IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

The Ed Show for Monday, July 28th, 2014

Read the transcript to the Monday show

July 28, 2014

Guest: Chris Van Hollen, Michael Eric Dyson, Jon Soltz, Jane Kleeb, Brad
Woodhouse, Reese Halter


CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS HOST: Will you consider impeaching the president?

REP. STEVE SCALISE, (R) LOUISIANA: This might not be the first White House
in history that`s trying to start the narrative of impeaching their own

WALLACE: But the impeachment is off the table?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Cry (ph). I`m going to give me a second.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think that there are some Republicans, hoping they
can get into office so that they can impeach the president.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We can have an impeachment hearing in the House.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And the tipping point in this drive towards

make determination about whether it`s getting impeachable or not.

right now by Mr. Boehner.

SCALISE: The White House will do anything they can to change the topic.


ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good to have you with us tonight folks. Thanks
for watching. So the Congress is about ready to go home for their summer
recess. And the Republicans are calculating the two big questions. Number
one, do the American people want to see the president get sued? And do
they really want to see him get impeached? Is that the right thing for the

It`s not about jobs, it`s not about health care, it`s not maybe even tax
reform, it`s about how bad can we make this president look before the

The Republican Party still has one word on their mind. It`s impeachment.
We know the Republican Party is helped bet on the defeating President Obama
whatever the cost is. It`s scorched earth policy on impeachment at this
point. We`ve seen record obstruction on every single policy President
Obama has put forth to move the country forward.

Now, they are suing President Obama for overstepping his constitutional
authority but they never given any definition about what they`re really
uptight about. On Sunday the incoming Republican House majority refuse to
take impeachment off the table.


WALLACE: Will you consider impeaching the president?

SCALISE: Now, you know, this might not be the first White House in history
that`s trying to start the narrative of impeaching their own president.
Ultimately, what we want to do is see president follow the laws.

WALLACE: But impeachment is off the table?

SCALISE: Well, the White House wants to talk about impeachment, ironically
their going out and trying to fundraise off of that too.

WALLACE: I`m asking you sir.

SCALISE: Look the White House will do anything they can to change the
topic away from the president failed agenda.


SCHULTZ: Who in the White House for months on end has been talking about
impeachment? No one. Follow the law. Mr. Scalise, what laws or President
Obama -- what`s he breaking, what`s he doing wrong?

Executive orders have been around for a long time. Scalise was asked three
different times if impeachment was a possibility he never answered the
question. And it`s not just this new dude. How about Congress Jeff --
Jason Chaffetz of Utah has also refused to take impeachment of the table.


WOLF BLITZER, CNN NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Jason Chaffetz of Utah is joining us
right now. Among other things he suggested that perhaps President Obama`s
hang (ph) of the Benghazi terror attack could be an impeachable offense.
Congressman, tell us what you mean by that.

REP. JASON CHAFFETZ, (R) UTAH: Look, it`s not something I`m seeking, it`s
not the end game, it`s not what we`re playing for, I was simply asked is
that within the realm of possibilities and I would say yes. I`m not
willing to take that off the table but that certainly not what we`re
striving for.


SCHULTZ: How about saying this, Congressman. That`s not where we`re
going, that`s not where the country is going, they just can`t get it out of
their mouth. Now the chorus is getting bigger.

On Saturday Congressman Steve King of Iowa, he threatened impeachment of
President Obama uses more executive orders on the immigration crisis. The
Iowa congressman said, "From my stand point, if the president enacts more
executive actions, we need to bring impeachment hearings immediately before
the House of Representatives. That`s my position and that`s my prediction
-- interesting word prediction. I had a similar prediction as Steve King
had just last month.


SCHULTZ: The Republican mission is to impeach President Obama. They just
need the power. Their game plan clearly is to hold the House, take the
Senate and impeach the president. These guys are ruthless.


SCHUTLZ: That`s it, it`s the replay folks. I said it back then I`ll say
it again Republicans will do whatever it takes to bring down President
Obama. That`s their agenda. They know impeachment is red meat (ph) for
their base and that`s what they need big turnout.

Republicans when you look at it they really have nothing to lose here. And
they`re even getting the minions to follow them. A new poll shows at 57
percent of Republicans support impeaching the president. Go base go.

Meanwhile when Democrats won the House -- and this is so important because
there is a distraction where the narrative is out there about impeachment
in suing the president. The Democrats have been there, they had their
chance and they didn`t take it.

The House back in 2006, some of the democratic base where calling for
George W Bush`s impeachment because of the Iraq war. The soon to be House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi said "Impeachment was not a possibility"


REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), MINORITY LEADER: I have said and say again that
impeachment is off the table. This election was about the future as those
little children knew this morning. It`s not about the Republicans. And
so, we will go forward with an agenda on issues that are relevant to the
lives of the American people addressing their priorities.


SCHULTZ: Such different audio, isn`t it? It just sounds so different back
in 2006 from 2014 where the ray of hope is still alive for the Republicans,
that door was slammed by the Democrats back in 2006 because the country had
bigger problems. Well, we got big problems right now, don`t we, if you
listen to them? It`s clear Republicans don`t have the leadership skills to
take impeachment off the table.

Obstruction is just the first page in their playbook to destroy President
Obama`s administration and his legacy and another part of their plan of
course to suing President Obama. On Friday, Senior White House aide Dan
Pfeiffer said Boehner`s lawsuit, could open the door for impeachment.


DAN PFEIFFER, SENIOR WHITE HOUSE AIDE: I saw a poll today that had a huge
portion of the Republican Party base saying that they support impeaching
the president. You know, I think a lot of people in this town laugh that
off. I think it is -- I would not just count that possibility. I think
that speaker Boehner by going down the path of his lawsuit has open the
door to (inaudible) possibly considering impeachment at some point in the
future. And I think that the president`s act on immigration reform will
certainly of the likelihood that they would kind of play impeachment at
some point.


SCHULTZ: I bet House Republicans and those on the Senate can`t wait to get
home for August so they can hear their 57 percent say, "Yeah, sue him.
Yeah, impeach him." Then they`ll come back to Washington and say, "Well,
we`re just doing what the American people told us to do on our recess."

House Republicans are expected to formally approve their lawsuit against
President Obama later this week. John Boehner is aware his lawsuit, may
not be popular right now. He`s already in the damage control mode.

On Sunday, he wrote an aped of the USA Today saying, "This is also not
about me versus President Obama, this is about future Congresses and future
presidents. I believe this path is the right one to defend our institution
and preserve the constitution while continuing to focus on the American
people`s top priority, helping our private sector create more American

What a freaking joke that is. Boehner`s aped is a total joke, total across
the board joke. Boehner is not concerned about creating jobs. If Boehner
really cared about jobs, he work with the president on nearly some kind of
infrastructure bill that would maybe rebuild some bridges in this country
that some have already fallen down and maybe vote that would create 1
million jobs. If Boehner really care about jobs, he wouldn`t obstruct the
president on his jobs bill.

John Boehner didn`t care about anything. He cares about one thing and
that`s destroying President Obama. And he told the reporters that he
doesn`t impeachment. I think he`s lying. There is a reason this guy is
suing the President of the United States. If Republicans take the Senate
in November, you can count on President Obama being impeached. It is the
ultimate tarnish bank on it. It will be the first order of business come
January of 2015.

Get your cell phones out. It want to know what you think. Tonight`s
question, if Republicans win the Senate and hold the house, will they
impeach President Obama? What do you think? Text A for yes, text B for no
to 67622. You can always go to our blog at We`ll bring you
the results later on in this program.

For more, let me bring in Congressman Chris Van Hollen of Maryland.
Congressman, great to have you with us tonight here on THE ED SHOW. Let me
ask you to answer poll. Do you think Republicans will eventually move to
impeach the president?

REP. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, (D) MARYLAND: Well, Ed, I think you got a preview
about the answer to that this weekend when as you pointed out Scalise had
an opportunity to close the door on the impeachment conversation just as
Nancy Pelosi did close the door back in 2006. Scalise decided to keep that
door wide open. We know many of their Tea Party constituents are clamoring
for impeachment. We also know that when speaker Boehner says he`s not
going to do something.

We often see very soon after that his Tea Party Caucus roll right over him.
Remember, he said he wasn`t going to shutdown the government and they ended
up shutting down the government. So I think you`re really right which is
that the lawsuit which they`re going to be voting on this week may just be
the opening salvo in what becomes a demand from the Tea Party to impeach
the president and the demand which of the end of the day, speaker Boehner
will not be able to resist.

SCHULTZ: Congressman, maybe I missed the new story here or the sound by.
What`s the legal basis for impeachment? What executive orders has
President Obama done that has exceeded his authority that would put him in
the position to be impeached?

VAN HOLLEN: Well, you know what`s crazy about this Ed, right, because
we`ve seen the statistics now. The reality is that Ronald Reagan had many
more executive orders, George Bush had more executive orders than President
Obama and what it gets right down to it, we`ve got this really weird
argument that Republicans representing. On the one hand, they want to
totally repeal the Affordable Care Act, right?

They want to get rid of the protections that we`ve got under the Affordable
Care Act and yet they`re claiming they want to impeach the president
because he delayed a portion of the act that relates to some of things
businesses have to do, right?

So they`re suing the president saying, "You know what? That executive
order that provided some relief and some delay that the businesses in terms
of the Affordable Care -- we`re going to sue you", for that even though we,
Republicans want to get rid of the entire Affordable Care Act. So it`s a
non sensible approach on policy grounds, legal grounds. This is peruse

The reality is this is the only thing, Ed, that they`ve got to appeal to
their base when we know that the American public cares about focusing on
jobs on the minimum wage and all those things which is why the Democratic
agenda for the first hundred days in the next Congress -- if we have the
opportunity implemented -- is focused on jobs and trying to make sure we
open more doors of opportunity.

SCHULTZ: So you expect this lawsuit against the president to move forward
this week. Everybody is going to go home for the month of August. The
Republicans are going to play up the 57 percent of Americans want to see
some kind of action taken against the president. We can only imagine what
we`re going to here form them when they come back after Labor Day. Are
Republicans more concerned about America`s infrastructure or this lawsuit?

VAN HOLLEN: Well, let me answer it this way. Have we had a vote on the
minimum wage in the United Sates House Representative? We haven`t even had
a vote.


VAN HOLLEN: Have we had a vote on the president`s plan to invest in our
infrastructure, right? We have a plan to shutdown those tax breaks that
encourage American companies to move jobs overseas to shut those down so
that we can bring those jobs back and invest our savings here in our
American infrastructure. Did we had a vote on that? No.

Have we had a vote on the emergency unemployment compensation? No. What`s
one thing we all going to have a vote on? Suing the president of United
States. That tells you, Ed, where the Republican priorities are? They`re
on process, they`re on lawsuits, they`re on talking of their base about
impeaching the president. They`re not about jobs and wages. And again, I
want to stress the fact that elections here have consequences and we
Democrats in the house have laid out our agenda for the first hundred days.

If the American people give us the opportunity to move forward, we will
vote on the minimum wage. We`ll vote on the jobs plan. We`ll vote on
closing the tax breaks that encourage jobs overseas and invest those moneys
on infrastructure right here at home. We`ll invest in the When Women
Succeed, America Succeeds. That`s a positive agenda.


VAN HOLLEN: All the Republicans got to suing the president and talking
about impeachment.

SCHULTZ: Congressman Chris Van Hollen, great to have you with us tonight.
I appreciate your time. Thanks to much.

VAN HOLLEN: You too. Thank you, thank you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: No doubt. You bet. Let me bring in Georgetown University
professor and MSNBC political analyst Dr. Michael Eric Dyson. Dr. Dyson,
57 percent of Republican support impeachment. What -- is that a high
number? Your thoughts on that number?

Republican faithful, we would expect the Tea Party inspired enemies toward
the president to a full meet this kind of resistance. But think about it,
33 percent of people want to impeach the president, 30 percent wanted to
impeach George W. Bush and 29 percent wanted impeach Bill Clinton. So for
the past two presidencies, this has been part for the course.

We know it has an ugly cast because of Barack Obama standing as the first
African-American president but also the political polarization that`s going
on in Washington D.C. now and the determination not to do anything to help
the president and to do everything to undermine his presidency. And beyond
that, as the Congressman just pointed out, the contradiction at the heart
of the Republican ideology, on the one hand, they want to sue him for over
extending, he is -- if you will, president authority through executive
orders that we has issued for fewer than many others and on the other hand,
they wanted to take the same kind of executive action in the myths of the
crisis of immigration going down -- going on in Mexico and Texas right now.
So -- that the border there.

So this is the kind of contradiction of the heart. What they really want
to do it to publicly hate the president and find legitimacy legally
speaking to do so.

SCHULTZ: Is it based in just how much disdain they have for this man?

DYSON: There`s no question that the hatred, the disdain, the feeling that
he is tearing the country of thunder. Now, we know that this is not
necessarily, only a ratio matter because the same kind of feeling was
directed toward Bill Clinton at the height if his presidency but we must
say that there is an extra layer of resistance and animus that is attached
to Barack Obama because of how he operates in this country and because of
the kind of love he gets on the one side, there is a kind of corollary
disdain for him on the other side and beyond that that kind of put a
sensation of his presidency in an -- with a narrow focus that has to say
that he`s attacking the constitution.

He`s undermining the presidential authority. These are all tropes and
metaphors and dog whistles. For the fact again, he`s not quite legitimate.
He doesn`t know quite what he`s doing and as a result of that he`s in
competency and inefficiency have converge and now, what we have as an
illegal president who needs to be stopped.

SCHULTZ: Well, Michael Eric Dyson, let`s just say that you are an adviser
in the Oval Office to the president.

DYSON: Right.

SCHULTZ: Would you tell him to stay the course on executive orders? Would
you tell him to ignore all of this chatter and lawsuit and impeachment talk
and just move forward and do whatever you have to do? What would say to

DYSON: I would absolutely say that. See one of the strengths of Barack
Obama which is why many white Americans voted for him, is that he`s not
perceive as a racial cry baby. The kind of comments that I`m making to you
right now, Barack Obama himself would barely admit.

So he`s a man who has been about his business. Let me go about the
people`s business. Let me take care of it. Yes. He`s not damn. The
people surrounding him are -- if you will fund raising on impeachment not
on the negative sense but in the anticipation of the fact that these
Republicans have shown that they will have little restraint in the face of
their animus toward him.

So he has got a two pronged strategy. On the one hand, continue to
mobilize the forces on the democratic party to stop down what the
Republicans are doing and secondly, state your course. Use your executive
power to do the things you know are right...


DYSON: . and allow history to judge you but also, depend upon the
political support of those who believe that you`re doing a good job.

SCHULTZ: There is no high ground with Republicans. They can`t emulate
what Nancy Pelosi did back in 2006.

DYSON: Not at all.

SCHULTZ: It`s just not in their DNA.


SCHULTZ: . to do what`s best for the country. Michael Eric Dyson, good to
have you with us tonight my friend, thanks so much.

DYSON: Thank you, sir.

SCHULTZ: Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the
screen. Share your thoughts with us on Twitter @edshow and on Facebook.
Appreciate your like on us. We always want to know what you think. Up
next, a rare moment of unity from Congress don`t celebrate just yet folks,
lots more to go. But first, Sarah Palin launches her own TV network. This
ought to be real good. Trenders is next. Stay with us.


SCHULTZ: What`s hot, what`s not? Follow us right here on Trenders. You
follow us on Facebook and on our website, would you, @edshow on Facebook.
You can get my radio Podcast,,,, and on iTunes it`s free they`re 24/7 for you whenever
it fits your schedule.

THE ED SHOW social media nation has decided. Here`s what`s hot. We are
reporting here at today`s top Trenders voted on by you.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The number three Trenders, static cling.

PALIN: This is a news channel that really is a lot more than news.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Where`s the remote.

PALIN: America prepare to be amazed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The two time reality shows star starts her own network.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you tired at the media filters?

TINA FEY, ACTRESS: Do you hate gotcha journalism?


FEY: That`s so Palin.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You can watch our channel right here on your
computer, your tablet, or even on your smartphone.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There is no escape.

FEY: All Palin, all the time.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The number two Trender, on trial.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Former Governor Bob McDonnell and his wife Maureen are
facing 14 federal charges.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You`re in big trouble mister.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The once powerful political couple was accused of
taking money and gets from a wealthy businessman.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The former governor Virginia faces federal corruption

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Federal prosecutors alleged the McDonnells to
$165,000 from Jonnie Williams. The governor got Rolex watch, golf clubs,
and outings, and use the Williams` Ferrari.

the evidence here is very strong that we kind of most clearly aware of
significant gifts.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This trial is going to be perhaps the most amazing
political trial we seen in Virginia.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And today`s top Trender, battling.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are up against the war idea.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A few days ago until the schedule of five week
congressional recess...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Senator Bernie Sanders and Republican Congressman Jeff
Miller of Florida work all weekend and try to hammer out a compromise.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Congress works of store of VA deal.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS, (D) VERMONT: It was given and take on both sides.

REP. JEFF MILLER, (R) FLORIDA: This agreement will go along way to helping
resolve the crisis.

SANDERS: It strengthens the VAs so that we can put a permanent end to long
waiting lists.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The plan is expected to authorize billion in
emergencies spending.

SANDERS: Claims and tanks and guns through a course of war. So we`re
taking of the men and women to use those weapons and fight our battles.


SCHULTZ: Joining me tonight Jon Soltz, our Iraq-war veteran and also
chairman of Jon good to have with us tonight. What is your
reaction that A deal has been struck? In the midst of all of this in
action in Washington they did not leave a lot of veterans behind on this
one, your thoughts on it?

JON SOLTZ, CHAIRMAN, VOTEVETS.ORG: It`s a little bit too late to be
honest. I mean we had this flight for along time. There`s a $21 billion
that pact that Senator Sanders brought up for a vote maybe three or four
months ago. After that happened, we have the buckle (ph) of the Phoenix

The money was still in want (ph) for the VA. And now, because the
political fought we have compromise but it`s still not the $21 billion.
It`s a good first step to helping with the waiting times and helping
college students get in state tuition in different states. But it`s still
not the initial $21 billion bill and it only happen because of tremendous
political pressure and follow at over at the VA that sort of forced the
House Republican to senator Republican hands to pass such a bill.

SCHULTZ: So your analysis is this falls way short of solving the major
problems that have unfolded in the VA?

SOLTZ: Well, there`s a couple of major issues one is the backlog which is
veterans are waiting along time to get this ability claim, that`s one
issue. Then, there`s the issue of wait times veterans can get and see
their doctors. And so, you know, you have a lot of veterans in this
country that didn`t have healthcare, they gone to the VA to opt in and so
the system, they got overwhelm.

The Congressional Budget Office thinks that, you know, this could be a $50
billion dollar operation not a $17 billion operation. So this is sort of
the tip of the iceberg probably. And veterans care last forever. People
come home with service connected injuries that last the lifetime. Our
casualties rates in Iraq and Afghanistan only one in the Marine age (ph)
groups dies was on prior works that was maybe one of the three that were

So these are people that need lifelong care and it`s up to the VA to do
that and there`s a real debate on what this costs are going to be.

SCHULTZ: So this still short changes what the VA needs and what you think
veterans needs. Well, at $17 billion and they`re looking for $5 billion
dollars as reported in offsets. So we can only imagine where the
Republicans are going to go on that. But it is going to expand facility
operations to see more veterans. How do we know about -- what is magical
about $21 billion?

SOLTZ: Well, you know, that`s a Senator Sanders number. And that`s a
variety of issues. Some of that was to offset, you know, college tuition
for students that one to other places. Some of that was the higher doctors
and nurses and a higher wage, you get underpaid as about treat the VA. I
mean there`s all kinds of creative things that they could do.

For instance, if you join the active militaries about there they paid for
your medical school, but we don`t see that type of loan forgive us (ph) to
the VA and so for so. There`s a variety of things that are in this
package, but the big issue is the wait times. And so, the fact right now,
you know.


SOLTZ: . and there`s the staff that 10 percent of veterans. I feel
they`re waiting too long at the VA Senate. But that just only because the
system is overwhelmed. So when we start to see there`s wait time go down,
I think you`ll have a better idea of how much more money is required.

But again, when someone gets inside the VA health care system of and
they`re there for life and the cost is a lifetime cost. So I think a lot
of veterans feel that the $17 billion, it`s great but it`s not -- it`s just
the beginning of the conversation, it`s not going to be enough.

SCHULTZ: And finally Jon, what your reaction to this new authority that is
been given to the VA secretary with regards to staffers who are not
performing properly or not performing to the level at which the VA expects.
And there`s going to be able to some more administrative moves a lot
faster. What about that?

SOLTZ: That`s a compromise Senator Sanders had to make, that`s a house
Republican bill to be honest. And, you know, I happen to like and respect
to workers if there at the VA. I mean they`re government employees, they
work hard for 20 and 30 years. Are there bad apples in every group?
Absolutely. But that was part of the compromise to be able to fire people
who work to the VA if is that the sole problem.

And it`s really a labor argument versus a finding an argument and I think
that`s not really largest the issue that VA faces. And it`s solely an
attempt to weaken the American Labor Movement and some of the AFGE unions
and -- that are involve there over at the VA. So it`s obviously something
not that I believe is this decisive here and obviously the money is more

SCHULTZ: Jon Soltz,, good to have to have with us.

SOLTZ: Thanks, Ed.

SCHULTZ: . on THE ED SHOW tonight. I appreciate your time. Thank you.

Still ahead, denial isn`t just a river drying up in Egypt. And on the
rapid response panel takes on Americas drilling trend of climate denial.
Plus a Florida Tea Party accidentally shows his true colors or ignorance by
judging others by the -- by their skin tone. Pretenders is just ahead.
I`m taking your question next at Ask Ed Live here on THE ED SHOW, MSNBC
were right back.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW. I appreciate all the questions from
our viewers in our Ask Ed Live Segment. Our first question tonight comes
from Laurie. She wants to know, "Are you going to subscribe to Sarah
Palin`s channel?"

No, I`m not. It`s 995 a month and I`d rather spend it on minnows so I
could catch more fish. But I have to tell you that I did see the promo
pieces of the trailer or whatever you call that. And Sarah Palin is really
going up to the mainstream media. I mean the mainstream media that didn`t
do anything any good.

So, I`m anxious harkening back to the interview that Katie Couric had with
Sarah Palin years ago about what she reads. I have to admit I`m rather
curious about where all the information is going to be coming from.

Our next question is from India. "Do you believe Congress will pass a
border bill before the August recess?" No. No way. They rather go home
and blame President Obama that`s not going to happen.

Stick around, Rapid Response Panel is next here on THE ED SHOW.

Market Wrap. Stocks end mixed with little change. The Dow gains 22
points, the S and P is flat, the NASDAQ falls by four points.

Some deals to tell you about, Dollar Tree is buying its rival Family Dollar
rate in a 0.5 billion dollars. Shares of Family Dollar jumped nearly 25
percent today. And in the internet sector, Real Estate website Zillow is
buying its rival Trulia for $3.5 million in stock. Trulia shares rally
more than 15 percent this second, Zillow also ended higher.

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


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW. Thanks for watching tonight.

Well, the United States is number one in denial. No one beats this country
at pretending global warming isn`t real. According to a new EBSAs global
trends study, our country has the largest number of people who do not think
we are headed for an environmental disaster. On the other end of the
spectrum, 91 percent of China agrees that change inhabits is necessary.
The misinformation campaign has been fueled really by a conservative
climate change deniers.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is climate change a fact? Mr. Harris (ph)?




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Brandon (ph)?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, god controls the climate.




SCHULTZ: Well, the climate issue is becoming a point of discussion in
political racist nationwide. In fact over the weekend, two Virginia`s
Senate candidates debated the issue. Democratic Senator Mark Warner of
Virginia asked the Republican candidate Ted -- Ed Gillespie about his views
on global warming and whether he sided with the majority of Republicans in
Congress who remain skeptical of the science.

Gillespie said, "I believe there is ample scientific evidence that
contributes to climate change but I`m not entirely dismissive of those who
have a different point of view." What? This is not a matter of points of
view. Don`t you think folks are -- Republicans seem to realize that there
are scientific facts out there? Climate change is real. Our environment
is changing.

Joining me now on our Rapid Response Panel Jane Kleeb, Executive Director
of Bold Nebraska also with us tonight Brad Woodhouse, former Democratic
Party Communications Director. Great to have both of you with us tonight.

Jane, let me facetiously ask you. How could the rest of the world be so
wrong on this if we`re number one?

reality is we`re going to start to lose standing in the world right Ed. I
mean, people look to America to be leaders, to be change agents, to be
innovators and we are, right? There`s a hog farmer in Nebraska who`s
literally turning hog waste in to clean energy.

And so, we should be lifting up those stories instead we have literally
crazy Republicans who are -- if only one decide with the Tea Party aren`t
siding a scientist and not looking at the reality and I`m actually starting
to get concerned on how other countries are viewing our world leaders.

SCHULTZ: So Jane, how do Democrats take advantage of this total denial in
the fact that the rest in the world is -- sees at one way and we just
happen to see the different way in this country influence by big oil, no

KLEEB: Democrat should start telling stories of Americans who are creating
clean energy and they should start telling real stories about what climate
change is going to mean. In Nebraska that could mean anywhere from 10 to
20 percent of our crops are going to go away because of all the extreme
weather changes that are going to happen.

And so -- and you can talk about projects like Keystone XL that is a dirty
outdated source of energy and so we should be transitioning to clean new
energy and that`s exactly where Democrats should be standing and they
should be standing strong on that not trying to hide, not trying to divert
attention away from extending strong and starting to tell stories.

SCHULTZ: What about that, Brad? Can Democrats do that? Is that a winning

COMMITTEE: Well, I do think it`s a winning strategy. I mean, look Ed, 97
percent of scientists, you know, agree on the human causes of climate
change but you have Republicans who really are bowing down I think to the
Koch brothers and to the Chamber of Commerce.

I mean, I`ll give you an example Ed. The Koch brothers started their
political advocacy in the 70`s because they didn`t like having to deal with
pollution regulations and now they`re funding all these campaigns. You
play the clip from North Carolina. Tom Tillis, the Koch brothers candidate
in North Carolina denies that climate change exist much and less the
climate change is caused by humans.

I think the Republicans are really -- they`re on the wrong side of history
here. They will look back and regret it but they have a political problem
I think this year but particularly going into 2016 where these issues will
be even more prevalent.

SCHULTZ: So, this is a bought and paid for political position by the
Republicans no matter what facts you throw out there, no matter what the
science is, they`re so bought and paid for on climate denial that you don`t
see them changing anytime soon?

WOODHOUSE: Well, I don. I mean, this really is I think a function of how
their campaigns are funded and who`s behind their campaign. The Koch
brothers and their interest in oil and their refineries, the Chamber of
Commerce, the big oil as you mention, they don`t care about what the
climate, what the earth looks like a hundred years from now. They care
about what their quarterly profits look like next month when the quarter,
you know, when the second or third quarter ends or third quarter begins.
And that`s what they`re concerned about. And look, I think.


WOODHOUSE: . that has real implications electorally for them.

SCHULTZ: Well, Jane you were talking about what Democrats need to do.
There is a new poll out in Florida that shows at nearly 8 and 10 voters.
What limits of carbon pollution from power plants although the governor
down there Rick Scott and a highly contested race with Charlie Crist claims
that he is no scientist when it comes to climate change impact.

So what`s the opportunity here? I mean what kind of number do the
Democrats need that would swing the pendulum? I mean is this something
that could really militate against the sitting governor in an election
first career?

KLEEB: Yeah -- I mean, I was born and raised in Florida. And so,
Floridians know that the extreme weather -- we can actually start to see
parts of Florida disappear if we don`t start taking climate change
seriously and if we don`t start listening to scientists. And so, I do
think that Charlie Crist should be using this to his advantage.

You know, I think politicians have not been talking about climate change
because they think that they need to dumb it down or that Americans don`t
understand it. When reality is -- it`s one of those issues that we need to
be talking about and that we want to be talking about.

I know it`s a mum. I want to see politicians talking about climate change
taking it seriously and more importantly I want to start hearing the
solutions to how we`re going to diversify our energy base. I am so tired
of hearing politicians talk about drilling and fracking. I want to start
hearing about solar, about innovative clean energy, about growing more
energy, about renewable fuel standards. We`re smart as Americans and our
politicians should be treating us as a smart.

SCHULTZ: So Brad, if this is a bought and paid for position by Republicans
there is nothing that`s going to move them. I have to say that I think
that there are a good number of Democrats who don`t feel the passion for
this, who accept the science, who understand the change of what is
happening with our environment but they don`t seem to have that fervor,
they don`t seem to have that pulse that they are going to take this and
they`re going to run with and they`re going to make it an issue. And I
personally think a lot of that has to do with they don`t want to become a
political target against those people that you had mentioned previously. I
mean is this a dynamic that they have to balance?

WOODHOUSE: Well, it is a dynamic they have to balance. I mean, you
consider the amount of money for example that the Koch brothers are putting
into this election and the fusion a lot of money they should spend to get
someone like Kay Hagan supporting the climate denial and like Tom Tillis.
I mean, you can understand what some politicians would be reluctant.

But I`ll say this, I think the President help find the right formula here.
You have to talk about parts of Florida disappearing. You have to talk
about the ice caps but you got to talk about some more practical things
too. And that`s asthma, that`s health of our population. That`s
emphysema. It`s what`s happening to all people and they`re breathing in
this environment. And I think if you combine all that, I think Democrats
can get on the right message and really how Republicans accountable for
really taking just a very small slice of this country. Big oil, the Koch


WOODHOUSE: . the polluters and representing them and not the American

SCHULTZ: And Jane Kleeb, I`ll be remised if I didn`t ask you. What is the
latest on they Keystone XL Pipeline the permitting which expired in South
Dakota? Where is that all stand right now? I know that in Nebraska you`ve
got a state Supreme Court hearing coming up on September 5th. Where is the
permitting process right now? What`s happening?

KLEEB: So essentially in South Dakota TransCanada is refusing to get their
permit recertified so they don`t have an active permit in South Dakota. I
think they`re terrified to face the tribes and the land donors who know a
lot more information that they did four years ago when they first got their

And I think they also don`t want to see that chaos happening in South
Dakota when judges are going to be deciding on the Nebraska route in
Nebraska eminent domain. Around September 5th is our hearing and then
we`ll see decision probably in the early next year. So, we don`t see
decision for the election time but I do think this is a time for
politicians to actually be standing with farmers and ranchers and start
defending property rights.

SCHULTZ: OK. Jane Kleeb, Brad Woodhouse good to have both of you with us
tonight on THE ED SHOW. And tomorrow night we`re going to talking about
another pipeline that is in their works.

Still to come, see the light under the gun, the silent victims of new
offshore drilling exploration. We`ll talk about another reason.

The White House seems to say no to big oil. We`re right back.


SCHULTZ: And in pretenders tonight for love of country, Curt Clawson. The
Florida Tea Partier picked up where the co-king Congressman left off
embarrassing his district. When Trey Radel stepped down because of his
issues Clawson stepped in as his replacement. Curt Clawson started out his
turn by welcoming two officials in a House Foreign Affairs hearing.


REP. CURT CLAWSON, (R) FLORIDA: I am familiar with your country. I love
your country and I am hopeful with the new change and regime that the
future and the land of promise and the land of opportunity of India can
finally became so. And I understand a complication of so many languages
and so many cultures and so many histories all rolled up in one.


SCHULTZ: Oops, you seem -- we have a problem. They`re all from the
country. Curt Clawson assumed two officials in the United States
government were from Indian`s government.


CLAWSON: So just as your capital is welcome here to produce good paying
jobs in the U.S. I`d like our capital to be welcome there and there are to
be freedom of capital so that both sides here on the same territory and I
asked cooperation and commitment and priority from your government and so
doing. Can I have that?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think your question is to the Indian government and
we certainly share your sentiments and we certainly will advocate that on
behalf of the U.S. government.

CLAWSON: Of course.


SCHULTZ: Florida is newest Congressman is already making waves in the GOP.
If Republicans think they are the party that doesn`t seek color and race,
they can keep on pretending.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to THE ED SHOW. This is the story for the folks who
take a shower after work.

For the first at over 30 years, the Obama administration is reopening
federal waters of the East Coast for oil and gas exploration that the
decision gives energy companies the green light to begin surveying from the
Coast of Delaware down the Coast of Florida staring next year paving the
way for possible drilling within the next decade.

The administration says that move could create thousands of new energy jobs
along the East Coast. The question is at what price. Exploration will be
conducted by using sonic cannons to find energy deposits deep beneath the
ocean floor.

Now, sonic cannons fire sound waves louder than a jet engine every 10
seconds for weeks at a time. Environmentalist say those sound pulses post
a real threat to marine life who rely on hearing to feed, communicate and
navigate. This would affect whales, dolphins, fish and crabs.

Now, aside from the environmental impact, this is going to affect anyone on
the East Coast whose job relies on fishing or tourism. The United States
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management acknowledged that thousands of sea
creatures could be harmed in the exploration process.

Folks, we are just talking about the impact of exploration process here
imagine what`s going to happen when the actual drilling starts if it does.

Joining me tonight, Dr. Reese Halter, Conservation Biologist at MUSE
College -- MUSE School CA and Author of the "Insatiable Bark Beetle."

Reese, good to have you with us tonight. This is the first I`ve heard of
this kind of exploration. What kind of long-term impact will these sound
cannons have on marine life as you see it?

DR. REESE HALTER, MUSE SCHOOL CA: Good evening Ed. This is horrendous.
Let me tell you why the doctors of the sea, our whales and dolphins are so
vital for the health and well-being of our oceans, our life support system.

These filter feeders, the enormous blues and humpbacks, they are
fertilizing machines, their flocculent pool enriches the phytoplankton and
stimulates the fisheries, the toothed whales, the colossal sperms and the
orcas, the largest dolphins. They keep their prey in check and they keep
it healthy. They call the old and weak and they prevent diseases from
becoming epidemics.

These cannons are going to kill thousands of dolphins and whales. They`re
going to maim hundreds of thousands of dolphins and whales. And by the
way, it`s not just the 1,000 miles from Delaware to Florida. These waves
will be felt as far as Iceland, as far as Scotland, as North Africa,
Portugal and Spain. This is the eco side.

SCHULTZ: OK. So, Doctor, what do the sound waves actually do to the
marine life? Does it disrupt their entire ecosystem? Does it disrupt
their reproduction? What does it do?

HALTER: It shutters their eardrums. They experience the most excruciating
death possible, those that are immediately around them. Farther away, they
loss their hearing. Ed, these are intelligent socially complex sentient
beings that communicate with their own sonar. They send out waves, they
have giant brains seven times larger than the human beings brain to
decipher the wave`s coming back.

And it`s not just the whales. We`re talking about the sharks, we`re
talking about the immense leathered-back three quarter of the ton sea
turtles, we`re talking about the -- we`re talking about all life. This is
a disaster. And we`re stalling men.

We know if we`re talking energy, Ed -- we`re talking about energy, yeah.
If we`re talking about energy, the ocean waves moving to and fro, they
generate two terawatts of power. Earthlings use one terawatt of power.

While the feds have been dragging their heels (ph), Australia, Spain,
Portugal and Scotland have this wave farms -- their pilots are already
done. They`re going into operational mode men. We`re wasting time and
we`re killing the oceans. And if the oceans die, we die.

SCHULTZ: There is no doubt about that.

Dr. Reese Halter, we`ll have you back to talk more about this. This is
very troubling and under the radar story. No doubt about it. I appreciate
your time tonight.

That`s THE ED SHOW. I`m Ed Schultz. "POLITICS NATION" with Reverend Al
Sharpton starts right now.

Good evening Rev.


Copyright 2014 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>