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

The Ed Show for Wednesday, January 28th, 2015

Read the transcript to the Wednesday show

Date: January 28, 2015
Guest: Scott Paul, David Cay Johnston, Ruth Conniff, Brad Woodhouse,
Annette Taddeo, Lizz Winstead, Angela Rye, Mike Papantonio

ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Americans and welcome to the Ed Show
live from Detroit Lakes, Minnesota. Let`s get to work. -


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The iPhone business for Apple is now bigger than Google
and Microsoft.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: IBM wants it all and is aiming its guns on its last
obstacle to industry control, Apple.

Will big blue dominate the entire computer industry?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They actually beat expectation by over 10 to 13

TIM COOK, APPLE CEO: The stores were absolutely electrifying with energy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a mesmerizing quarter.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Those who felt that this is only an iPhone story and
that they maybe one day it`ll be a worldwide story.

COOK: It is the next chapter in Apple`s story.


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

Been a lot of talk about weather and storms. You know what the big storm
is in technology? This thing right here.

If someone had told me 15 years ago that this was going to be at my finger
tips, I wonder what my reaction would have been. It really is amazing
isn`t it? We take it for granted.

We start tonight with the booming economy, the American economy. I guess
you could say it`s all about Apple.

Today, Apple announced its first quarter financial results and the numbers
are simply stunning. Apple sold a shocking 74.5 million iPhones setting a
record for unit sales. Apple CEO Tim Cook said on average, they sold
34,000 iPhones an hour everyday of the quarter. This boosted the company
to a record profit of $18 billion for the quarter.

Now overall, the company brought in over $74 billion in revenue. This is
higher than quarterly revenue from Microsoft and Google combined. By some
measures, it`s the largest quarterly profit ever to be reported by a
publicly traded company. It`s amazing.

Apple ended the quarter with a staggering $178 billion of cash on their
balance sheet. That`s a whole bunch of zeros, folks. And it`s enough
money to buy Ford, General Motors and Tesla, and still have $41 billion
leftover to go to a picnic.

No surprise here. Apple stock ended up 6 percent today in $115 a share.
Meanwhile America`s automobile industry is roaring. G.M. had a record year
in 2014 selling more than 9.9 million vehicles worldwide. President Obama
was exactly right to be telling the booming American economy in a State of
the Union Address.


more people back to work than Europe, Japan, and all advanced economies
combined. Our manufacturers have added almost 800,000 new jobs. Some of
our bedrock sectors like our auto industry are booming. But there are also
millions of Americans who work in jobs that didn`t even exist 10 or 20
years ago.


SCHULTZ: Now, the numbers don`t lie. We have seen 58 straight months of
private sector job growth with over 11 million jobs created. And if you
would tell the average Joe on the street that back in 2009 in the winter
time, they would have laughed you off the street.

The unemployment rate, some people thought it would never go below double
digits it`s at 5.6 percent right now, that`s from the Labor Department.

Meanwhile, John Boehner is still asking the same old questions.


REP. JOHN BOEHNER, (R-OH) HOUSE SPEAKER: The American people are still
asking the question, "Where are the jobs?"

Jobs and economy is still the number one issue in the country. And I just
don`t understand why every proposal that comes out with the administration
is just going to kill thousands and thousands of more American jobs.


SCHULTZ: Despite all of this success, Republicans are still fixated on
defeating President Obama. Republican leadership is standing firm against
just about everything President Obama wants to do.


the Union Address, let me ask you -- dead or alive -- raise taxes on the

BOEHNER: Why would I want to raise taxes to our people?

PELLEY: I`ll take that as a dead.

BOEHNER: Dead -- real dead.

PELLEY: Make community college free of charge, dead or alive?

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL, (R-KY) MAJORITY LEADER: We`ve added more debt during
the Obama years than all the presidents from George Washington down to
George Bush and giving away free tuition strikes me, it`s something we
can`t afford.

PELLEY: I`ll put that down as dead as well. Increasing the Federal
minimum wage?

BOEHNER: Bad idea.


BOEHNER: It`s a bad idea. I`ve had every kind of rotten job you can
imagine growing up and get myself through school. And I wouldn`t have a
chance to have those jobs. It`s the Federal government that kept imposing
higher minimum wage. It take the bottom wrongs off the economic ladder.

PELLEY: Finally, dead or alive, tripling the child care tax credit for
working families?

BOEHNER: We`re all for helping working class families around America. I
think we`ll take a look at this when he sends his budget up, something that
could be looked at in the overall context of simplifying our tax code.


SCHULTZ: So with all the positive things that are happening in our country
and the economy, if there was ever a time to move things forward
progressively, this would be the time to do it, to address the things that
we certainly couldn`t address in 2009 at the start of the great recession
in the years following.

But right now, isn`t this the time to invest? And shouldn`t this news from
Apple at least give us some confidence that if we do invest, it`s amazing
what American ingenuity can do? That American innovation -- that American
technology is the best in the world. Shouldn`t that motivate our lawmakers
to want to do something a little bit more to make sure that we`re on the
cutting edge? But instead, no matter what the conditions are, whether
they`re at the very bottom which we saw on 2009 or where they are right

The pinnacle of our economy is right now, the numbers don`t lie and we have
the same old Republican Party in the way of progress. They will say no to
everything unless it`s for the wealthy.

Get your cellphones out I want to know what you think. Tonight`s question,
"Does John Boehner need to stop asking where are the jobs are?" Text A for
yes, text B for no to 67622, leave a comment at our blog and
we`ll bring you the results later on in the show.

For more, let me bring in Scott Paul who`s the president of the Alliance
for American Manufacturing. Also with us, David Cay Johnston, columnist
for Al Jazeera and Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, gentlemen great to
have you with us tonight.

David Cay, you first. What would you compare where we are economically in
this country right now as to where we have possibly been before? When you
put it in terms of recovery, where we were years ago and where we are right

better off than we were obviously in 2009. And I think it was a very good
President Obama made our job increases has been greater than all the rest
of the modern world combined. We would be much better off if we were
investing in the future America and if we were using our tax dollars to
benefit all of us through infrastructure and education and training.

You know, we have scientist leaving this country to go to China because the
Chinese government will finance their research and we won`t. So that means
the future profits are going to come there.

The other side of this though Ed, is the bottom 90 percent of American`s
incomes from 2009 through 2012 fell. They went down.

In 2013, wages went down on average for every one of the 60 job categories,
the Social Security administration follows except job paying $50 million a
year or more and they were up -- if memory serves by about a third.

SCHULTZ: So how big is this deal, this Apple financial report? What does
it signal? What`s the offside as you see it when you relate it to our

JOHNSTON: Well, Apple has produced a series of products which are all
interlinked with one another. If you got an iMac computer, and an iPod and
an iPad, you`re not going to buy an Android phone in most cases. So they
tied these things together. And the profits they`re producing are
phenomenal. The $18 million figure you cited is -- what Apple says, was
its aftertax profit.

We know that Apple pays very, very minor taxes because it siphons profits
out of the U.S. and puts them overseas, about $178 billion of cash and near
cash that it`s sitting on and to give you an idea of how much that is,
that`s about $550 for every man, woman and child in America.

Apple`s pretax profit was $24 billion, that`s enough to run to Minnesota
State Government where you are for about nine months. It`s a profit of
about of over a quarter trillion dollars a day.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. Scott Paul, the President talks a lot about high-tech
manufacturing. For us to stay competitive, don`t we need to be making
investments? I mean are there any other companies out there that are going
to be able to even come close to what Apple has been able to accomplish?

good question and I count myself as a fan of Apple products and the amazing
technology and innovations that they brought on the American market. I
think it`s really exceptional.

My bone to pick with Apple however is the way they make their products, and
it`s a very kind of backward lazy way of doing things for such an
imaginative company.

One thing that I known about the data last year is when the iPhone 6 was
released, of course, it`s assembled in China, our trade deficit with China
that month from August to September when the iPhone 6 was released, went up
$5 billion and it was almost solely because all of these iPhones were
coming into the U.S.

What I`d like to see is, Apple invests maybe 1 percent of its cash sitting
around, build a factory in the United States. Help recruit a supply chain
of advanced technology products manufacturers into the U.S. to make more of
its product for the U.S. market.

Now, I expect Apple to make iPhones in China for Chinese consumers, that
makes perfect sense but they ought to try to do it in the United States.
And I think that we`d all be better of, I mean, Ed the one thing that we`re
going to need a lot more of in the coming years are those middle-skill
manufacturing jobs. And it is going to take companies like Apple to set
the bar in the advanced technology product sector.

We have imaginative products. We have incredible research and development
but where we are falling behind is in that advanced technology product
manufacturing and Apple could lead the way back to the United States if it
set its mind to it.

SCHULTZ: Well, it maybe heresy for me to ask this question but I`m sure
that people in the front office of Apple are asking, "Why should we change
anything? With numbers like this we obviously have done the right thing."
I mean, that`s their reasoning. They`re about chasing it to the bottom

So, where would be the offside for them if they would do it -- to do it in
America if the cost would be higher? And I have to ask that.

PAUL: You bet. And so, Ed, actually people looked at how much bringing an
iPhone back to the U.S. would cost Apple. And I would cut in to their
profit margin a little bit. It would still be an incredibly affordable and
amazing phone for consumers to purchase and would basically take that down
payment of building a factory and also recruiting the workers.

And I think you make that up in goodwill and in terms of probably some tax
benefits that you could talk some states into as well. But Apple -- Tim
Cook, they`re always looking for the new amazing thing, and the one part of
that entire company that is really lacking is their production platform and
how they`re dependent on outsourcing, on waking up workers in China,
feeding them tea and biscuits, these are their words not mine, and putting
them to work if there`s been a screw up in the product.

I mean, they can be much more sophisticated. I can only imagine the
factories they design in the United States...


PAUL: ... if they put their mind to that. They can do anything if they
put their mind to it.

SCHULTZ: David Cay, isn`t this the model though? This is what American
companies want to emulate. They`re looking at Apple and saying, "Gosh, how
did they do that?" And look what they did and that`s what we got to do.
And this encourages business practices that make it hard on the American
market, doesn`t it?

JOHNSTON: Yes. And if Apple were to bring jobs back to the U.S. and it
would, you know, the guest pointed out, cut their profit margin a little
bit. It would also result in some more money being spent hiring people in
this country which will be good for the economy. And by the way, Apple`s
profits were over a quarter billion dollars a day and not a quarter

But, these are jobs of the kind we need and if we don`t in the long run,
maintain a lot of manufacturing jobs especially very high value
manufacturing jobs here. We will over time lose our edge to China.

So it`s important we have a domestic manufacturing industry that does very
high-tech work and it would mean more salaries, more jobs and probably more
people who can afford to buy Apple`s phones.

SCHULTZ: All right. On the cutting edge. Scott Paul and David Cay
Johnston, gentlemen thanks for your time tonight. I appreciate you being
on the Ed Show. Good discussion.

Remember to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the screen.
Share your thoughts with us on Twitter @edshow and on Facebook. We
appreciate your comments and thanks for the like on Facebook.

Coming up, Scott Walker makes his move towards 2016. We`ll look at
Walker`s new organization and a big money push that could put Republicans
right where they want to be, on top.

And later, Mike Huckabee wants ladies to watch their language. To speak
police out and about. Rapid Response Panel, coming up. Stay with us.

He says there`s trash talking going on.


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

The field of Republican presidential hopefuls is being groomed. It`s the
grooming season.

Big money is pouring in following the Freedom Summit in Iowa. Half-term
Governor and former Tea Party darling Sarah Palin`s appearance was less
than stellar. So she goes to FOX and Hannity asked sort of the $64


SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: You also got criticized for the speech by a
lot of people, even some of the people in the crowd that tend to be
supporters of yours. And then, there was -- did he TelePrompTer go down?
Did you have trouble with the copy? Was there any moment in the speech
where you had any difficulty because people had been so critical?

FRM. GOV. SARAH PALIN, (R) ALASKA: Well, you know, I don`t read the praise
and I don`t read the criticism because I know how you guys or how the media
in general works. I`m used to TelePrompTer`s not working...

HANNITY: I`m not you guys. I don`t want to be part of that group.

PALIN: Remember it`s a GOP acceptance speech back in `08, the TelePrompTer
broke there too, it didn`t work and I kept on going. So no, you know, I
don`t know. I received the standing ovation throughout and at the end of
the speech. So, I don`t know, I think a lot of this herd mentality of some
reporters would -- that kind of exacerbates some of the criticism.


SCHULTZ: The word that was used by conservative blockers was incoherent.
These are her people. Not anybody else is from the left.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie also took the stage doing his best John
Adams imitation. His speech sounded like an appeal to super Conservative
Tea Partiers.


GOV. CHRIS CHRISTIE, (R) NEW JERSEY: I ran in New Jersey as a pro-life
candidate in 2009 and I won. And I ran for reelection as a pro-life
governor in 2013 and won by 22 points. The notion that our party must
abandon our belief in the sanctity of life to be competitive in blue states
is simply not true and I am a living proof of that fact.


SCHULTZ: Well, the GOP, Golden Boy from the Iowa Freedom Summit turned out
to be Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker.

Walker strolled comfortably around the stage and came away as the most
impressive candidate for the conservatives.

Now, he`s launching a new organization called "Our American Revival" very
reaganist (ph) I think. He was to raise cash to help push his agenda. The
group released this ad today.


GOV. SCOTT WALKER, (R) WISCONSIN: Those groups in Washington, they tend
measures success by how many people are dependent on the government. We
measure success by how many people are no longer dependent on the


SCHULTZ: What did Sarah Palin do? She made Scott Walker looked good. How
many speeches has Sarah Palin given since 2008? How many stages has she
actually been on? What a slam for the conservative social media to use the
word incoherent. Whether her TelePrompTer worked or not, you`re still
responsible for what comes out of your mouth Ms. Palin. The bottom line is
you just couldn`t put a coherent thought together.

She deserved the criticism. But of course, she blames the media. What
Sarah Palin did in Iowa? She made Scott Walker looked real good. The tap
dance that conservative candidates are going to do is going to be fast and
furious. They want the money. The billionaire Koch brothers are
reportedly prepared to spend an unprecedented $900 million in the 2016
election cycle. And based on his Iowa performance, Scott Walker could be
an early front runner.

For more on this, I`m joined tonight by Ruth Conniff, she is the Editor-in-
Chief of the Progressive Magazine, also with us tonight Brad Woodhouse,
former DNC Communications Director.

Well, let`s combine this if we can -- and great to have both of you with us


SCHULTZ: You know, Ruth it just seems to me that if Sarah Palin is the bar
of the right-wing that gets motivated to vote, all she did was help Scott
Walker. Your thoughts.

Palin has never made any sense, you know, to me. She pushes some emotional
buttons but once she talks its word salad. And I don`t get it. It works
for the base, I don`t know.

Scott Walker is dangerous. He is not dumb and he is a skilled politician,
and he is an interesting candidate for the Republicans because well he
appeals to that base. He also comes off as personable and potentially
moderate which he is not if you look in his records in Wisconsin.

And in fact in his speech in Iowa, he indicated that, because he
highlighted the very things that he downplayed when he ran for reelection
here, including closing down Planned Parenthood clinics all over the state,
depriving thousands and thousands of Wisconsin women, not only of abortion
but of birth control and of the most basic kinds of health care because
many of them saw Planned Parenthood as their primary health care provider.
He eliminated that.

Attacking education...


CONNIFF: ... he just made the biggest cuts to University Wisconsin System
in history and he`s trying to privatize their public schools.

And he thanks people in Iowa for all the outside support he got in the
recall and in his reelection campaign. So that he was saying, "Look, I
wasn`t running on Wisconsin`s values and with Wisconsin money. I was
running with these big national donors like the Koch brothers, helping me.
Thanks guys."

SCHULTZ: Well, I`m reading today that Walker wants to cut $300 million out
of the U.W. higher education system yet he wants to throw in over $200
million for an HNL hockey arena. So, his priorities could be questioned by
the citizens though that will be for another day.

But as far as his stage presence is concerned, Brad, I think Walker is what
they`re looking for. I mean, he`s not TelePrompTer guy. This is a guy who
goes out on the stage, he is somewhat conservatively unspoiled, he knows
who he is, he knows what he wants to do, and he`s not afraid to do at off
the cuff.

Now, this is what Ronald Reagan did. And Reagan was a guy and call it
acting, call it whatever you want...


SCHULTZ: ... but isn`t this what the conservative movement has always
gravitated towards.

WOODHOUSE: Well, it might be and he is I think, as Ruth said, he`s a
talented politician, we`ve seen that in Wisconsin. I mean I wouldn`t get
carried away with what he did in Iowa this weekend. And we saw Sarah
Palin, we know that Steve King and Carl (ph) (inaudible) were there. It
was kind of low barred across.

Now he also went to the Koch brother`s conference in California and he
wasn`t the life of the party there, it seemed like they liked Marco Rubio

So, you know, this is a marathon not a sprint. He was impressed in Iowa.
But I`ll tell you the two sides to this coin Ed, there`s what you can do in
a primary, and there`s what you do to yourself in a primary that may have
impact in a general election. And, I think taking the side -- being a Mitt
Romney mini me on Planned Parenthood, on unions. He is a poor job creator
in Wisconsin won`t serve him well in the long run.

SCHULTZ: Yeah. Republicans at this point don`t seem to be sold on any

WOODHOUSE: That`s right.

SCHULTZ: ... for 2016. The most recent USA Today poll asked a question,
"Who do you want the Republicans to nominate" and there`s a big undecided
number at 45 percent. Romney got 16 percent, former Florida Governor Jeb
Bush into 13. What`s your reaction to these numbers? What`s this mean,

WOODHOUSE: Well, I think it`s exactly what you have suggested that the
field is really unsettled. There`s a lot of the fields, Scott Walker I
think would fall under this category, that the American people would
probably never heard of. People are obviously in the Republican Party
lukewarm on Jeb Bush for obvious reasons. They`re lukewarm on Mitt Romney
because he lost the last time.

And I think what you`re going to see like Romney is trying to distinguish
himself today by going after Hillary Clinton on Foreign Policy and jobs
which is kind of rich considering how poor his job creation record was and
how bad his Foreign Policy position turned out to be in the last election.

So, there`s going to be a lot of fleshing out here before I think you see
this settle out and you see favorites...


WOODHOUSE: ... in some of these polls.

SCHULTZ: Ruth, isn`t a strong point for Walker, say what you want about
the progressives and how upset they`ve been. He can just fire right back
in one sentence, "Well I`ve won three elections in four years." What do
you think about that?

CONNIFF: I think that`s right. I mean, I think it made him really
powerful, it strengthened him. You know, clearly he`s a candidate who
interest Kochs as we know from his -- the fake phone call with the
progressive contributor and blogger Ian Murphy who calls him up and pretend
to be David Koch and they weren`t really friendly with each other.

Look, the Koch brothers are now going to spend as much money as a political
party unto themselves. And so, it`s going to be a huge amount of influence
in this election. And the very rich, you know, and their interests are
represented in the way they never have been an American politics before.

So, you know, it`s not just the Democratic process anymore. We have to
figure out what we do to respond to the takeover of our politics by big
money and that`s really what Walker represents. And the little bright spot
is that, the Republicans are talking about inequality because people are
seeing it and they don`t like it. And that`s going to be a real problem
for them.

SCHULTZ: Ruth Conniff and Brad Woodhouse on the Ed Show. Thanks so much.
I appreciate...

WOODHOUSE: Thanks, Ed.

SCHULTZ: ... your time. We`ll do it again.

Still to come, the feminine critique, Mike Huckabee goes from Beyonce to
the boardroom. The Rapid Response Panel takes on the Governor`s
conservative crusade.

And ahead of the Super Bowl, the NFL puts a focus on domestic violence with
a commercial.

Next, your questions, Ask Ed Live coming up on the Ed Show on MSNBC. We`ll
be right back.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show. I appreciate all your questions,
love hearing from our viewers.

Tonight at our Ask Ed Live segment our first comes from Samuel (ph). He
wants to know, "Do you think that Democrats should boycott Netanyahu`s
scheduled speech to Congress?"

When you say boycott, do you mean -- I assume you`re saying don`t show up
for the speech. No, I don`t think they should do that. I think they
should go on record on how they feel about Netanyahu`s visit and his speech
but boycotting it, I think that goes too far. I think you can make a
statement without having to do that. I think it`s unnecessary.

Our next question is from Cordell. "How do you feel when Democrats in the
Senate filibuster the Keystone Pipeline Bill?"

I loved it. I loved it because there`s a tremendous amount of
misinformation that`s out there. I`ve watched more of the Senate debate on
Keystone that I have on anything else in recent years and it`s astounding
how ignorance some of the Republican senators are or how they`re just
completely trying to hoodwink the American people. We`ll have more on that
later on in this broadcast.

The fact is filibusters are part of the process. It`s when they become the
norm and totally stop all government is when I have a problem.

Stick around, Rapid Response Panel is next.

Market Wrap.

Well, another triple-digit slide for the Dow which ends down 195 points.
The S&P slips 27 and the NASDAQ falls 43.

Well Federal Reserve wrapped up a two-day meeting living interest rates
unchanged and reiterating that it can be patient in deciding when to hike
those rates.

Another steep decline for crude oil which fell 4 percent, to $44.45 a

And Facebook shares are lower after hours despite reporting results that
easily beat estimate.

That`s it from CNBC. We are first in business worldwide.


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

Mike Huckabee is trying to submit his social conservative standing heading
into 2016. What a strange pathway to do it too.

The culture warrior has been on record opposing gay marriage, abortion
rights, teaching evolution in schools, birth control and Beyonce.

While promoting his book "God, Guns, Grits, and Gravy", Huckabee discussed
the culture shock he faced while working in New York City.


FRM. GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE, (R) ARKANSAS: It`s one of those things where, in
a business meeting that you might have in the south or in the midwest there
in Iowa. You would not have people who would just throw the F-bomb and use
gratuitous profanity in a professional setting.


HUCKABEE: In New York, not only do the men do it, but the women do it.
And, you know, you just are looking around saying, "My gosh, this is worse
than locker room talk." This would be considered totally inappropriate to
say these things in front of a woman and for a woman to say them in a
professional setting. We would only assume that this is a very, as we
would say I the south, that`s just trashy.


SCHULTZ: Huckabee made clear he wasn`t referring to the women he worked
with at Fox News but with this sounding bad it is red meat to cultural

This is calculated language as I see it from Huckabee in an attempt to
solidify the conservative-based in this race to outdistance one another.
Outside of the Family Research Council, I don`t know who his appealing to.

Joining me now on our Rapid Response Panel, Annette Taddeo, vice-chair of
the Florida Democratic Party, also with us tonight Lizz Winstead, co-
creator of "The Daily Show" and the Angela Rye, political strategist.
Great to have all of you with us tonight.

Let`s talk about the political strategy first here.

Annette, what is does he gain? Who is he winning over by attacking women
in this way and coming up with an accusation that that`s how, I guess,
women on the East Coast are in a business meeting?

honestly. I live in the south. I went to school in Alabama. I mean, I`ve
really lived the southern lifestyle and I still don`t understand who he is
trying to appeal to.

Maybe he wants to encourage more of the white male to vote for him. I
don`t understand where he is going with this. And when he says he wasn`t
referring to the Fox coworkers, well maybe there`s another job that he`s
had in New York that we`re not aware of so I`m curious about that too.

SCHULTZ: Angela, your reaction to all of these.

ANGELA RYE, POLITICAL STRATEGIST: Yeah, I think it`s crazy Ed. And I
don`t know if he`s trying to, you know, get his T.V. ratings up so that he
can sell more books but this certainly doesn`t appeal to me.

I -- my honest thought initially was, "What the hell is Mike Huckabee
talking about?"

We know he hasn`t had any other job in New York. The only job he`s had has
been with Fox and he really better hope that we don`t catch his wife or his
daughters saying any -- using any foul language. And quite frankly, you
know, Ed we know this very well. I wish that the rest of the members in
his party would also pay attention to this.

I wish that they would stay out of our mouth, stay out of our bedrooms and
focus on making sure that we are earning the same way that they do for the
same work. This is just crazy.


SCHULTZ: Well -- go ahead Lizz.

WINSTEAD: Well, the thing that I sound hilarious about it was, look, like
a months ago he was on with Megyn Kelly and she dropped the F-bomb when she
was introducing him, so right there in front of him.

So, I mean apparently he missed that or he was focusing on something

TADDEO: He might have been talking her lid (ph).

WINSTEAD: I know right.


WINSTEAD: Well, that they -- and I just feel like all of these language
whether it`s shaming Beyonce, shaming women for swearing. It`s all a
narrative of, women are out of control.

And, if you`re trying to build a coalition and you`re basically not going
to include the swearers, the people who like sex, the people who use birth
control and the people who like Beyonce, I honestly don`t know who`s left
to vote for you. Non-swearing gravy eaters. That is it.

SCHULTZ: Well Lizz, I mean basically he`s saying that the women in the
Midwest and in the south, in business meetings they don`t act like that.
It`s only on the East Coast. And of course, you being from the Midwest,
well, you know, you`ve dropped the F-bomb.

WINSTEAD: No. Heaven forbid. Just do a little Google search on me and I
think the first thing that comes up is F-bomb and M-trashing (ph). So, I`m
a tripper.

SCHULTZ: Annette, does this raise...

WINSTEAD: I`m a tripper.

SCHULTZ: Annette, does this raise money for him? I mean, the last time
Huckabee run, you know, it was a dollar to a donut. There`s no question
about that. He was way behind the curve. What does this do for him?

TADDEO: I really believe he`s trying to sell books. I mean, that`s what I
think he`s trying to do because I don`t understand how he`s trying to get
elected this way.

But maybe since there`s such a big number of people trying to run for
President, he`s trying to a specific, you know, right-wing, white male,
voting block. I don`t understand it but maybe he had some bright idea that
we`re not aware of but I think he`s trying to sell books honestly.

WINSTEAD: Well -- and I have to...

RYE: Yeah.

WINSTEAD: ... say that, if he is trying to sell books, the number one
selling book in the past like five years is "Fifty Shades of Grey" and
there`s a little bit of not so much grey in that, so he`s book about gravy
and no sex ain`t going to cut it.

TADDEO: Oh my god.

RYE: Well, not only that but I think, you know, we really have to look at
what Mike Huckabee is showing us, right? He thinks that he`s created this
whole new persona. You know, Mike Huckabee 2.0 since doing this television
show and he thinks that we forgotten that as a governor he had all of these
ethics challenges, some that look a lot like Bob McDonnell. I`m not saying
he should go to jail but I`m just saying its worth looking at.

I think the other thing that we have to pay attention to is, even when he
was running in the primary with Mitt Romney. The religious intolerance
displayed by Mike Huckabee is not -- is shameful at this point.

And I think the country is far beyond that. And of course, we know that
it`s not just him but also within his party. The issues that they have
with women`s rights, reproductive rights, fair pay is just beyond the pale.
And Mike Huckabee really needs to address this instead of addressing what
Beyonce is doing with her husband.

WINSTEAD: Well, you know, bottom line is, is that if he was even a serious
contender at all. People would be digging into all of that about him. We
all know that Scott Walker has, you know, a legal stuff against him, we all
know about Chris Christie`s bridgegate.

The fact that Mike Huckabee is not even remotely close to being a contender
to be president of the United States of America just -- that`s everything,
like he can go and even say that and he is just trying to get headlines.

TADDEO: I believe that he is...

SCHULTZ: All right.

TADDEO: ... he is trying to actually bring down the fact that Hillary
Clinton will be the Democratic candidate and sort of like saying, women
should curse, women shouldn`t da-da-da. It sort of like a very subtle way
of saying a woman shouldn`t be president.

RYE: Yeah.


Annette Taddeo, Lizz Winstead, Angela Rye, I appreciate your time tonight.
Thanks for the discussion.

Still to come, Senate Republicans continue to push for Keystone. But
Nebraska landowners aren`t backing down. They have the law on their side.

We`re going back to the ground zero on Keystone fight next, as the Senate
was debating it today.


SCHULTZ: And in tonight`s two-minute drill, the Super Bowl ad everyone
will be talking about on Monday is pretty easy to identify.

A public service announcement will make history as the first ad to address
domestic violence has been produced and it will run during the Super Bowl.

The NFL spent much of 2014 under fire for how they`d handled or failed to
handle several high profile domestic violence cases among its players.

The league is now donating 30 seconds of airtime during America`s most
watch television event to bring awareness to the issue. 30 seconds may not
sound like a lot but in the world of advertising it`s a big deal. A 30-
second ad can cost upwards of $4.5 million during the game.

You`ll see the 30-second version aired during the first quarter of the game
on Sunday, an extended version was released last night. Take a look.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: 911. Operator 911, where is the emergency?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: 127 Brimier (ph).

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK, what`s going on there?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I`d like to order to pizza for delivery.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ma`am, you reached 911. This is an emergency line.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Large with half pepperoni and half mushroom.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You know, you`d call 901. This is in an emergency

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you know how long it will be?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey, ma`am. Is everything OK over there? Do you have
an emergency or not?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And you`re unable to talk to...


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. Is there someone in the room with you? Just say
yes or no.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. If you looks like I have an officer down the miles
from your location. Are there any weapons in the house?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you stay on the phone longer?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No. See you soon. Thank you.


SCHULTZ: Powerful stuff. No doubt about it.

Plenty more coming up on the Ed Show. Stay tune. We`ll be right back.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

Finally tonight, you know you got to give it to them. Republicans just
will not give up.

Today the Senate is voting on 18 more amendments to the Keystone XL
Pipeline bill. This is on the hills of Democrats using their first
filibustered in 2015 to stop Keystone yesterday.

Now, what the Senate fails to understand as I see it is the issue is now a
property rights issues with landowners in Nebraska.

No one in the Senate seems to be addressing liability issues. And if
you`re a landowner this is paramount. And of course this is the stumbling
block for landowners.


BRIAN JORDE, ATTORNEY, EMINENT DOMAIN CASES: The landowners still have the
liability for any negligence that may occur and you know a negligence is
just an accident, something that I didn`t mean to do.

So TransCanada can say, "Well, wasn`t it you that drove your combi across
the easement, maybe you were part of the problem, maybe it`s really you",
and so now you`re fighting 100 lawyers of TransCanada over who did what.

SCHULTZ: So, it will be the little guy against the big corporation that`s
got the deep pockets that could drive the whole thing?

JORDE: The landowner would lose everything they have.

SCHULTZ: So, there`s not only an environmental risk there`s a serious
legal and personal risk to the landowners forever.

JORDE: Forever. It`s a colossal financial risk that is being forced upon


SCHULTZ: Nobody in the Senate is talking about that. What`s it like to be
a landowner and have a pipeline come through your neck of the woods?

TransCanada, what are they doing? They are trying to eliminate this
problem by cash sweeping landowners into accepting the project.


JIM CARLSON, NA LANDOWNER: The first time they came to my house, they
offered me a good sum of money. And I listen to them for a little while
and I knew enough about it that I was not going to sign anything that day.

And just before they left I told them thanks but it`s not enough money just
kind of jokingly. And that I wasn`t going to sign -- I wasn`t really sign

SCHULTZ: And they came back?

CARLSON: Yes. They came back a couple of times. One of the state
pipeline manager and then here about a week ago, they were back in my

SCHULTZ: I mean, I`ve been told that you were offered $250,000 to allow
this pipeline to come over your land, is that true?

CARLSON: Yes. That was their first offer. The best offer I`ve got an
amount of about $307,000.

SCHULTZ: And you say no to them.


SCHULTZ: Can you be bought?

CARLSON: No. Because my land is worth more to me and my family than any
amount of money they could offer me, or would offer me I should say that.


SCHULTZ: I`m joined tonight by Mike Papantonio, Americas lawyer and Ring
of Fire radio host.

Mike, property rights goes all the way back to the colonial days. This is
one of the reasons why we fought a revolution in this country. Do these
landowners have a case and what does this legal process look like?

first eminent domain, you have to first sort of understand that
corporations that want to accomplish this have to show there`s a need for
it. There is no need for this pipeline.

It`s about moving oil from Canada to the gulf coast to be refined so it can
be exported to Europe. So you don`t even meet that issue of a great public
need. That`s the first part of eminent domain.

There`s no genuine public necessity for it. There`s no compelling public
good. It`s absolutely required before government or corporation can take
constructive use of a property owners land.

Secondly, very important. There`s no proper compensation here. Look, as
you heard the attorney on the air that you just showed just a minute ago.
He said, "How are you going to pay for advance in the future?"

We don`t even know what`s going to happen in the future. The experts tell
us they can`t calculate damages because we don`t know what happens if a
leak takes place.

What does that do for the second or third generation of that landowner?
What is it mean when you have drinking water that`s ruined? The aquifer
ruined because benzene and poisons and toxins move into that aquifer.

So in order to have the two parts of this kind of taking, there has to be a
need, there is no need. This is all about corporations making money. It
used to be a corporation couldn`t even be involved in it in this type of
process but now they can. But they still have to jump over that first two.

And when you can`t even say to any -- through nature, how much is it going
to cost the landowner. You have a real failure.

It used to government alone was the only group -- was only entity that
could take land from an individual. They had to show that there was a need
for public safety, public health, public welfare. They use it for things
like expansion of the infrastructure, power grids. And then all of a
sudden, we have this new element of corporations stepping into the shoes of
government and corporations for the benefit of their dollar, for the
benefit of more property, of more profit, taking property from Americans.

And right now, you have a Congress that`s not even talking about that. It`s
as if nobody is...

SCHULTZ: No, they`re not.

PAPANTONIO: ... advising Congress that there are thresholds the
TransCanada has to meet. Let`s hope that the gentlemen that you
interviewed and the other 100 claimants here hold out because I believe
it`s winnable.

I believe it`s winnable. I think this can be delayed for an awful long
time simply by analyzing the two parts, actually more parts than two, the
two most important parts to eminent domain...


PAPANTONIO: ... taking of land. And they don`t really rise up in --
certainly, my evaluation but not just my evaluation, the evaluation of
other experts that are looking at this case.

SCHULTZ: I just find it amazing that there is none of this conversation in
Washington. You know, they say that all politics is local. It doesn`t get
any more local than a local judge making a determination of whether it`s
for the greater good Johnny (ph) for you to give up your lands so this
multinational can pump oil down to the gulf and put it down on the open

I mean, this is a constitutional landowner issue here that is just out the
window in Washington, "All heck we got a pipeline we going to put in the
middle of the country, you know, because it`s going to be good for whoever
it`s going to be good for." And they`re totally circumventing the process.

President Obama doesn`t have to make a decision on this. And so...

PAPANTONIO: Well, I think...

SCHULTZ: ... he probably wont. And the chances of this being built on his
watch are slim and none at this point right now.

Mike, we got to go. We`ll come back to the story again because it is the
fabric of what`s going on in America right now.

What does it mean to be a property owner? That`s the "Ed Show." "Politics
Nation" starts right now.


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.>