Skip navigation

The Ed Show for Thursday, June 11th, 2015

Read the transcript to the Thursday show

  Most Popular
Most viewed

Date: June 11, 2015
Guest: Mark Pocan, Jim Keady, Lori Wallach, Dr. Jeff Gardere, Roger
Johnson, Pat LaFrieda, Howard-John Wesley

MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Americans, welcome to the Ed
Show. I`m Michael Eric Dyson and we`re live from Washington, D.C.

I`m in for Ed Schultz, let`s get to work.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tonight, trade war.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Picture down on Capitol Hill today over President
Obama`s trade agenda.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hope does continue to spring eternal.

REP. JOHN BOEHNER, (R-OH) HOUSE SPEAKER: I`m not in the guaranteeing

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Plus, still out there, day six of the manhunt.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Police are still questioning Joyce Mitchell.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Who worked here at the prison tailor shop?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mitchell helped the inmates with their escape because
Richard Matt "Charmed her" and she "Thought it was love".


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Another important issue for agriculture this week in
the Congress.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The Country-of-origin labeling program.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Who is concern from food safe evidence that a vote
tomorrow in Congress about a new trade treaty could lead to lower U.S.
inspection standards for shrimp coming in from Southeast Asia.


DYSON: We start tonight with major developments on Fast-Track trade
authority for President Obama. Fast-Track would provide President Obama
with the authority to finalize the Trans-Pacific Partnership. It would
then head to Congress for a simple up or down vote with no debate. Just
moments ago, Ohio Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur slammed Fast-Track on the
House floor.


MARCY KAPTURE, (D) OHIO: When I find it hard to imagine a more dangerous
or irresponsible approach than Fast-Tracking another trade deal through
Congress. TPA, the authority to Fast-Track is the gateway to the Trans-
Pacific Partnership, both will further harm workers and communities to a
faster global race to the bottom. With more outsourcing of jobs, more
lowered wages, more dropping benefits, more lowered standards for worker
safety and compensation and environment. We`ve seen that since NAFTA
passed 30 years ago.


DYSON: The House is expected to vote on a final Fast-Track bill tomorrow.
The first day or some other some key bills that must be approved. One of
them is the Trade Enforcement Act. The New York Times reports Republicans
are gaining support for Fast-Track by letting members of their favorite
causes to the enforcement bill.

Congressman James Sensenbrenner added language promising that no trade deal
can force the United States to address climate change. Iowa Congressman
Steve King added another provision that would prohibit trade deals from
loosening immigration laws or expanding visa access. Illinois Congressman
Peter Roskam demanded authorization for trade provisions with Israel.

It would discourage trading partners form boycotting or sanctioning Israel.
The Trade Enforcement Act is key to Obama`s Fast-Track authority. This
puts President Obama in a very tough position. If he wants the Trade
Enforcement Act to pass, he`s going to have to sign a law with potential
restrictions on immigration and fighting climate change. Immigration and
climate change have been key parts of the President`s agenda.

Now let`s look at what happens tomorrow. The House must approve the Trade
Adjustment and Assistance bill or TAA. If TAA fails Fast-Track will not be
taken up for a vote. The TAA bill provides assistance for workers who`re
display from free trade deal. Until last night, cuts in Medicare were
going to pay for the assistance. This means the bill would have been all
but dead in the House.

Last night, House Speaker John Boehner and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi
worked out a fix. Medicare would not be cut. TAA would be paid for by
increasing tax penalties for people who don`t file their taxes. Their
fixed pass by a large margin in the House earlier today. Tomorrow`s key
votes are expected to be close. There`s no solid reliable vote count at
this time. If President Obama`s is granted Fast-Track authority tomorrow,
it will allow him to move forward with the Trans-Pacific Partnership for an
up or down vote in Congress. Many say a trade deal that encompasses 40
percent of the global economy deserves a debate in Congress.

For more, let me bring in Congressman Mark Pocan of Wisconsin, Jim Keady,
Director of educating for justice and Lori Wallach Director of Public
Citizen Global Trade Watch.

Congressman, will there be votes for TAA and TPA tomorrow?

REP. MARK POCAN, (D) WISCONSIN: That we expect there`ll be two separate
votes, one on the trade adjustment assistance and one actually on the Fast-
Track proposal. But they`re intertwined and we expect they`ll be very,
very close votes. And I actually think on the TAA proposal, there`s a good
chance that could go down before we get a chance to vote on TPA.

DYSON: So, Congressman your reaction to this language being slipped into
the enforcement bill by Republicans?

POCAN: Yeah, well, you know, they have all kinds of little ornaments
they`re putting on the Christmas tree so to speak, to get their favor that,
you know, really we need to not only point those out. But more
importantly, they`re doing everything they can to get votes on their
Republican side, for the most part, House Democrats have been rock solid in
saying we`re going to fight for American jobs and for good wages, and
despite those things being on there, and the real problems around the Trade
Adjustment Assistance. We`re going to fight hard to make sure that we
defeat those first measures and hopefully the rest one even matter.

DYSON: So Lori there is language on climate change and immigration. How
do you think President Obama can deal with this, and how could he actually
go along with this?

question. Because what is in that customs and enforcement bill is the
opposite of what how sensibly is the administration`s agenda. However.

DYSON: Right.

WALLACH: Truth be told. So is the Fast-Track bill, the opposite of what
he`s supposed to be for. Because Fast-Tracking the TPP would make it
easier to offshore American jobs and push down our wages by making
Americans compete with folks in Vietnam who aren`t but making $0.60 an
hour. This whole thing makes you wonder, was there a rabbit hole, did he
go down there with Alice? What`s exactly is going on around here, because
it`s backwards.

And I think the Congressman was spot on in pointing out that folks want to
make sure they don`t have more of these job killing, unsafe import flooding
agreements, and they need to get their Congress people to vote against
both, the Fast-Track bill, but the trade adjustment assistance bill sort of
greases the path for the Fast-Track bill.

And by the way contrary to the intro unfortunately, they didn`t actually
fix it, it`s a gimmick fix, it`s a fix where you basically have to vote for
$700 million cut in Medicare.

DYSON: Yeah.

WALLACH: With the hope that you vote after to fix that thing you voted
for, except you`re on the record having voted for cutting granny`s
Medicare. So a lot of members of Congress are going fix me and think in
twice about doing that.

DYSON: Wow, pig Latin (ph), George or well, and Louis Carroll (ph) in one
bite. Thank you so much. So Jim, why pass this Trade Adjustment
Assistance assurance if no jobs are being outsourced?

JIM KEADY, DIRECTOR EDUCATING FOR JUSTICE: I`m not a complete loss of why
the President is been pushing the agenda as hard as he has. You know I
spent the last week of May in Vietnam. I want to see first hand what is it
is going on the labor movements there and the labor movements. You know
that the President has talked about that this is going to create a minimum
wage in Vietnam, that it`s going to help them to get independent trade
unions, some of those things, you know, the wage already exists. It`s an
abysmal poverty wage.

In terms of independent unions, it`s currently against the law in Vietnam
to have independent unions, even if this trade deal were to help them get
created. There`s zero infrastructure in place. There are no NGO`s to help
them build capacity to independent trade unions. You know, the president
used Nike as an example on his speech on May 8th saying that Nike is a
model for fair trade and this is what could happen in Vietnam. You know,
Nike`s got 330,000 workers in Vietnam right now. It would take an army of
independent organizers to go in there just to organize Nike`s factory

DYSON: Yeah. Well, Congressman, its COOL being repealed yesterday, a good
example of what can happen with the TPP?

POCAN: Exactly. You know, everything we`ve been saying that could happen
wrong with doing this Fast-Track proposal on TPP happened when we lost in
the WTO on Country-of-origin labelling. And because of that, we had to
change our laws. That`s exactly the problem, it challenges are
sovereignty. So, there`s a lot of Republicans and Democrats, one of the
main issues they have is around losing sovereignty. But I just want to
bring up a little argue (ph) when Lori mentioned that, you know, it`s so
true, it`s the wimpy theory. I`ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger

We voted for something that without having the Senate`s vote, you`re going
to be voting for $700 million in Medicare cuts. And hope in this Congress
this dysfunctional Congress that Senate will take care of it and all will
be well. That`s a lot to ask members of Congress to expect. And I think
that`s why tomorrow`s two votes are so very important.

DYSON: Yeah. We`ll go from wimpy to Popeye now to Brutus with spinach.

POCAN: Yeah.

DYSON: So Lori, should members of Congress trust of this language that
they`re adding is actually going to be enforce d?

WALLACH: The language, which part?

DYSON: Well, the language that they`re adding in terms of trying to
adjusted this bill to accommodate the very thing you were talking about

WALLACH: No, in fact, I would say anyone who wants to trust that have a
bridge to sell to you. Because the way it`s written basically there are
two big problems, first of all, you have to vote on the bill that would put
you on the record as sending a bill to the President.

DYSON: Right.

WALLACH: That cuts $700 million in Medicare.

DYSON: Right.

WALLACH: You have to vote for that before the Senate has the opportunity
to pass the thing that`s supposed to fix the thing you already voted for on
the record.

DYSON: Right.

WALLACH: But then there`s the second problem, which is -- is the Senate
going to ever vote for that? Because A, the bill they`re putting it on is
one that is just a big slump target to put a bunch other controversial
stuff on. So it may never see the lighter day to go fix the thing that you
already on the record in doing wrong.

DYSON: Right.

WALLACH: But also there is the thing called self-executing rejoined or
rule, which is a rule that basically pretends to break the Fast-Track and
TPP bills into three parts, pretends, one of them goes away for one minute
and hides. You vote on the two pieces, then the rule puts the piece that`s
missing that`s a bad price together, and then you`ve got better on your
neck on the way to the President. And a lot of members are going that
parts going to come back in a campaign ad.

DYSON: Right, all right. Congressman Mark Pocan, Jim Keady and Lori
Wallach, thanks for your time tonight.

And coming up, a bizarre twist in the search for two escaped killers.
We`ll look at how a love affair may have aided in their escape.

And later, where`s the beef. The House votes to repeal a law that tells
you where your meat comes from. The Rapid Response Panel weighs in on what
it means for consumers.

Stay tuned.


DYSON: Still to come on the Ed Show, a new twist in the manhunt for two
escaped inmates in Upstate New York.

And later, Breaking News out of Ohio in the case of Tamir Rice.

Stay tuned.


DYSON: Welcome back to the Ed Show. The manhunt continues in Upstate New
York for two escaped prisoners. Police are searching a heavily wooded area
east of Dannemora after a K9 blood hound picked up the scent of at least
one of the inmates Wednesday night.

The search area is just a few miles from the Clinton Correctional Facility
where Richard Matt and David Sweat escape six days ago. Over 500 law
enforcement officials are part of the search. Aided by K9 and aviation
units. New York State police are being assisted by the FBI, U.S. Marshals
and customs and border protection among others. State police are asking
local residents to remain on alert.


strongly asking all the public to remain vigilant, report anything
suspicious, anything with regard to vehicle larcenies, burglaries, trespass
any sign of any of that, we need to know about it.


DYSON: Vermont officials say they have increased the police presence
around bodies of water in remote areas across the state, but have received
no credible threats. Philadelphia police say a report from a cab driver
claiming to have dropped off two men matching the inmate`s description at
30th Street station earlier this morning proved unfounded. As the search
continues there`s a new twist that provide more information about the lead
up to the mens escape.

Sources familiar with the investigation say Clinton Correctional Facility
employee Joyce Mitchell established a relationship with one of the men
while working in the prison tailor shop. The sources tell NBC that
Mitchell was charmed by Richard Matt and she thought it was love. Mitchell
planned to drive the getaway car for the prisoners but got cold feet.
Mitchell was still being questioned by authorities. Two sources tell NBC
that she will be charged, but details of the charges are not known.

Let`s turn to Dr. Jeff Gardere who is a psychologist. Dr. Jeff explained
how someone can fall in love with some like Richard Matt who such a violent
history -- two murders at last count?

DR. JEFF GARDERE, PSYCHOLOGY: Yeah. Well, this individual certainly is a
predator, probably a psychopath of some sort, given his history. So he`s
able to smell out an individual who may be at risk, who may be weak
emotionally, he knows what to say, he knows how to manipulate. And
therefore she becomes the perfect mark.

Now, it could be that he got her to imagine she was in love with him and
use that as a way to aide in the escape. Or he may have done something
that some inmate`s do, which is asking that employ to do small favors all
along, thinking it`s no big deal, she won`t get in trouble. And them bam,
he hits her whip, if you don`t help me do now this big thing. I`m going to
turn you in to your superiors.

DYSON: Oh so he let her along. There`s a condition called hybristophilia.
What can you tell us about that lovely word?

GARDERE: Well, hybristophilia is a situation where someone may in fact
feel that they maybe in a situation where they can control someone very
quickly. And in this particular case, she may have felt that she was an
individual who in fact was the only person who really understood this
individual and therefore, was able to be in a relationship which she felt
might have been under her own will.

DYSON: Dr. Jeff, in the simplest of term, does it seem like Matt was
ultimately merely trying to trick Mitchell?

GARDERE: I think so. Absolutely. I mean you have you to take a look, and
I worked in federal prisons and local prisons with some inmates. Not all
inmates. But some inmates, they see the staff as being a mark. They see
themselves as being superior to that particular employee. And therefore,
it is about the manipulation and being superior, being able to get them to
do their bidding. So certainly, I don`t think this individual was in love
with Ms. Mitchell. I think it was certainly just using her to get what he
wanted which ultimately was the escape.

DYSON: Yeah. Is it common to see prison employees establish relationships
with prisoners like we`ve seen here possibly?

GARDERE: Well, what we`ve seen with people who train correctional
officers, the superior of this officer they constantly warn and get them to
understand that they could be a mark. And yes, there are relationships,
some of the relationships are healthy, some are the proper relationships
where the officer is the superior. But in this particular case, this was
turned upside down and when that happens, when the prisoners the one who
has the power, then that`s on things go completely awry as we saw in this

DYSON: As always, grateful for your comments as Dr. Jeff Gardere. Thanks
for joining us here tonight.

GARDERE: Thank you, Reverend.

DYSON: Up next, Breaking News out of Ohio in the case of Tamir Rice.

And later, Congress could put mystery meat back on the menu. The Rapid
Response Panel tells us what it means for consumers and the American

Stay tuned.


DYSON: Welcome back. We have some Breaking News, a Cleveland judge found
probable cause that Officer Timothy Loehmann should face multiple charges
including murder in the death of Tamir Rice. The judges also found
probable cause exist for accusation of reckless homicide and negligent
homicide against the second officer Frank Garmback.

However the judge found there was a lack of probable cause on accusation of
aggravated murder with respect to Garmback. The prosecutor is continuing
to investigate and it will be up to the prosecutor to file charges against
the officers.

12-year-old Tamir Rice was shot and killed by police on November 22nd in
Cleveland. After a man called 911 to report a child playing with a gun.
Tamir Rice had an air gun capable of shooting plastic pellets or bb`s.

Joining me now on this Breaking News story is Dr. James Peterson MSNBC
Contributor and Director of Africana studies at Lehigh University. Dr.
Peterson give us your just gut reaction.

JAMES PETERSON: Well, gut reaction we just want to make clear that the
news out there is accurate. And you`re right, doctor how the fact that
this is a municipal judge who`s essentially saying there`s probable cause
to make the charges. The charges have not yet been made. And you listed
out the charges as you`ve noted.

This is a huge victory for grassroots activists and citizens in Ohio and
Cleveland on the ground because remember the prosecutor and the sort of
chemical justice system wasn`t really moving on Tamir Rice case, there was
no decision, there was not clear to case as to when they would be a
decision. And so, you had citizens and activists and organizers apply
pressure here on the criminal justices to make this happen. Now not every
state has this kind of law in place where citizens can actually sort of
petition to have a judge review particular cases. But they do have that
law in Ohio.

The activists on the ground who did a great job in making this happen. And
now, there`s even more pressure on the local criminal justice system there,
and on the prosecutor there, to consider bringing charges against officer

DYSON: Well, we know in lights of the department of justices brief if you
will against the police department in Cleveland, there are extraordinary
problems, complicated situations that lead to injustice for so many
African-American people there. With that backdrop do we expect the
prosecutor will move forward if the prosecutor to this point has not given
any indication that the prosecutor would do so? Is this more of a
resentment that a judge has ruled not in the favor of the kind of inertia
that seems to be going on there?

PETERSON: Some people may read it as resentment if they`re prosecutor even
in the aftermath of this ruling doesn`t raise or press any charges. But,
again and I don`t have a whole lot confidence necessary in the sort of
wheels of the criminal justice system attorney in the favor of justice for
Tamir Rice. So, I`m not sure how it will play out. But I think again, the
victory is that grassroots activists were able to apply pressure to a
system that`s clearly broken.

You`re right, also to mention here doc. that the justice department`s
report on the Cleveland police department specifically was, showed
egregious miscarriages of justice, and overuse of brutality and a sort of
in ability to de-escalate situations. So they have a lot of problems in
that police department that officer Loehmann sort of is reflective of. But
at the end of the day, the idea that citizens can apply pressure to the
system to pursue justice is what victory is all about for this Breaking

DYSON: All right, we`ll see you later in the show. Dr. James Peterson
thanks for joining us.

PETERSON: Thanks doc.

DYSON: Stick around the Rapid Response Panel is next.

You`re watching the Ed Show on MSNBC.

Market Wrap.

Stocks build on Wednesday`s big gains, the DOW adds 38, the S&P is up 3,
the NASDAQ climbs by 5 points.

Shares of Twitter are higher after hours. The company CEO the Dick Costolo
is stepping down on July 1st.

Retail sales jumped in may, rising 1.2 percent as pending increase on a
range of items, including autos. And weekly jobless claims rose more than
expected last week, but they`ve remained below the key 300,000 mark for the
last 14 weeks.

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


DYSON: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

American exceptionalism has suffered a major blow. Last night the House
voted to take words that might as well say made in America off the meat
that you buy in American grocery stores. The U.S. Country-of-origin
labelling law or COOL was repealed 300 to 131. The rule requires retailers
of beef, pork and poultry to label their packaging to indicate the country
or countries where animals were born, raised and slaughtered.

If this repeal becomes law, meat from all over the world could be on your
store shelves and you may not know where it comes from, taking about
mystery meat. A poll conducted in 2013 found 90 percent of Americans
favored requiring a label with the country of origin on its meat. Canada
and Mexico disagree and forced Congress to buckle on your consumer rights
with the help of the World Trade Organization.

Our NAFTA partners argue the rules put their meat at an unfair advantage in
the U.S. market. Canada and Mexico threaten to levy $3 billion a year in
retaliatory sanctions on imported U.S. products. The World Trade
Organization agreed and ruled against the U.S. Now, instead of fighting
for Americans right to know what they are feeding their families. Congress
is bowing to demands of our international partners by trying to repeal the
law before sanctions can be imposed. Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro explained
why this moves sets a dangerous precedent in light of the TPP vote ahead.


REP. ROSA DELAURO, (D) CONNECTICUT: Contrary to what the President has
said. Trade agreements have a direct affect on our sovereignty. They have
the ability to uproot domestic laws here in the United States. Today the
casualty is Country-of-origin labeling. Beware of the road that you go
down today.


DYSON: Joining me now is our Rapid Response Panel. Roger Johnson,
President of the National Farmer`s Union and Pat LaFrieda of Pat LaFrieda
meat purveyors and author of meat, "Everything you need to know". So
Roger, Speaker Boehner called this a victory for American farmers. Is that
your reaction?


DYSON: You guys feel victorious here?

JOHNSON: No, National Farmer`s Union was one of the leading organizations
for the last two, almost three decades fighting for Country-of-origin
labelling for the consumers right to know where their meat comes from,
because producers are proud of what they do what they produces. And they
want consumers to know.

DYSON: But it`s not just pride, is it? Is it also about quality control?

JOHNSON: It`s about a bunch of things, its quality control, its food
safety, you name it. I mean, people want to know where their food comes
from. I mean, if this -- if what Congress, what the House passed last
night were to become law, we could technically be having Chinese chicken
come in here without evening knowing that it`s a Chinese chicken.

DYSON: Right. And then makes a big difference two people who can solve

JOHNSON: Well, I think most people would be rightly concerned about that.

DYSON: Right. So Pat, what is this going to mean for the business that
you`re involved with?

PAT LAFRIEDA, PAT LAFRIEDA MEAT PURVEYORS: Well, for me I think it`s a big
defeat for the American farmer. And all we`ve done as a company in our
third generation, is try to push the idea of American farmers and buying
domestic product. The COOL Act was great in that we were able to give the
consumer the ability to choose and have the knowledge of where their
product is from.

Now, the thought that the retailers cannot or are not mandating to write on
the package where the Country-o-origin is from, is taking American freedom
away from us, this is at a time when as your poll shows, 90 percent of the
public want to know where their meat is from. They thought that we know
more about where our clothes are made from the tags we consume and eat is
just idiotic to me.

DYSON: Roger, in light of that claim of videos you see. What kind of risk
is this for American consumers? Not having an idea about where that meat

JOHNSON: Well, you know, it`s helpful to go back to when we first got COOL
passed in 2002, and subsequently passed again in 2008 because the
administration was prevented from Congress from implementing it in 2002.
The reason it was passed is because the multinational meat packing
companies in this country prefer to source their meat from a number of
different places around the world. And deceive consumers into believing
its U.S. product, because its required to have a USDA inspected stamp on

So consumers would see that, and they would think it was a product of
Canada, or a product South America or wherever in the world. If it had
that USDA stamp on it, they would think it was U.S. product. That the very
fact that consumers were being deceived and that producers in America were
facing depressed prices as a result of this Deceptive Act on the part of
the packers is really what lead Congress to put this law into place to
begin with. That`s what the packers want to go back to.

That ability to source from any place in the world, mix the product up to
whatever specifications they prefer, and along the way. I mean, who knows
what we`re going to end up eating.

DYSON: Yeah, that`s a tremendous -- so Pat, some of the biggest U.S. -- I
know you want to time in on that, but I want to ask you, some of the
biggest U.S. food and beverage companies supported repeal of this labelling
law. Give us as sense of why and how it`s going to benefit, you know, who
is going benefit from that.

LAFRIEDA: Look, the reason they wanted to repeal is, because there`s less
expensive. It`s less expensive to bring in product from other countries,
obviously. When you have to label the product by its country of origin,
you have to segregate it in the slaughter facilities. That`s expensive so
that makes Mexican and Canadian product a little bit more expensive unless
appealing to domestic manufacturers. But this is a capitalist market, so I
think that 90 percent of the American public wants American product. Then
that should be the driving force.

There I think that if you took that poll today it would be even higher.
And I think that Americans are prepared to pay more for a domestic product
than for something that could come from anywhere in the world. And just
the fact that they have that knowledge gives us that much more freedom. I
think that if this is repealed, there is a way around the COOL Act.

And that has to do with the consumer. If the consumer is educated and they
demand from retailers, domestic product. Then the retailers will have no
option other than to put their own labelling on the product that says it`s

DYSON: Right.

LAFRIEDA: And that will drive back toward some sort of labelling. So
there`s some sort of traceability to the country of origin.

DYSON: Well, might both of you. What about the money involved here, what
about the $3 billion? What could we have done about that fine? We could
have extracted that from the billions of dollars we make from pork in one
state alone, right. So tell us about how we get (inaudible).

JOHNSON: Sure. So first of all this $3 billion is a threat on the part of
Canada and Mexico. It`s totally disproven at this point. I mean the real
shame on what House did was they interceded wanting before throw out the
law before the WTO process is even over. The step we`re in with the WTO
right now is the WTO saying "OK, the way we were labelling it here,
violated the WTO rules". But they`ve got about a two to three, maybe four
month window now, where Canada and Mexico have requested the right to
retaliate that`s a 3 billion.

The U.S. now has a right to go to arbitration at the WTO and say to the
Canadians and Mexicans proved that you lost money. The fact the matter is.
There was a study done by Auburn University`s Dr. Robert Taylor who looked
at the markets before COOL was put in place in the markets after COOL as
put in place and concluding that there is zero economic impact to the
Canadian or Mexican beef industry either in terms import numbers or in
terms of prices. That information, the U.S. would be able to present and
we`ll find out whether that 3 billion is going to be something bigger.

DYSON: COOL at all.

JOHNSON: That`s right.

DYSON: All right, Roger Johnson and Pat LaFrieda. Thank you so much for
your time.

LAFRIEDA: Thanks for being with you.

DYSON: Still to come, the details of a new plan to diversify more
communities across the country.

And a Michigan lawyer is taking Detroit`s courts to court. Here why he
says Detroit`s justice system is unfair.

Stay tuned.


DYSON: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

In tonight`s two minute drill, finals fever. The Cavaliers lead the Golden
State Warriors two games to one in the finals. Heading into game four
tonight in Cleveland. Lebron James is on some other stuff. He continues
to dominate even the court. James has 123 points through the first three
games. Even Kobe Bryant is defending his gunslinger mentality. Of course
he would. His average of 41 points per game ties him with Michael Jordan
for the highest in the finals series.

Another incredible stat, Lebron had a hand in nearly 70 percent of the
points scored by the Cavs so far in the finals. And why would you guess
not. Why would that not be the case, because he`s been short handed?
Kyrie Irving is out, Kevin Love is out, and Lebron has put this team on his
back, and he`s carried forward. And he`s done of this point making through
assists and play creation.

There`s another Cavalier quickly becoming a household name. Matthew
Dellavedova the Australian point guard helped seal the deal for the Cavs in
game two, and scored a playoff career high 20 points in game three. ESPN
reports Dellavedova had the top selling basketball Jersey on the fanatic`s
website Wednesday. The site says they`ve sold more of his jerseys during
the finals than they did the entire regular season.

Let`s see if they can get my jersey up there too. Dellavedova was
hospitalized for severe dehydration after game three, but is expected to be
back on the court tonight. That`s going to be one hooded nanny and heck of
a shooting contest there.

There`s more coming up on the Ed Show after this. Stay tuned.


DYSON: Welcome back to the Ed Show. A lawyer in Michigan says the Detroit
municipal court system is biased against black people. Attorney Michael
Fortner plans to file a lawsuit. Fortner claims "The governor has taken
over Detroit`s court system and replaced its leadership with the prejudiced
administrator, more interested in hurting the people of Detroit than fixing
the challenges of the court system".

This of course is in light of all of the extraordinary changes and
challenges going on in the criminal justice system in America gives bold
relief to such a story so we`re invite Attorney Michael Fortner to join us

Attorney Fortner thank you for coming on my friend. What would you say to
Governor Rick Snyder if he were here with you now?

MICHAEL FORTNER, DETROIT ATTORNEY: You know, Rick Snyder needs to be aware
of this a number of problems. But first of all, thank you Michael for
inviting me. Governor Snyder needs to be aware of the fact that there are
a number of problems taking place, in terms (inaudible) court and overall
impact it`s having on the jury system here in state Michigan in general.

DYSON: Right. So, my understanding is -- go ahead sir.

FORTNER: Well, let me start off this. A few years ago, Judge Michael
Talbot he`s the city court appeal judge here was given the job of
supposedly managing the budget over 36th District Court.

DYSON: Right.

FORTNER: And the guys on that what`s happened, is that just been
handpicked judges who control the outcome of certain cases. There have
been judges who have been punished for speaking out about foreign (ph)
practices. And there`s been overhaul of the jury system. A lot of
exclusion of a large number of black population here and participate on
jury process period.

DYSON: Right. Well, that`s pretty remarkable because, as I understand it
there are plenty of black people who`re in the jury pool in the criminal
side. But you`re suggesting on the civil side there`s a dearth of blacks
who`re allowed to participate. Tell us what the consequences of their lack
of participation are.

FORTNER: Well, respectively in civil court, professor that`s where the
money`s at, and obviously if you don`t have people from your background
from your culture, understand how you operate and cultural, you know, it is
increase of your particular group.

DYSON: That`s right.

FORTNER: Then you tend to be on a disadvantage quite frankly.

DYSON: And tell us about then, do you think there`s a systematic attempt
to exclude black jurors from the pool in the civil court?

FORTNER: Well, when you start leaving out certain segments of the
population, not inviting them to participate in the jury process. Then
obviously it`s a systematic exclusion. At one point the jury pool consists
of 85 or 90 percent of black in minority, now it`s significantly less.

DYSON: Well, that`s pretty remarkable and the city as large as Detroit
with as large a black population as Detroit to find that black people are
being systematically excluded there. Doesn`t appear to be something of
course that is arbitrary, but something that is target toward that

FORTNER: Well, supposedly under the guys of saving money. I mean, if you
leave out -- if you don`t notify certain segments of the community. You
say money because they`re not going to show up anyway supposedly.

DYSON: All right.

FORTNER: That`s free tax under which these people aren`t being invited.

DYSON: Well, good luck with that particular lawsuit. Attorney Michael
Fortner, thank you so much for your time tonight.

How the Obama administration is trying to make wealthy neighborhoods less
segregated next. Stay with us.


DYSON: The Obama administration is taking new steps to address housing
segregation. The department of housing and urban development proposed new
regulations that will take grant money to affordable housing projects. Low
income housing would be placed directly in affluent neighborhoods. The
policy would also refurbish schools, parks and transportation routes in low
income communities. HUD Secretary Julian Castro says "It is a piece of
unfinished business from the 1968 Fair Housing Act that`s long overdue.


on a rule, a new firm and look further for housing rule. Part of that is
an assessment of fair housing tool that they`ll be able to use to
understand what the fair housing challenges in those communities are.


DYSON: The program has the express goal of reducing the racial and ethnic
concentrations of poverty caused by historic segregation.


CASTRO: We are first and foremost with housing. However, to the second
question, do I believe that we should also make investments, and we are
making some investments, that seek to get folks to a stronger track so they
can achieve the American dream? Of course I do.


DYSON: To qualify for the funds cities would required to examine patterns
of segregation in their neighborhoods and developed plans to address it.
For generations marginalize communities have been shut out of key resources
for upward mobility as point of government policy. HUD wants to break that

Joining me now is Dr. James Peterson MSNBC contributor and Director of
Africana studies at Lehigh University, and Dr. Howard-John Wesley Senior
Pastor of what has been told to me is the greatest church in America Alfred
Street Baptist Church. Dr. Peterson, how important are these new

PETERSON: I think these new proposals are actually quite important. It is
really addressing the spirit of the 1968 Fair Housing Act which, you know,
didn`t really account for some of the disparity impact consequences of the
ways in which gentrification was going to operate particularly in our major
American cities. Some of these are going to really depend on how it is
targeted. So doctor and so, there are basically two pieces of it. Some of
it is about community development, developing some resources and some
structures in certain low income communities and some of it is about
actually building housing in middle class and more wealthier neighborhoods.

If they target that in the same cities that have suffered most from
gentrification, I think that`s where the policy will find a strength and
some of the best outcomes. And we are to see exactly, you know, how the
grants are allocated. Who applies for them and where it ends up taking

DYSON: Well, to piggyback on that Dr. Wesley. I want to turn to a grim
milestone that I believe relates to the subject directly. We`re halfway
through the year and we`ve already reached 500 fatal police shootings as of
last night. Do you see a connection between concentrated poverty and the
kind of explosive activity in our neighborhoods leads to such devastation?

a shadow of a doubt. One can`t be blind to the effects of poverty and the
cyclical nature of the violence the criminal activity come when one is
denied basic freedom and rights and the progression for good schools and
grocery stores and adequate housing. But then beyond that, even in the
city in which we live, the police officers who work in the city can`t
afford to live in the city.

So you`ve already set up a tense moment when (inaudible) officers aren`t
residents of the community, do not know the residents, are not able to
interact. And so there just tension all around when you don`t deal with
the poverty issue and see that`s part of the race issue as well.

DYSON: You`re one of the most heralded young ministers in this nation.
The President came to worship at your church on Eastern Sunday morning.
What do you think is the responsibility of this administration to dealing
with the outbreak of extraordinary police brutality against unarmed black
citizens, the latest of which of course happened down at a pool party in

WESLEY: Well, I know it is a very divisive issue. You know, around
American society and we did not elect out President to be the President of
black America. But I do applaud he`s courageousness. I do applaud the
ability to rise he`s voices around this issue to make it something people
are speaking about. The genius of Dr. Martin Luther King was he took off
the hidden nature of segregation in the south and exposed it through the
nation. And I believe the same thing that`s happening to our president,
that though he`s courageous voice, he`s helping other people realize the
systemic racism that we still do within our land.

DYSON: All right. So Dr. Peterson, Republicans have already launched
opposition to HUD`s proposal calling it overreached. Is that a predictable
response to people who weren`t interested and invested in desegregating
these communities as a party to begin with?

PETERSON: Yeah. There are a lot of politicians on both sides, you know,
actually I think who will also going to be resistant to this. And you`ll
hear them used talking points and words like Utopia or these words that try
to make people distracted from what the actual reality is. The reality is
there`s been a disparity in impact on poor folks and people with color.
Based upon the ways on which cities have sort of been developing.

And so, there are certain things like tax abatements in cities like
Baltimore and Philadelphia for corporations and for corporate entities that
underdeveloped housing opportunities for poor folks. And so, this is a
policy oriented response to it. And like I said, to the extent that it is
targeted to the communities that have suffered most from that kind of a
corporate favored gentrification, we can actually sort of roll some of
these things back.

We know doc. as the Rev. has mentioning, here that if we address
concentrated poverty in the systematic ways, to public education through
housing opportunities. If we really try lift folks up out of poverty, we
will address the issues around police brutality and aggressive policing
because it is much more pronounce in the poor communities and where those
communities of concentrated poverties. So there are ways of address thing.

DYSON: Sure.

PETERSON: Systematically through brought of these issues and this policy

DYSON: You know, Secretary Castro said look this is the fulfillment
finally of the 1968 Act that was enacted in the shadow of Dr. King`s death.
So what do you say to people who think Dr. Wesley, "Oh, housing
discrimination that`s been over, we dealt with that years ago?"

WESLEY: They`re blind to the reality, the fact and I`m glad that we`re
able to, you know, race this statistic, these numbers at the same time.
Remember, Dr. King`s dream was never realized simply with Voting Rights
Act. He began to move toward economic equity, wages, and issues such as
housing. And so, I believe they we`re still carrying on the dream of Dr.

DYSON: And when you talk about that dream very briefly. The housing is
extremely important because it is connected to the tax base for your
educational system. So good education it seem to me is attached to housing
as well.

WESLEY: Oh, definitely. We know that is the key to any upliftment. And,
you know, the whole idea that this is Utopian, I thought that`s what
America was. The pursuit of the Utopian ideal, that all people have an
equal opportunity to get a piece of the pie. Instead for those who would
say that it`s inappropriate because of that, it`s exactly why I`m in this

DYSON: Well, from one duke man to another, I`m scared about that. Dr.
Peterson, you agree with what the Reverand is saying here? Because it does
seem to be interrelated relationship between housing, economic despair and
the kind of poverty that people are confronting in a 30 seconds.

PETERSON: There`s no question about that. The only way to address the
infrastructure systematic challenges that we`re talking about with respect
to concentrate poverty is to look at policy that`s address broader systems
housing, education, criminal justice system. Those things have to be
systematic in their nature and that`s what this proposal is all about.

DYSON: All right, Reverend Dr. Howard-John Wesley and Dr. James Peterson,
two young men who graduated from a school down south somewhere. Thank you
for your time tonight.

That`s the Ed Show. I`m Michael Eric Dyson in for Ed Schultz.

The Reverend Al Sharpton with PoliticsNation starts right now.


<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