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

The Ed Show for Monday, February 16th, 2015

Read the transcript to the Monday show

Date: February 16, 2015
Guest: John Garamendi, Jack Jacobs, Bruce Bartlett, Mike Papantonio



SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, (R) ARIZONA: To restrain him in our authorization of him
taking military action eventually leads to 535 commanders-in-chief.

OBAMA: It is our troops who bear the cost of our decisions.

ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: And later, the gulf today, five years after this

KEN PARMER, FORMER RESTAURANT OWNER: Over the last five years, it`s been

everything is dead, barnacle, sea grasses, all dead. That`s a dead wreck.
It is not going to come back.

BRENT COON, BRENT COON AND ASSOCIATE: They want money, their livelihood,
their careers, the heart and soul of everything they built was taken away
from them.

SCHULTZ: What were you thinking when you saw all these pictures on T.V?

SCALONE: Oh, right at the wellhead?


SCALONE: That was almost in tears. That`s where I live.

SCHULTZ: Plus, the Palin effect.

TINA FEY, ACT AS SARAH PALIN: I can see Russia from my house.

FRM. GOV. SARAH PALIN, (R) ALASKA: How much do you think Lorne Michaels
would pay me if I were to run in 2016?

SCHULTZ: Why a Palin 2016 nomination could be a reality?

PALIN: This applies to you too in the 2016 presidential race.


ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good to have you with us tonight, folks. Thanks
for watching. It was a weekend of terror around the globe.

In Libya, ISIS released a new video showing more blood shed. The video
released on Sunday claims to show the beheading of 21 Egyptian Christians.

Now, the brutal act of violence is clearly a gross display of what ISIS is
capable of, what they`re motivated about and what they are really all
about. And I think this act of mass murder amounts to a religious war.

Now, we all have our own interpretations at this point. This continues to
go on. At this point, these people were targeted as I see it and murdered
because of their faith.

Now, the response from the Egyptian government has been swift and strong.

Egypt has launched a series of airstrikes against ISIS in Libya. The
strikes hit ISIS camps, training camps and also weapons caches.

It`s not immediately clear what damage the airstrikes cost. One thing is
clear ISIS is gaining influence in Libya and around the globe. It`s not
just in Syria and Iraq anymore.

Since Libya`s 2011 uprising, ISIS has filled the leadership gap in some
areas on that country. ISIS has control of the Darna where today`s
airstrikes were targeted. They also have control in Sirte and -- in
Central Libya and there is a strong ISIS presence in major cities like
Tripoli and Benghazi.

ISIS has spawned a number of radical affiliate groups outside its territory
that controls and, of course, ISIS related groups now stretch from Algeria
across Africa and Afghanistan.

So what`s the analysis here? Clearly, ISIS is growing geographically.

Now, this is the biggest jihad that we`ve seen in our lifetime.

They are gaining influence. They have a strong social media presence.
They are recruiting more and more everyday. Fighters have traveled from
around the world to join ISIS and Iraq and Syria.

Now, we`re seeing ISIS cells appear around the world, a lone wolf attack
certainly is part of the model and because of this ISIS, I think is
changing the world and every country security.

A lone wolf attacker in Copenhagen, Denmark shot and killed a film director
and a Jewish man on Saturday.

Now, government officials in Denmark say that they cannot officially
connect them to a terrorist cell (ph).

The alleged gunman was killed by police after attacking a free-speech
debate in a synagogue. Five police officers were wounded in the attacks.
Two additional suspects have been arrested for helping the gunman.

As I see it, the United States is going to have to have a continual review
of its strategy. We can`t seat back here and watch hordes of people get
their heads cut off. And why would we tell ISIS that there is no way we
would ever put ground troops in combat situations.

I think it has reached the point where we really have to have a very strong
debate in this country.

As I see it, it`s a religious war. What is going to turn back ISIS?

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

Tonight`s question, "Do you think we`re headed for a major conflict with
ISIS?" Text A for Yes and text B for No to 67622, you can always go to our
blog at and we`ll bring you the results later on the show.

For more let me bring in Congressman John Garamendi who serves on the House
Armed Services Committee.

Congressman, good to have your time tonight, I appreciate it very much.


SCHULTZ: Does this situation as it unfolded yesterday as grosses it was in
Libya. Does that change anything? Does this bring us to any different
conclusion or any other method of response as you see it?

GARAMENDI: Well, for months, I`ve been saying the same thing. We have to
have a different response. We cannot do what we done before. It simply
didn`t work. So we need to have a different response, part to that
response has to do with the other countries in the area.

You saw Egypt very quickly responding to what happened in Libya. They are
seriously threatened. You saw Jordan also have responded when their pilot
was burned. You`d seen -- the question is, is Turkey also going to get
involve. The country surrounding Iraq and Syria and now Libya are at risk
and they are going to have to respond.

Clearly, this is radical jihad. No doubt about it. And we need to work
with those more stable countries, pull them into our work with them and
work with them to bring about a proper military solution. But we also have
to deal with the underlying social, economic and religious issues that are
profoundly operating through out the Middle East and quite possibly around
the world.

So that needs to be a very comprehensive strategy. We`ve got to understand
the religious jihad that`s going on, the Sikhism (ph) that exists in the --
in Islam between the Shia and Sunni. All of those issues.

Now, Ed, you said maybe we should put the army back into the Middle East.
I respectfully disagree with you.

Boots on the ground, a new military adventure with tens of thousands of
Americans with armor infantry, artillery, all the rest on the ground is not
going to solve this problem.

We are going to need to have certain elements. We will have to have
Special Forces operating in certain areas when they can be usefully but
mostly we need to build the support of the existing countries in that area
because they are the ones that are most seriously threatened. Not that
we`re not, we clearly are. But they`re the hometown and they are the ones
that you`re going to see this first and it`s already happening.

SCHULTZ: Congressman, I would personally come to the conclusion as someone
who is following the news and seen what`s unfolding here is that what we`re
doing isn`t strong enough, isn`t working. Now, whether that means we need
to put ground troops and get them involve, I don`t know. I`m not a
military expert.

But when they`re growing geographically and they`re growing in influence
and they are socially connected as they are, I mean, this was almost like a
movie production what they released.

I mean, it -- they`re in lawless parts of the Middle East, I mean, how do
you trot out 21 people with nobody else around and do something like that?
It takes organization, it takes protection and I think it`s reached the
level right now that where the United States. We might have to have a
conversation that special ops and some ground forces might be part of the
equation. But basically, we`ve told ISIS, well, that`s not going to
happen. We told other countries who are getting hit by this group that
we`re not going to put ground troops in.

Is there a time...


SCHULTZ: ... that we would possibly do that as this continues to grow?

GARAMENDI: Well, take a look at the total Middle East. If you or anybody
thinks that we can control the situation to have a ground troops, we better
be prepared to put several 100,000 troops on the ground.

You got Libya and Syria. You`ve got problems in Yemen. You clearly have
continuing problems in Afghanistan and now in the Libya area. We`re
talking about a major confrontation, should we put ground troops -- should
we want to put troops on the ground?


GARAMENDI: We need to study this. I would recommend and I`ve asked my
colleagues and their Armed Services Committee, let`s have a very serious
understanding of what it means to put troops on the ground. Special
operations, that`s one thing.


GARAMENDI: You want to put the brigades. You want to put the armory. You
want to the artillery back in. What is it mean? What is the cost? What
is the human cost to Americans and others? And keep in mind that the
countries -- Egypt has a very strong military, Jordan had one that is not
be neglected and, clearly, Turkey has a major military operation.

All of those countries, they are the ones that have to come to the
realization that they are threatened.


GARAMENDI: So we can use that threat to our advantage and to their
advantage by working with them, providing certain logistic all and the
intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance if they don`t have. But, boy,
I don`t want to put another division...


GARAMENDI: ... back on the ground there.

SCHULTZ: All right. Congressman John Garamendi, great to have you with
us, I appreciate your time...


SCHULTZ: ... tonight and insight.

Joining me now is Colonel Jack Jacobs, Medal of Honor recipient and MSNBC
Political Analyst Steve Clemons also with us tonight MSNBC Contributor and
Editor-at-large for the Atlantic.

Colonel, I start with you first.

So we need Turkey, we need Jordan, we need the Iraqis, we need the
Egyptians and we hope things hold in Libya. There`s a lot of ifs (ph) on
the table. A lot of things got to come together if we`re going to stop
ISIS at this point. That`s a lot of game plans.

JACK JACOBS, MSNBC POLITCAL ANALYST: Yeah. That`s a lot of game plans and
what you need initially, the first order issue is what is our strategy and
to be honest with you. I`m pretty sure that we do not have a strategy.

We have not started at the end and work backwards. So you`re not going to
be able to put a coalition together unless you know what it is you`re
trying to accomplish until the American government, the national command
authority decides that we`re going to have a strategy. And what it`s going
to be? To get back to your discussion about the fact that we actually need
to have a discussion at the highest levels about what it is we want to
accomplish unless until we do that, we`re not going to be able to
accomplish anything.

SCHULTZ: Is this all about strategy? We`re not sure about ground troops
and how effective they would be and I`m just asking the question or is it
about political will? Because the President knows and some Democrats know
that we just -- we`re not there yet.

Now, I believe and I`m not advocating this, but we can`t sit back and let
ISIS continue to grow, these crosses all political lines and do the kinds
of atrocities that they`re doing.

Now, I`ll say it to you straight, folks. There`s not a whole lot of
difference between putting people in ovens (ph) or cutting their head off.
It`s just a different method, OK?

So if we`re going to sit here and claim to have the moral authority and
say, well, you know, you guys got to do all of these.

I think we`re at that point of serious discussion. And I do believe that,
well, we`ve seen the troops can be effective. It`s the aftermath that is
so tough.

JACOBS: Yeah. Well, I think Mr. Garamendi was quite correct when he
talked about the numbers involved. We have to be prepared to do two

First of all, make a commitment to assist those who were there including
Turkey from whom we`ve heard very little and it was a very, very strong
military. Convince them and everybody else in the region that they have a
stake in what happens in the Middle East.

And second, and just as important. We have to make a commitment that we`re
going to be able to assist them. And that means, as Mr. Garamendi has
suggested, not ones or twos and maybe a brigade here and there.

We`re talking about several hundreds -- 200, 000 to 300,000 troops. We
have to make that commitment. And secondly, we have to make the commitment
of time. We`re going to have to be there for a while. It`s not enough to
the cease the terrain, we have to hold it to.

If we`re willing to do that then we will get something accomplished. And I
agree with Mr. -- with Senator McCain in this regard. It really doesn`t
make any sense whatsoever for the Congress to constrain the President of
United States when in the interim, he is trying to accomplish something
before we get to a position when we exactly know what we`re doing
strategically (ph).

SCHULTZ: Steve, there`s been reports out there that, you know, ISIS has
got some very sophisticated social techniques and intel techniques that
it`s hard for our people to track exactly what they`re going to do. Where
does this go from here?

STEVE CLEMONS, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think that we have incredibly
sophisticated intelligence that we don`t often share with the regions.

What you`ve been defining essentially through the Middle East, North Africa
region, is a series of very weak states that themselves don`t have the
resources to deal with this kind of Whack-A-Mole (ph) flexibility and
nimbleness of what ISIS has been able to bring the bear.

The United States and Europe frankly have formidable intelligence capacity
but you need a combination that intelligence capacity was something else.
I think -- I understand your emotion and I understand why you think boots
on the ground is an answer here. The bigger answer is to draw away the
Sunni tribal support for what ISIS is doing.

That is an achievable objective and it would begin to choke down the fuel
that is driving ISIS because right now ISIS is striving (ph) throughout the
region because of cooperation and collusion with major parts of these
societies. And it`s making a bet that Jordan and Egypt and those that
pretend to be in positions of power in Libya won`t be able to challenge
them or take them on or they open up a big crevasse (ph) in their society
where ISIS looks like the guarantor of Sunni freedom...


CLEMONS: ... and Sunni right. It`s not the Western wraps (ph) running
dogs at the United States.

SCHULTZ: The point that to me, very clear. I`m not saying that we take
200,000 troops today and do this. But I do think we need to push the
critical conversation. Is this the best way to go telling all of these
other countries that we`re counting on, there`s no way that we would get
skin in the game with our men and women. I mean, I think if ISIS had a
chance to hit America, they probably do it.

CLEMONS: I`m going to think that there`s thing that would...

SCHULTZ: Can we come to that conclusion, what do you think?

CLEMONS: We have troops on the ground in Iraq today. We have 3,000
soldiers inside Iraq. We have special operations that evaporated quietly
in Syria and we continue to have series numbers of troops inside

So it`s important to remember that there is a -- not the large scale
military footprint but there are military operations and, you know, boots
on the ground it supposed non-combat rules but believe me, they are killing
thousands of...


CLEMONS: ... ISIS fighters.

SCHULTZ: Well, geographically, they`re different and their influence is
different today that it was six months ago...


SCHULTZ: Fair estimation?

CLEMONS: Fair. I mean, I think that...

SCHULTZ: So that brings us to -- OK. And now, what question for the
United States. Now what?

I mean, clearly, the degrading and destroying and the methods that we`re
using don`t seem to be as resourceful as we thought they were going to be.

So now, ISIS is doing what they`re doing and...

CLEMONS: But we`re -- on this show, in conversations with you, I predicted
this was going to be a very long run marathon...

SCHULTZ: Yeah. You do.

CLEMONS: ... and a very long one marathon not only because bombs wouldn`t
drop but because the support in the societies, the financial flows, the
private dollars and essentially the emotional and psychological support
that ISIS gets from people inside Jordan, inside Egypt, inside Kuwait,
inside Bahrain, inside Saudi Arabia, is more substantial than we`re willing
to acknowledge.


CLEMONS: Until we find the way to extinguish that, ISIS will continue to
pop up and all these places, that has to be undone. We don`t have a
strategy for that...


CLEMONS: ... despite the military issues.

SCHULTZ: Well, and finally, Colonel Jack, do we have resources to do?
What we really have to do if that had to get to a military conclusion.

JACOBS: Well, that`s a very interesting question. We have the horsepower
in terms of launch platforms bombs...


JACOBS: ... intelligence gathering capability and all the rest of that
stuff. We have hardware. The question is whether or not we have
sufficient political will to increase the size of the military

Beyond what we have, now we`re about to -- ready to have (ph) the smallest
army we`ve had since 1940. There has to be a public commitment to the
strategy otherwise the Army, NAVY, Air Force, Marine Corps will be too
small to man the operation whatever we decide to do.

SCHULTZ: Colonel Jack Jacob, Steve Clemons, gentlemen, great to have you
with us tonight on the Ed Show.

CLEMONS: Thank you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: We`ll have a lot more on this as the weeks go on.

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 want to
know what you think.

Coming up, Sarah Palin surprise appearance on last night`s SNL Special, we
got plenty of laughs. We`ll talk about what it could be for her 2016

And later, five years after the spill, how business in the gulfs are
recovering from one of the worst disasters the region has ever experienced.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I thought that, if they would get in contained and
cleaned up and life could go on for us. But it seems to go on and go on
and go on and oil keep coming and they got worst and worst.




JERRY SEINFELD, ACTOR COMEDIAN: Next question -- yes, Tina.

PALIN: Yes -- no, it`s Sarah.

SEINFELD: Oh, sorry. Sorry. Oh, my God. It`s Governor Palin, welcome.

PALIN: Yeah. I`m just curious, Jerry, how much do you think Lorne
Michaels would pay me if I were to run in 2016?

SEINFELD: Run for President, Sarah? I don`t think there`s a number too

PALIN: OK. Just, hypothetically then, what if I were to choose Donald
Trump as my running mate.

SEINFELD: Sarah, you`re teasing us. That`s not nice.


SCHUTLZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

I`d tell Sarah Palin, yeah, get Donald Trump. That would be really good,
but your probably stick to a day job.

The half-turn Governor had some fun teasing a 2016 run at Sunday, Saturday
Night Live, 40th anniversary special, a Palin-Trump campaign. Oh, would
that be a gift to comedy and cable. And you could reverse that too and it
will still do the same results.

In reality, 2016 is still looking like a free-for-all in the Republican

The latest NBC news Marist polling asked Republican voters to choice from a
selection of 11 potential Republican candidates.

Polls were conducted in three key presidential caucus and primary states.
Bottom line, a Republican front runner failed to emerged.

Mike Huckabee leads among Republicans in Iowa. Jeb Bush came in second
close. Jeb Bush leads among Republicans in New Hampshire. Scott Walker
trails by three points. Lindsey Graham leads among Republicans in South
Carolina where retired Neurosurgeon Ben Carson rounded up the Top 5.

It`s important to note the undecided option Garner double digits and broke
into the Top 5 in all three states of surveys. These means voters weren`t
particularly interested or invested in or satisfied for that matter for any
of the 11 candidates.

It`s a deep 2016 field from Republicans the inability to rally around the
candidate shines a light on the deepening rifts within the GOP.

Joining me tonight, Bruce Bartlett, former George H. W. Bush Policy

Well, Mr. Bartlett, good to have you with us.

What do you make of these early polls? There`s nobody jumping out and I
guess, you know, whoever can win the media show at this point. What do you
make in the field, there`s no front runner at all.

BRUCE BARTLETT, FMR. H.W. BUSH ADVISOR: Well, I think the -- my first
impression is that, this is terrible news for Jeb Bush, who is trying to
run as the establishment candidate, and is obviously not getting traction
but then, again neither as anybody else.

I think maybe it`s because in our heart of hearts the Republicans know that
they`re not going to win in 2016. They don`t have a candidate who could
beat Hillary Clinton. And basically, it just a question of who is going to
be the sacrificial lamb.

SCHULTZ: Watching the Saturday Night Live special last night, obviously,
it was all suppose to be a joke. But something, you know, run through my
head. She`s seriousness (ph) a heart attack.

Sarah Palin, she could not have had a better question in a better role to
play in that whole production last night because she had a serious look at
one moment about her. What -- does that make you feel comfortable as

BARTLETT: Well, it certainly doesn`t make me comfortable to see people who
have absolutely no business being part of -- being considered seriously for
the most powerful position in the United States. I mean, Sarah Palin is a
joke. Ben Carson is a joke. Chris Christie and Rand Paul can`t makeup
their minds whether they believe vaccinations are worthwhile. Scott Walker
doesn`t even know that he`s position on evolution is. And Bobby Jindal
goes around saying, we -- Republicans have to stop saying stupid things.
And then he goes and says stupid things like there are "No-Go Zones" in the
city of London which lead the mayor of London to say that he`s complete

SCHULTZ: So what are Republicans looking for that obviously Hillary
Clinton is the polling juggernaut right now? And of course, you know
Podesta leaving the Obama administration to lock-in his position and to be
functional with the Clinton campaigns. So we all know what`s coming. So
what are the Republicans looking for?

BARTLETT: Well, one thing they`re clearly not looking for is actability
(ph) that clearly is not a factor in their decision. At least, at this
point in time and in fact there wasn`t really a consideration in 2012

But I think, obviously, it should be. I think right now there just looking
for somebody who makes them feel good, who says what they would say
themselves if they had a national platform and a national stage whether
it`s religious schism (ph) or rabid anti-Muslims (ph) or a rabid anti-
illegal alienism (ph). They`re just looking to feel good and hear somebody
who`s says.


BARTLETT: . what they think.

SCHUTLZ: I sure seems like Jeb Bush is going to have to thread the needle.
And I think that threading the needle between the extreme right-wing and
the establishment of Republicans may not be -- that may be quicksand for
anybody. I don`t know if that can be done. And with nobody coming out
polling strong at anyway she (ph) performed, it seems to me that the money
barrens behind the Republican Party as far as Citizens United as concern
and all the money floating around. This is really wide open to the point
where the special interest may get exactly what they want. You`re read on

BARTLETT: Well, it certainly true that it`s harder for the establishment
or whatever you want to call it, to kind of ease certain candidates out of
the race by defunding them because they all have independent sources of
money. Everybody`s got their billionaires it seems who will support them.
And so, the invisible primary as it sometimes called doesn`t seem to be at
least at this point leading anybody out. Although, certainly, at some
point somebody`s going to have to cry uncle and throw their support to
somebody else or just open things up a little bit more. But we`re still
too far away.

SCHULTZ: Bruce Bartlett, always a pleasure. Good to have you with us
tonight. Thanks so much.

Still ahead, countless businesses were destroyed after the Deepwater
Horizon oil spill five years ago.

Coming up, stories from the men and women who`ve had to pick up the broken
pieces in the aftermath of that disaster


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What they made to the gulf coast and our community is
that they put a lot of people in a standard of living that was far below
what they`re accustomed to. And like us now at a (ph) very difficult time
trying to recover.




ED SCHULTZ, THE ED SHOW HOST: Welcome back to the Ed Show. We have
breaking news.

Take a look at these pictures outside Fayette County, West Virginia were a
freight train carrying crude oil derailed earlier today. The crash sent
(ph) several cars into the nearby river 911 Dispatchers say, a subsequent
explosions set at least one home on fire. The area around the derailment
is being evacuated by emergency crews.

The nearby water treatment plant is shutdown after some reports indicate
oil could be leaking into the river. No word yet on the cause of the
accident or injuries. We`ll continue to follow the latest out of Fayette
County, West Virginia and bring you updates as they coming with us.

We`re right back on the Ed show. Stay with us.

PAGE HOPKINS, MSNBC ANCHOR: I`m Page Hopkins. Here`s what`s happening,
the winter weather that`s been punishing parts of the south has dump a foot
of snow in hearts of Kentucky and let thousands without power across the

That band of severe weather is headed east where is expected to dump snow
from the Carolinas to New York. And northeast is already in a deep freeze
where temperature is had been near zero in many areas.

It`s been a tough time for travelers more than 2000 flights have been
canceled and more than 3000 have been delayed.

The Ed Show continues in a moment.


SCHULTZ: Tonight on the Ed Show, we start a week long series on the gulf
today five years after the oil spill.

Now, it is virtually impossible to cover every facet of this historic
event. Over the next five reports, we hope to give you some sense of what
many Americans have experienced, the business devastation, the
environmental impact, the health concerns, the restoration projects, and
the legal fight to achieve restitution.

For some Americans, life will never be the same.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We really had high goals for this restaurant. You
know, it was doing 2 million a year. It was great, you know, if you will,
mom and pop operation but -- and it was my son and I and we were just
having a wonderful time and everything went good and then all of a

SCHULTZ: Five years after the oil disaster, businesses have been lost and
lives have changed forever.

PARMER: Spill took placed, sales dropped 45 percent, 50 percent, couldn`t
make payments to the bank. And the bank, after three or four months, took
the property back in December 2010.

SCALONE: I`m more upset in my heart that they did what they did to the
gulf. Seeing and saw (ph) what I did, because what I put down on the
bottom, I could live after generations to fish on.

SCHULTZ: People who depended on the gulf as their economic engine, their
livelihood, say they are left with nothing but debt, stress and lost

Rocco was a commercial fisherman and a steward of the gulf. Over the
years, he constructed what`s known as living wrecks to support fishing,
that`s all gone.

SCHULTZ: Here`s the Deepwater Horizon...

SCALONE: That`s correct.

SCHULTZ: ... 54 or 55 miles from where we are now. Where were you

SCALONE: I was operating right here in this area. We have a clear waters
here, Apalachicola Bay is right here.

I concentrated my wrecks in this area here. All these little Xs are where
my wrecks are. So I`m down here, I`ve got some over here.

Well, we concentrated -- I concentrated them over here because the oil
platforms, you`re not allowed to drill in Florida waters. So the oil
platforms stop the Florida border, what concentrated much (ph) up over here
to build structure for the fish.

SCHULTZ: Are there other guys that do -- who do that around the business?

SCALONE: Yeah, lot of them, a lot of them.

SCHULTZ: That`s it. Just out of the clear water area, out of the one
marina (ph) that I looked out of...

SCALONE: Four captains just packed in so that`s it -- so the boat packing

SCHULTZ: It`s interesting in your commercial fishing operation, you
created habitat that drew the fishing in.

SCALONE: Exactly. Exactly.

SCHULTZ: That`s all gone.

SCALONE: Yes. It`s all -- it`s -- the hole is still there...


SCALONE: ... but all the resource is ironic. The little fish, the --
everything that was here is gone, barnacle, sea grasses, urchins, clams,
oysters gone.

SCHULTZ: It`s almost hard to find the words when a no fault of your own,
you`ve lost everything and are left with just memories.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I didn`t know where to fix out there (ph) it`s

RUSTY HEFT, FORMER RESTAURANT OWNER: What they did to the gulf coast and
our community is that it put a lot of people in a standard of living that
was far below what they were accustomed to.

And like us, have had a very difficult time trying to recover. People are
doing things that they would have never done have their livelihood not been
affected by that B.P. spill.

SCHULTZ: What are you doing now?

SCALONE: I`m retired. I got out of the business. I got -- I retired and
move to Jordan, moved up to Atlanta.

SCHULTZ: But you didn`t want to retire?

SCALONE: No. Oh, no.

SCHULTZ: You love what you do.

SCALONE: Oh, yeah but (inaudible). I got pictures of me, two months old
in a bassinet on Long Island Sound. I got six years in the coast guard,
four years on two ships, two stations on Long Island Sound.

1985, I get out. I was here in all of these in 1986 in clear water and I
have been here ever since.

SCHULTZ: Do you think B.P. has a clue who you are?

SCALONE: No. They don`t care. It`s not that they don`t know. They don`t

SCHULTZ: So you`re living on a hope and a prayer?

PARMER: Yes, sir, most definitely. That`s all I`ve got at this point...

SCHULTZ: And five years ago, you had no idea this is where you were going
to be.

PARMER: Not at all.

SCHULTZ: And when that oil spill took place within hours, did you know
what the future held for you?

PARMER: No, sir. I did not. I thought that they would get it contained
and cleaned up and life could go on for us but it seem to go on and go on
and go on and the oil keep coming and it got worst and worst.

SCHULTZ: This wharf in Niceville, Florida was a thriving business. And
then the oil spill took place. And almost instantly lives were destroyed,
things changed and future dreams just erase.

These folks think that life has just played a dirty trick on them.

RUSTY HEFT, FORMER RESTAURANT OWNDER: My wife is 75 and still working
because our income was affected. I`m 71 and still working because our
incomes were affected. Our retirement goals are affected because B.P.
hasn`t come to play and fix things.

COON: You look at wharf, this place here. They`ve built this -- blood,
sweat and tears. 15 years of their lives went in to it and after the spill
is all taken away, not that just that they loss money, their livelihood,
their careers, the heart and soul of everything they`ve built was taken
away from them.

SCHULTZ: And what hope do you have that this is all going to be corrected?

COON: Very little.

SCHULTZ: Very little?

COON: Very little. This is never going to be probably corrected.

SCHULTZ: What has life been like for you the last five years? Describe
what you`ve been through.

PARMER: It`s like starting over with a mountain of debt so that you can
start over and being in limbo and waiting for B.P. to do the right thing
and make us whole, so to speak, so that we can start over.

You know, over the last five years it`s been difficult, very difficult.
Because before that occurred -- the oil spill, you know, we`d owned this
place for 13 years and it`s been open since 1976. So it had a great name
and did a great business here in the area.

SCHULTZ: Life was good.

PARMER: Life was good.

SCHULTZ: Ken Parmer and his business partner loss the wharf they operated
for 13 years in Niceville, Florida. The oil came to their dock and the
rest is history.

How immediate was the damage to your business?

SCALONE: A week, right afterwards, a fears of like contaminated seafood.
You could smell the oil in the air if you`re out here on the deck and it
was a very strong toxic oil smell. The guests stop eating seafood because
of their worries of the dispersing in the oil contaminating the seafood.

SCHULTZ: So, you have moved on in your career and -- but you have this
banknote just hanging over your head?

PARMER: Yes, sir. I`ve moved on, you know, as a restaurant manager but
certainly making, you know, a lot, lot less. And the dream of being your
own boss is gone at this point.

COON: Whatever money they lost from the spill is much greater than their
(inaudible) because they loss their livelihood, they`ve loss their

SCHULTZ: What is left is irreversible personal damage.

What are you thinking when you saw those pictures on T.V.?

SCALONE: Oh, when it right at the wellhead?


SCALONE: ... I was almost in tears. I could say I was almost in tears.
Because that`s where I lived, it`s not only going to work out there, OK,
when offshore for 10 days, that`s where I`m living. So I don`t throw
anything over the side, everything goes in a trash can. My friends are all
around even on the -- over the horizon but they`re all friends of mine, all

Somebody gets in trouble -- you need hamburgers, so I`m sure I`ll give you
hamburgers but then, come on over, right? Then that happened and within
the first two minutes, they`ve dump more oil in the gulp (inaudible) and
lifetime (inaudible) anywhere.

What we`re going to do is just keep it going so that my kids could have
something and now live a life and now I got negative.


SCHULTZ: Stay tuned all week because each day we`ll have a new story.
We`ve got a new look at the effects of the oil spill five years later.

And coming in this hour, why Louisiana judge on Friday just came to pass to
nearly 100 oil and gas companies who were slowly destroying the gulf coast.
That`s ahead. Stay with us. We`ll be right back.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

Tomorrow in part two of our series, "The Gulf Today Five Years After the
Spill", the impact of the environment and what residents tell us they are


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These all shell fell off right here. There should be
shell are going all the way to the bottom. That`s a cancer right here you

SCHULTZ: That`s a cancer right there.


SCHULTZ: And you can tell by the color of the shell?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The shell is gone.

SCHULTZ: The shell is gone?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah, you feel it? Feel it right here. You can see
that shell off.


SCHULTZ: That`s coming up tomorrow on the Ed Show part two, "The Gulf
Today 5 Years After the Spill".

And up next, the Louisiana judge is letting big oil companies get off the
hook for the damage they may have cause along the gulf coast.

Attorney Mike Papantonio weighs in on this big lawsuit.

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


SCHUTLZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

And finally tonight, nearly a hundred big oil and gas companies will not
pay for decades` worth of damage to the Louisiana coast.

On Friday, a federal judge dismissed a controversial lawsuit filed in 2013
by a Louisiana flood board. The lawsuit was seeking billions of dollars in
damages from oil and gas pipelines companies.

The New York Times called it, "The most ambitious wide-ranging
environmental lawsuit in history of the United States". Shell, Chevron and
B.P were among the companies named to the lawsuit.

The states coastline losses about football field worth land every hour due
to erosion. The U.S. geological survey estimates at Louisiana`s wetlands
could disappear in this fewest 200 years.

The United States Interior Department estimates wells drilled by the oil
and gas industry have cause anywhere from 15 percent to 59 percent of the

The lawsuit would have force the industry to help pay for an estimated $50
billion in coastal restoration and protection in the state.

Republican Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana praised the judge`s decision.
He opposed the lawsuit and signed a bill last year trying to squash it.
He`s bill was found unconstitutional. The flood protection authority is
expected to appeal the judge`s decision in an effort to get restitution.

I`m joined tonight by Mike Papantonio, Ring of Fire Radio host and also
American`s Attorney. And as you pointed out that Mike was not involve in
this lawsuit, but certainly as qualified beyond to give his thoughts on

Mike, is this oil and gas getting off the hook big time. How else do

Obama pointed federal judge that gave this industry have pass on a $50
billion lawsuit in an area around Louisiana where land lost as you`ve
talked about, It`s is about football field every hour. By the time your
show is over, they would have lost another area that large of wetlands,
this is wetland coast. It`s an area where the industry pumps more toxic
chemicals and carcinogens into the air and water than most places in the
world including China, Ed. You could almost compare this, what`s going on
there with what`s going on in China.

And as they do the states coastal wetlands are disappearing. But what`s
gone unreported very important about the story is that, the Obama federal
judge Nannette Brown worked a corporate defense lawyer for decades for the
same oil industry that she gave the pass to.

She was hands-on oil and chemical lawyer for decades who represented
industry polluters and some of the ugliest environmental cases in America.
It`s interesting that this case started out in state court until the oil
industry fought desperately to have the case put in front Nannette Brown,
so she could do exactly what she did and that`s make the case disappear.

This is a very important part of the story, Ed. It`s part of the story
that has to be told because for decades she said in court rooms defending
this very people that she gave to pass to. So the net result is that more
than 1,900 square miles of coastline has vanished in the last 80 years and
an industry is continuing to pollute what`s left. What`s also interest,
Ed, is the industry has admitted. There no -- nothing equivocal about

They admitted that they`re responsible for approximately 40 percent of the
wetland lost of the state. They came on said, yes, we did that.

So basically what this judge who again worked for the industry, Obama -- by
the way, she had a unanimous approval in the Senate, no Democrats asked
these questions, no Republicans asked these questions about what his
woman`s background was.


PAPANTONIO: She was good on social issues, bad on issues like this.

SCHULTZ: All right. Now, doesn`t the Federal Rivers and Harbor Act, Clean
Water Act to the Coastal Zone Management Act, governing coastal erosion. I
mean, there is legislation that deals with coastal erosion. So, how could
she come to this conclusion if there`s coastal erosion and it can clearly
be attributed to industry that they would not have any responsibility in
any kind of restoration or clean up?

PAPANTONIO: Well, she comes back, it`s a cop out (ph). You put it back to
the legislative body and you say the legislative body has to take action
that she doesn`t have the power to take action, that we can`t actually see
the real causation that`s work here, the science can`t tell us who`s really
responsible, that there are too many companies and we can`t point the
finger to any one -- companies.

If you read what she had to say, its cop out (ph) right down the line.
Again, Ed, this industry basically admitted guilt. They said we did this.
We were responsible for 40 percent of the erosion. But oh, by the way
we`re going to continue doing business just like we`ve done in this
industry captive judge, dismissed the case anywhere, where is -- there is
nothing less than.


PAPANTONIO: . admission of guilt here. I don`t know how else you could
characterize this.

SCHULTZ: Later on this weekend in our series, we`re going to have a story
on Cat Island, Cat Island what it was before the spill and what it is
today. You almost have to see it to believe it.

It`s absolutely devastating and that whole area, those islands have gone
through just enormous erosion and devastation and to say that the oil
companies and the oil and gas industry don`t have any responsibility or
whatsoever. It seems amazing to me that a judge could rule that way.

But, moving forward the attorneys for the flood authorities say that they
are looking at the ruling. What do you think from what you know at this
would be the opportunity of an appeal?

PAPANTONIO: It`s very difficult to appeal, that this circuit has typically
sided it up with the oil companies. The only -- rarely, the B.P cases and
exception -- that this circuit has been very, very good on a B.P. case
because the devastation has been so incredible and so clear.

On this case, this case is going to fit circuit (ph) it`s a real -- it`s a
long shot if you want to ask my opinion about it. I think it`s a tough
road. And I think this judge knew that in the way that she wrote the
opinion and the way that this case is basically going to disappear and that
the damage is going to continue for an awful long time. Because they`re
not going to change the way they`re doing business. Ed, real quick,
there`s a -- there`s an area called cancer ally.


PAPANTONIO: It`s even worst in the story we just told, maybe we can talk
about it sometimes.

SCHULTZ: OK, our series will continue again tomorrow night and throughout
the week. Mike Papantonio, I appreciate your time tonight.

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

PoliticsNation with Reverend Al Sharpton starts right now.

Good evening Rev.


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.>