggar parents.
They`re breaking their silence and speaking out about the molestation
scandal involving their oldest son Josh. For the first time being their
reality TV show "19 Kids and Counting" has been taking off the air. Jim
Bob and Michelle Duggar say the victims included four of their daughters
and one person outside the family. They told Megyn Kelly of Fox News about
the first time Josh confessed to them.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.B. DUGGAR: First time on Josh, came to us, on his own, and he was crying
and he just turned 14 and he said that he had actually improperly touched
some of our daughters. And he was.

MICHELLE DUGGAR: We were shock. I mean we just devastated. I don`t think
any parent is prepared for a trauma like that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: The Duggar say they spoke to Josh and their daughters about the
improper touching. They took measures to protect the girls. But the
problems didn`t stop. According to the parents Josh Duggar confessed three
times improperly touching his sisters. After a third time the Duggar
parents say they took action. They sent Josh away to a private Christian
base treatment facility where he got help.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

M. DUGGAR: We were leaving a little I was like what`s wrong where is --
why daddy and Josh leaving and as we`re all leaving the next day and for
days and days I was saying, you know, Josh has done some very bad things
and he`s very sorry.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

When just got back his parents took him to speak with a state trooper, but
no charges were ever filed. Jim Bob addressed why he didn`t go to the
police from the start.


(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.B. DUGGAR: I talked to somebody that worked at one of those juvenile
youth sex offender facilities, and he described how they actually take care
of these situations down there, and the success rate is not very good. And
so we felt like that going from a perspective of really reaching his heart
first would be important.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: The Duggar spoke about why they decided to go ahead with their
reality TV show after these problems.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

D.B. DUGGAR: We had nothing to hide. We`re taking care of all that year
before. And they ask us to do the reality TV show, all this have been
taking care of five years before. And we had a clean doing help from the
state. We had said you`ve gone through counseling, we had the police.

KELLY: Did any of the girls or did Josh say "Woah, hold on mom and dad,
hold on".

D.B. DUGGAR: We had no fear because we hadn`t -- everything was taken care
off and that was sue -- that was actually sealed juvenile record.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: The Duggar family says they feel like they have been wrong by
Josh juvenile record being made public. They`re speaking to attorneys
about the possibility of legal action. But we should point these record
became public after a Freedom of Information Act request by In Touch
magazine.

Two of Josh his sisters also spoke to Fox News. They`re extremely upset.
The records were made public.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JILL DUGGAR: People don`t have a right to do this, we`re victims, they
can`t do this to us

KELLY: And yet they did.

JILL DUGGAR: And they did.

JESSA DUGGAR: The system was set up to protect kids, both those who make
stupid mistakes or have problems like this in their lives and the ones who
are affected by those choices. It`s greatly failed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: For more let bring in Erin Merryn. She is the author of An
Imaginable Act and Founder of Erin Law. She has been in contact with the
Duggar family.

Erin, good to have you with us tonight on the Ed Show.

ERIN MERRYN, AUTHOR "AN IMAGINABLE ACT": Thanks for having me.

SCHULTZ: You bet. There just seem to be a thousand questions here. What
wrong here as you see this story. What did the Duggar parents? We`ll
start with them. What they do wrong if anything in your eyes?

MERRYN: Well, I believe the one thing that could have been different was
going to the authorities immediately. You know I`ve told Michelle and Jim
Bob Duggar, you know, I`m not going to throw a stone at you and judge you
like society is. But I do agree that you should have gone to the
authorities immediately. That the first thing any parent should do. If a
child is scolded, if you find out your kid is doing this. You go to the
police immediately.

And as you notice for the interview, it happened one time, then a second
time. And, you know, waited too long there were more victims there. So I
believe the first and foremost, go the police immediately and then I don`t
think Josh have ever been allowed back into the home. Any parent I told
them, do not allow the perpetuator back in to the home. It`s too
dangerous, too much of a risk.

SCHULTZ: So, you think there`s a lot of fault here with the parents, say
they clearly could have and should have handle this differently.

MERRYN: Yeah. And I try to tell people put yourself in their shoes. No
parent in their mind plans and prepares to find out their, you know, kid is
abusing another family member. So, I think they were just, you know, how
do I handle this? What do I do?

So I don`t think they were prepare and how to properly handle it. And then
when they did go to the authorities. Look what we`re hearing now. This
guy -- the police officers now spending 56 years behind bars for child
pornography, you know, as I tell people these are often people we know and
trust and that are doing this to children. Not the stranger danger. We
warn so many people about.

It`s the police officer, it`s the family members, it`s the coach, the
pastor, it`s not these strangers we put so much emphasis on which is why we
need to talk to kids about personal body safety. And that`s how I got to
know the Duggars. A year and a half ago they brought me into their home
after hearing me speak on sexual abuse and they said "Erin, will you come
into our home tonight?" It was 9:00 at night and talk to our kids about
Erin Law.

Educating them on personal body safety if you`ve been sexually abused, you
speak up and tell you don`t keep it a secret. They didn`t tell me anything
about what happen with Josh. So I spend two hours in their family room
that evening, talking to all of their kids. Well, not all but nine of them
about Erin`s Law. What it does you don`t keep this secrets and then they
want to tell me "Erin, we want to get you in touch with homeschoolers.

You know, get you out there and getting this message because my law
requires personal body safety, to be thought to kids in preschool all the
way to 12th grade and public schools. So this doesn`t reach the home-
schooling community.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

MERRYN: So they wanted to help in my message at national conferences, at
home-schooling. At the same time I had no idea that their older son had
done this. So maybe by bringing this and they were trying to prevent this.

SCHULTZ: Erin, what is your reaction to the victim`s reaction defending
Josh?

MERRYN: You know, what, I`m not surprised, every victim reacts
differently. And I think, you know, I wasn`t there, you know, if the girls
are really asleep, were they not, do they wake up? I don`t know all the
circumstances. But, you know, this is after all their parents, their whole
family is literally be thrown on the bus, you know, judged by so many
people at society, their faces all over the every news magazine to every
news outlet. I just think they really just want this to go away and in
reality.

SCHULTZ: Well.

MERRYN: You know, we`re putting so much focus on, you know, Josh. What
Josh did, Josh this just, you know, what we really need to focus on is how
we revictimizing these girls. How this is affected them, how we`ve reopen
this wound, you know, to what happen 12 years ago. And how they`ve try to
move on with their life and suddenly it`s in their face all over again.

SCHULTZ: All right. Erin, stay with us. I want to bring in Wendy Murphy
a former Prosecutor, also with us tonight Paul Henderson who`s a Veteran
Prosecutor and Legal Analyst, great to have all of you with us tonight.

Wendy, your thoughts. How do you think the police handled this case?

WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: They didn`t. I mean we have nothing to
analyze because they did nothing. I look through the reports very
carefully and what struck me is not only the inexplicable cavalier
dismissal by the cops or the seriousness of what was going on. Because
we`re talking about abuse not only a five different kids. One was as young
as four or five years old. But also over the course of the long period of
time, from a guy who, you know, was told not to do it again and kept doing
it again. That`s predatory, that super dangerous.

And I`ll tell you what else. When the cops don`t intervene, the message
goes to the bad guy. This is something I can get away with. Nobody cares,
the cop don`t care.

MERRYN: Exactly.

MURPHY: My parents don`t care. Why don`t I keep doing it? And I did not
like the statement from the girls that I read sounded parented (ph),
prepare, you know, puppet like. Every single one them soft pedal in my
opinion what probably really happen. They all had the same story. I don`t
by it. I prosecuted these cases for 30 years. I don`t buy it that they
all had the exact same story to tell the cops. I think that whole family
should have been investigated. And I don`t give a damn that we`re all
judging them. Of course we`re judging them. This is what you`re supposed
to do.

When people do very bad things to children and it`s hidden behind close
doors and the family allows it. We should be judging them harshly. That`s
exactly the right reason to judge people harshly.

SCHULTZ: I agree with that. Paul that the person outside the family that
was improperly touched filed charges. That seems to be someone the odd
thing in all of these in this scenario that someone outside of the family
was violated in yet no charges. What do make of that?

PAUL HENDERSON, LEGAL ANALYST: You know, it`s really unfortunate and again
I think the biggest travesty is the ongoing pattern and behavior of the
legal conduct both within the family and outside of the family when notice
was not given to the proper authorities until statute of limitations had
run both with the offender and with the parents in terms of their own
liability. And they keep saying and I think we all heard that in their
interview where they said that there was no mandatory reporting.

But that`s not the issue. This isn`t about whether or not you`re a
mandatory reporter. These are you children that you have a duty and an
obligation to protect. And they weren`t protecting in this way. They
weren`t protected.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

HENDERSON: Until we see this release end of this information. And again
they`re outside of the statute of limitation for prosecution as well. But
that doesn`t speak to the dire need to protect our most vulnerable citizen
and those children. And that includes the baby sitter that was touched or
that was offended as well even though that`s outside of the statute of
limitation, again I think as this story continues to unfold. What the
focus is going to be on is the legal analysis on the actual release of the
information and the FOIA request that release from the chief of police.

In my opinion, you know, there are so many exceptions with FOIA to juvenile
records both the Supreme Court and in state court for that state that
relate to law enforcement access. And even when...

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

HENDERSON: ... they tuned over that information in redacted form that did
not include the names of the address.

SCHULTZ: OK.

HENDERSON: It was still clear who the family they were talking about. But
that`s going to be the issue in terms of if they have defamation suit or a
libel suit. I think where the story is going to go next.

SCHULTZ: Wendy, what`s your analysis of the parent that they decide to
move forward with this reality show and waves it all? Everything is taken
care of. This is all in the past. You know, do you accept that answer as
someone who is prosecuted these cases for years that they just decided to
move forward with the television carrier after going through all of these.

MURPHY: Well, look I don`t know what. I mean Michael Jackson had a career
after God knows what he was doing. I don`t know what to make of the fact
that they went forward. What I can say is their attitude is so disturbing
because they`re just so unconcern about the severity of what happened. And
when you`re on TV, show casing yourself in a particular way and hoping the
public sees you in a certain life.

What I worry about is that they were hoping the public would see them for
something that they`re not. And that kind of cover insulates them from
suspicion in the way they`ve could keep the kids.

HENDERSON: The bad behavior.

MURPHY: At even greater risk.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

MURPHY: Because we think those types of people don`t molest children.
"Oh, yes they do".

SCHULTZ: Erin, your response to what Wendy is saying about the way the
parents handle this. About how they move forward and how they should be
held up to a standard. What about that. I mean you Erin, you seems to be
given him almost somewhat of an alibi.

MERRYN: I though that on given him alibi, you know, I just don`t feel in
the place that I should be judging them. You know, like I said. Do I
agree on how they handle this? No, and I admit it cleared to them. You
know, I`ve in contact everyday with them since the last week. And I made
it very clear with them. I`ve said the media has been reaching out to me.
You had me in your home talking to your kids about this. I had no idea nor
did I feel that you had to tell me this. But I`m just going to let you
know that I feel...

HENDERSON: I disagree.

MERRYN: ... you should have gone to the authorities immediately that, you
know, allowing Josh to continue to stay in the home.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

MERRYN: Wasn`t the proper way of how to handle this. And that I hope
moving forward, making do something positive with it.

SCHULTZ: OK. Paul, the Duggar say that they`re considering legal action
for these juvenile records being release. Do they have a case?

HENDERSON: Well, there`s an analysis that goes both criminally and
civilly. So, criminally in order to go after the chief of police that
released the record. They have to prove that she was acting outside of the
scoop of her duties. I don`t believe that they`ll be able to prove that
especially given the fact that she brought the record to the city attorney
to have it analyze and then made the release. And then the release was
redacted. And so then that leads to an analysis of whether or not their
civil liability, right. And so, that be...

SCHULTZ: Sure.

HENDERSON: ... a defamation case of slenderest case where they`re going to
have to prove what damages they have from the release and keep in mind this
is a true statement. So, it`s not a false statement that`s being made.
It`s a true statement that was disseminated. The damages obviously would
be the lost of the show which has yet to be determined. It just suspended,
we don`t know if it`s going to come back.

But again because they took the steps to redact the information, they
follow that the law. They follow the advice of their counsel. I think
moving forward with the case would be very, very difficult. And that
obscures...

SCHULTZ: All right.

HENDERSON: ... the bigger issue as to what happen to these kids because
that`s what we need to focus on. We need to concern with our vulnerable
victims and families like this that are having problem and face charges and
should face right now (ph).

SCHULTZ: All right, Erin Merryn, Wendy Murphy and Paul Henderson, good to
have all of you with us tonight. I appreciate your time on the Ed Show.

Follow us on Facebook and watch my Facebook feature "Give me a minute".
You can get my video Podcast at WeGotEd.com.

Coming up, Rick Perry joins the 2016 race for the legal system, could be
his biggest challenger. We`ll have all the details a head.

And later, the President hints (ph) at another partner for the Trans-
Pacific Partnership. We`ll look at how it could impact the trade deal
negotiation.

Stay with us. We`ll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Coming up, on the Ed Show. The Republican field hits double
digits. Rick Perry joins the Republican race, but he brings a lot of legal
baggage. Can he overcome it? That`s all coming up on the Ed Show

Stay with us. We`ll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FRM. REP.RICK PERRY, (R) TEXAS: We have the power to make things new
again, to project American strength again, and to get our economy going
again. And that is exactly why today I am running for the presidency of
the United States of America.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: And we are back on the Ed Show.

Former Texas Governor Rick Perry is looking for redemption. His biggest
hurdle isn`t a failed 2012 presidential campaign. It`s a criminal
indictment for abuse of power. If you remember back in August a grand jury
indicted Perry on two felony charges. The indictment says Perry
"Intentionally or knowingly misused government property" and he influenced
or attempted to influence a public servant.

Perry and his lawyers have denied any wrong doing. He`s the third GOP
hopeful to join the crowd of second timers running. But he`s the first one
with the felony indictment against them.

Joining me tonight Jim Moore, investigative journalist and author of
"Bush`s Brain" also with us tonight Harold Cook, Texas Democratic Political
Strategist.

Well I guess you can give Rick Perry credit for one thing he just won`t
give up, so let start with this. Jim, do Republicans see a felony
indictment for abuse of power as a qualification for the presidency?

JIM MOORE, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST: Well, I think the way they are
looking it Ed, is that their thinking on a far right is like badge of
honor, you know, and remember we are the sinner of the hippie universe in
Texas. So, Austin certified square miles are real estates surrounded by
Texas. So they think that it came from the Democrats in Texas. But the
truth is what they have to confront is the very real fact that this is been
appealed three times and it has not gone away.

One of the judges in a court that has presently facing the criminal court
of appeals is a Perry appointee, I expect motions there to try to get him
dismissed, I don`t think that`s going to happen, it`s probably going to get
heard. And even if Perry should lose it the state will then appeal. So
the truth is he`s going to go all the way through this nominating process
Ed, and he could up in end up being a nominee with an indictment do the
Republicans want to take a chance I`m picking a guy who still going to be
under indictment when they choose a nominee. I think probably not.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. Harold Cook, it looks to me like Perry is just acting
like, this is just some chatter on the background I don`t have to worry
about. How do you -- what`s your analysis how is he handling all of this
obviously Jim Moore. It doesn`t seem to bother.

HAROLD COOK, DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL STRATEGIST: Ed that is my analysis. I
think the Perry team has deluded themselves and spun themselves into
believing that this is no big deal. And, you know, what, they might be
able to get away with being a presidential campaign under federal -- under
criminal indictment in maybe Iowa maybe New Hampshire. Look, there`s a
certain subside of Republican primary voter who probably I mean Jim`s right
they probably think some Democratic plot even though there`s no Democratic
in site in his indictment.

But, I guess they would get delude himself and but they`d be wrong. Look,
I mean at some point probably fairly early on a nominating process
certainly by South Carolina. Electability comes into play it always has
and I assume it always will. That`s why the Republicans have elected or
had nominated electable people after hearing from a bunch of Tea Party
people for the last two cycles.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

COOK: Rick Perry is just too easy to run against because if he starts
gaining in a polls since Republican opponents can, can just say "Yeah, the
guy under felony indictment and I just don`t think he can overcome it, I
don` think anybody could.

SCHULTZ: You know, I agree with that I just think that they -- if they
have to they`re going to throw at him in a big way and the question is.
What`s his answer going to be? He had notorious flub during the debate in
2011 here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PERRY: I will tell you, its three agencies of government when I get there
that are gone, commerce, education and the - what`s the third one there let
see.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can`t name the third one?

PERRY: The third agency of government.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah.

PERRY: I would, I would do way the education, the commerce and let see, I
can`t the third one I can`t sorry, oops.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: You know Jim, somethings just follow a guy is that something
that`s always going to follow Rick Perry that he just never going to be
taken really serious since a guy who`s got a core and knows exactly what he
wants to do?

MOORE: Well, it`s going to be very, very hard and, you know, he said he`s
taking off his boots, he`s put on some glasses and he`s trying to reinvent
and re-brand himself. But the fact is, you can`t, it`s not like going to
college to become the President of the United States. He said he spend the
pass couple of years studying. But it`s what you bring to the game and,
you know, he`s out there talking about the Texas miracle and the things he
was saying in his speech today Ed, about Texas being such the great
economic engine.

Well, there`s something happening here. But remember also we have them the
highest number of low income jobs in the state the most uninsured in the
state and if you`re a person with difficulties, economically and
financially. We have the worst support system in the country. So, and now
the hydraulic fracturing has turned down tenths of thousands of jobs
disappearing, he`s got another hitch in his get along.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

MOORE: I think this is really, really tough for now.

SCHULTZ: So, he probably out does Scott Walker for incompetence and under
delivering. I mean what you just said where the state it didn`t sound very
good.

MOORE: That`s not.

SCHULTZ: That for sure. I want to know Harold Cook, who`s this base? I
mean who`s going to be counting on? I mean who in the Republican on the
right and the conservative movement is going to say "You know, what, Rick
Perry is just our guy."

COOK: Well, if that`s a good question. I think it`s an open question.
Look, last time there was no questioned that Rick Perry run and the Tea
Party lane. And, you know, he was briefly the front runner until we
started screw it up. I mean he look pretty good. But he`s not in that
lane right now and even if he was it`s such a crowded field. I mean
there`s probably 10 now, there might be 20 by the end of it.

That I`m not sure that he is in love with that lane. I know they`re not
going to love with him. I`m not so sure he won`t run on a more economic
more -- almost bipartisan lane which, you know, what that lane that even
exist in Republican Party policy anymore.

SCHULTZ: Yeah.

COOK: So, you know, in the final analysis who have realm they`re
conference room table. Maybe they`ve decided it doesn`t even matter that
if you just hang in there with superior fundraising long enough for the
field when or down they`re like 5 or 6. Maybe you`re in the ballpark and
I`m not sure that`s a rational but I know it`s achievable as long as this
is indictment is hanging around isn`t that.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. Harold Cook, Jim Moore always great to have you on the Ed
Show stay with us.

We have some breaking news to report now. The Washington Post is reporting
there has been a major data breach in the federal government`s Office of
Personnel Management. The breach could effect up to 4 million current and
former government employees. The post says "Chinese hackers breach the
computer system in December". In a statement the FBI says that they are
investigating the matter.

Still ahead, TPP future hangs in the balance in the House of
Representative, Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro has an update on the negotiation
and there is a new twist that deals with China.

And Ted Cruz walks back his press comments about the vice president.

Stay with us we`re right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Still to come here on the Ed Show. The Fast-Track pushing
Congress continues. Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro gives us an update on the
House negotiations.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi had this comments about her caucus
today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NANCY PELOSI, (D) CAL MINORITY LEADER: Our memberships are taking this
very seriously. We had many members who are not supporting this who have
overtime always supported a trade initiatives that does don`t think that
this reaches the standard that we need to go forth with 11 different kinds
of countries.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: More on that coming up. And save-the-date, Jeb Bush prepares to
make his presidential announcement. And look at how he`ll impact the
Republican field.

Stay tuned. We`re coming right back.

JANE WELLS, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I`m Jane Wells, with your CNBC Market Wrap
Stock.

Stock sink unconcerned about grease (ph). The DOW slides 170 points, the
S&P is off at 18 and the NASDAQ sheds 40.

On the other hand the number of American`s filing for first time jobless
benefits fell more than expected last week. Claims dropped by 8,000 to
276,000.

And a report from outsourcing from challenger will increase (ph) showed
layoffs. We`re down sharply in May falling 33 percent. But all life
waiting for tomorrow morning when the Governor releases his closely watched
job supported at 8:30 a.m. Eastern.

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

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

This is a shocker. At least it is to me. President Obama says the Trans-
Pacific Partnership could bring China to the table. Think about that. It
could bring China to the table for more trade. He floated the possibility
in an interview with the American public media.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: They`ve already started putting up feelers about the possibilities
of them participating at some point to you, to us, to Jack Lew, the
Treasury Secretary. It sure helps if they are surrounded with countries
that are operating with the same kinds of high standards.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: That`s interesting. The Presidents says in an interview that
China has put out feelers that they may want to participate. Further when
it comes to trade.

You know, I don`t know what this love affair is that the President has with
the Chinese because they have cheated on every single trade agreement.

So, just in preparation for this today, I just happen to come across this.
I don`t know if anybody in the White House reads the Wall Street Journal,
but I do. And I`ll be dug on it if wouldn`t on the front page today? Six
still firms. Let`s see.

Steel Firms Fire Salvo Against Imports. Here is it. This is the China
that the President of the United States is talking about. Why should we
trust them? Here is what the story says and I quote, "Six steelmakers with
major U.S. operations filed a trade complaint on Wednesday seeking punitive
tariffs for alleged unfair pricing of imported steel from China, India,
Italy, South Korea and Taiwan."

The article goes on to say and I quote "The petitioners are frustrated
because prices have been sluggish, down about 25 percent since the start of
the year". Despite strong demand. That had forced the companies, which
make most of their steel near automobile factories in the Midwest and in
the South, to lay off thousands of workers and idle plants around the
country, meaning the United States. They blame imports particularly from
China.

Folks, here is what`s happening here. China is state sponsoring their
steel industry to undercut American workers. They are dumping, dumping,
dumping. We do not have proper enforcement in this trade deals as they
stand right now. So the President is now trying to sell.

In the interviews, that well, you know, China might come to the table and
be a real trusted partner. Really? Show me the money.

Mr. President, I don`t understand how your staff can mislead you on this.
China has never been an honest broker when it comes to trade and they are
dumping on our market and they are doing it with state subsidized money.

So what this means is that there is the Chinese federal government, their
local municipalities and their military. They are the ones that are
dropping the material on the United States. We can`t do anything about it
right now. All we can do what? We can go to the international trade
commission. That`s going to take 45 days and they are saying that by the
end of this year, that they may render judgment but the full throughout of
all of these won`t come permission (ph) and until the middle of 2016.

Middle of 2016, these factory workers and these people who are in the
automobile industry and on down the line, rubber, steel, glass,
electronics, glass you name it. What are they going to do with jobs?

And so now, what the President was to do is go off and do another trade
deal. Hoping that China will maybe someday feasts up and do things
correctly. I don`t buy it. I don`t buy it at all.

Joining me tonight is Representative Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut.
Congresswoman, great to have you with us tonight. I appreciate your time.

What`s your response to the President saying that China might want to play
a ball when it comes to trade if we do the TPP?

ROSA DELAURO, (D) CONNECTICUT: Well, first of all Ed, it`s a delight to be
back with you again and I think what the president`s comments just
reinforced is what the serious complaints that all of us have with the
Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement. And that you reinforce it with what
the steel companies have said in filing against China.

This is an agreement that will loss jobs and depress wages. We have been
saying that all along. And I think what the President has walked into here
is say that in fact this is the case and this is what will happen. In
addition to which because it is also job-related, Ed, is that China
practices currency manipulation.

SCHULTZ: Sure, it did.

DELAURO: And there is nothing in the agreement, and the President says he
would veto an agreement that had a currency chapter in it. But well-renown
people have said that currency manipulation has caused the loss of between
1 million and 5 million jobs in the United States.

SCHULTZ: OK.

DELAURO: So, none only will you have Japan that does this, Malaysia, and
you will also have China. The President has just they contradicted his own
arguments about this...

SCHULTZ: In a big way.

DELAURO... in a very, very big way.

SCHULTZ: In a big way.

DELAURO: Very pretty extraordinary.

SCHULTZ: Congresswoman, I got to ask you. There was comment made earlier
today by Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi. Do you know where she stands on
this?

DELAURO: I think our leader will make up her mind in where she wants to be
at the end of this. She has always had interest in jobs and making sure
that people had jobs and good wages and.

SCHULTZ: But it`s been reported she doesn`t want to embarrass the
President. It`s been reported that she doesn`t want to embarrass the
President. What do you make of that?

DELAURO: Well, I think as I said, I believe that Leader Pelosi will be
true to where she is and the issues that she care deeply...

SCHULTZ: OK.

DELAURO: ... about and that`s what`s going and the economic lives of
American workers today.

SCHULTZ: So, she`s leading no.

DELAURO: I would just say to you I have to imagine that she will be true
to where, you know, her core values are in terms of American working men
and women.

SCHULTZ: All right. We`ll find out. Rosa DeLauro, Congresswoman. I
appreciate your time tonight. Thank you.

Right now, I want to bring in Jonathan Alter, MSNBC Political Analyst and
Lori Wallach with us tonight, Director of Public Citizens Global Trade
Watch.

Jonathan, you first, what has China done that would make us believe that
they would be honest brokers in trade when you have six steel companies who
are now flagging them for dumping on our market and circumventing a trade
agreement?

JONATHAN ALTER, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Ed, I think you`re jumping the
gun here. It`s not like we`re going to sign a new trade deal with China
tomorrow. What the President was saying was that China ultimately has to
be brought into international trade under our rules. See this -- China is
what this whole thing is all about and it`s actually the best argument for
approving this trade deal is that, if we don`t do this deal with all these
other Asian countries. China will give them preferential treatment and
their trade relations with no environmental or labor standards, terrible
for the United States, terrible for workers around the world.

So, what this is a big struggle over the next 10, 15 years over who has
more control over the rules of international commerce, the United States or
China. We wanted to be our rules.

SCHULTZ: OK

ALTER: That`s what the President was saying. That`s a huge argument for
supporting this deal.

SCHULTZ: All right. Lori Wallach, what about that?

LORI WALLACH, DIR. PCCTW: Well, I feel a little bit like I`ve been carried
back to the year 2000 because that was precisely the argument almost word
for word to push Congress to support China entering the World Trade
Organization. That was the only way we get China to follow the rules to do
commerce and trade the way we want because their rules we have right now,
they have to come in afterwards.

And sadly, everyone knows how that movie ended right our trade deficit...

ALTER: Not really.

WALLACH: ... went through the ceiling. We have seen China not following
the rules of the WTO. And in fact, some of the industry that pushed for
China to be in the WTO were the -- all the ones complaining 15 years later
that that`s been a total catastrophe.

To add to this, if in fact that -- the TPP were to be Fast-Track, that
would mean the agreement goes into place and the agreements call the
docking agreement which means that China could enter into it. And here`s
the kicker, the administration opposes this amendment that the Senate tried
to pass could happen (ph) in the House. That would at least require
Congress to have a vote on whether China should be able to enter the TPP
and then on what terms.

The administration even opposes that. They just want China to get in, so
the Fast-Track and the TPP.

SCHULTZ: What about that, Jonathan?

WALLACH: And then, Fast-Tracking China.

ALTER: Well, I mean, China, this is all well down the road. But just on
the WTO question, you know, Lori, makes it sound as if was a catastrophe
that these nations are joining a WTO because there have been this pretty
terrible violations. Was it better to have them in the tent or outside the
tent?

I would argue it`s much better with all the problems, all the unfilled
promise of the WTO to have everybody in this, you know, as many of these
trade deals as we can make on our terms. And the reason is because the
assumption on the part of the opponents of this deal is that we can somehow
do something about globalization. We can somehow get these jobs back.

SCHULTZ: Now.

ALTER: We can`t.

SCHULTZ: Well, the (inaudible). But if you have this fair trade.

ALTER: ...at this point. Globalization is the fact.

SCHULTZ: But Jonathan, wait a minute.

ALTER: It`s a fact.

SCHULTZ: If you fair trade.

ALTER: Yup. I want fair trade.

SCHULTZ: And the fact that it is that the Chinese have cheated. They`ve
manipulated their currency.

ALTER: Absolutely.

SCHULTZ: These and they are dumping on our market.

ALTER: Absolutely.

SCHULTZ: And this -- and so, there has to be some level of protection for
us, for them, for everybody in the deal.

ALTER: Ed, what you have to do is create these international forums with
dispute resolution, with teeth and I sure hope, you know, we haven`t seen
it text to this deal. I sure hope that...

SCHULTZ: Yes, we have.

ALTER: ... that we have some teeth in it, you know, for all of our sakes.
The sakes of American workers but, you know, what, I don`t think...

SCHULTZ: Well, that`s a thing the President wants Congress to vote on but
they don`t want them to read it.

ALTER: That you have to -- well, that relates to the fact that it`s very
hard to negotiate with these other countries if you`re negotiating in
public. None of it (inaudible).

WALLACH: Gentlemen can I join in.

SCHULTZ: Well.

ALTER: And anyway, the point is we would be so much worse off if we had
these huge trade wars, these terrorist...

SCHULTZ: All right. We`ll leave it there.

ALTER: ... all over the place.

SCHULTZ: Do you think, will be...

(CROSSTALK)

SCHULTZ: All right. I love to have both sides of the story. Jonathan
Alter, Lori Wallach, that`s all we have time for tonight. We`ll continue
to follow it as it is the biggest economic story on the globe. No doubt.

We`ll have more in the Ed Show right after this. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Jeb Bush is one step closer to the presidential race while Ted
Cruz is forced to walk back his joke about Joe Biden. We`ll have reaction
from our political analyst. Coming up.

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: We are back. An update to the breaking news we reported earlier
this evening, there has been a massive cyber attack on the United States
government.

NBC`s Kelly O`Donnell joins me now with the latest, Kelly what`s happening
here?

KELLY O`DONNELL, NBC CAPITOL HILL CORRESPONDENT: Well Ed, we expect that
as many as 4 million currents and federal employees will be getting a
notice from the federal government that their personal information may have
been exposed. What we understand is there has been a giant hacking attack
of what`s known is the Office of Personnel Management and the Interior
Department.

Now OPM as it`s known in Washington think of it as the human resources
department for the federal government. They handle all the things that
relate to the huge federal workforce. We don`t yet know how massive this
breach is. Officials are telling us, they are trying to step up cyber
security and our investigating. But alerting those federal employees
current and former that their information may have been exposed gives us a
window into what may have been taken.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the U.S. government suspects that
there might be hackers in China who could be responsible. NBC News has not
confirmed that, Ed.

SCHULTZ: Kelly O`Donnell thanks for the update tonight here on the Ed
Show.

Up next Ted Cruz his tasteless joke puts him on a hot seat.

We`ll be right back stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

Finally tonight, Jeb Bush has save-the-date card. Well, it finally
arrived. The former governor says June 15th is going to be a special day.
Bush will almost certainly declare his candidacy for the presidency. He`s
already been on the campaign trail for a few months. Bush hopes the gaps
are out of the system by now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KELLY: Knowing what we know now, would you have authorized the invasion?

BUSH: I would`ve.

The power of hindsight`s not given to us.

I would have not engaged. I would not have gone into Iraq.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: Of course, all of those missteps took place before becoming an
official candidate. Ted Cruz has saved up his worst remarks for his
official campaign for the White House. Last night, Ted Cruz publicly
ridiculed Vice President Joe Biden.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CRUZ: You know, Vice President Joe Biden. You know the nice thing? You
don`t need a punch line.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHULTZ: The Vice President is currently grieving the loss of his son who
died on Saturday. Ted Cruz made an apology on his Facebook account saying
in part, "It was a mistake to use an old joke about Joe Biden during his
time of grief."

Joining me tonight, Jim Moore back with us, Investigator and a Journalist
and Author of Bush`s Brain and Harold Cook with us, Texas Democratic
Political Strategist.

There`s a lot of things I could categorize Ted Cruz as being smart isn`t
one of them. But this just really underscores to me, Mr. Moore, that this
guy is just simply a lose candidate. How do you put into reason what he
did?

MOORE: Well, there isn`t anything, anyway to put any of that into reason.
It`s tasteless. And you know the courage that he shows by apologizing on
Facebook instead of standing in front of a camera and apologizing and being
honest about, it`s all faults, it`s cowardly and it`s everything that Ted
Cruz is. I mean, full confession Ed, when I just talking about the guy
makes my eyes want to roll back and my head steam come out in my ears. So,
I`m probably not the best guy asked about this. But I thought it was
reprehensible. And he knew at the time what had happened and that makes it
even more despicable, frankly.

SCHULTZ: Well, Mr. Cook, what do you think?

COOK: Well, what Jim said is what I think. You don`t kick a man while he
is down. That isn`t even politics such as basic fundamental and human
kindness and if...

SCHULTZ: What is it Ted Cruz?

COOK: ... complete apology would -- He would said, "I`m sorry for being a
total jerk." And it wouldn`t have been on Facebook, it wouldn`t have been
on in front of a TV camera just like his guess (ph) was.

SCHULTZ: All right. Jeb Bush, apparently, June 15th is the big day.
Harold, is there anyway he`s not going to run?

COOK: No, of course no. He`s got to run. And, you know, he`s kind of
well-positioned electoral math wise. The Republicans either going to get
those 2009 electoral votes out of Florida or they`re going to lose the
election. So, I think, Republican primary voters would be kind of foolish
to not put either Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio on ticket somewhere. So, I
think, both of those guys at least have that to hang their head on.

SCHULTZ: Jim, you think W is going to be around on June 15th? Is he going
to be in the camera shot?

MOORE: I would be surprise if he is. This is one -- this is going to test
the family relationship as Jeb tries to do this. But who knows he may, you
know, he`s been apologizing for his brother all along. And now, he`s
brother`s going to apologize for him. So, that`s keeps the family tight
and well new.

SCHULTZ: All right. And -- well, you know, look.

COOK: And to might thanksgiving awkward (ph).

SCHULTZ: You know, I mean, they say that guy spent too much money is an
exactly dishing him too much so maybe W is going to jump in there and help
out as much as he can. One thing for sure is the Bush`s know how to raise
money and you guys know that.

Jim Moore, Harold Cook, good to have you with us tonight. Thanks for your
time.

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

PolicsNation with Reverend Al Sharpton starts right now.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY
BE UPDATED.
END

<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.>







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

Sponsored links

Resource guide