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

The Ed Show for Monday, February 23rd, 2015

Read the transcript to the Monday show

Date: February 23, 2015
Guest: Jim McDermott, Ruth Conniff, Randi Weingarten, Brent Coon, Mike

ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: Good evening Americans and welcome to the Ed Show
live from New York.

Let`s get to work.


SCHULTZ: Tonight, extremist put American malls on high alert.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Threat of violence had major shopping centers by the
terror group behind the deadly attack in Africa.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The FBI and Department of Homeland Security say there
is no known specific or credible plot.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Terrorist like Al Shabab looks for some targets (ph).

global terrorist threat right now.

SCHULTZ: And later, five years after the spill, the legal battle for
restitution wage is on.

GLENN GILLYARD, CARR, RIGGS & INGRAM, LLC: So the review process was
really become an overkill of what it was intended.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They use their political connections, they use their
P.R. machine, they take advantage of the court systems.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They`re trying to discourage everybody from common good

GILLYARD: I think they`re running out of clock.

SCHULTZ: Plus, Scott Walker`s union-busting legacy gets national

GOV. SCOTT WALKER (R) WISCONSIN: When we talk about our record results, I
got to tell you the Wisconsin way is working as well.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When we saw the significant dropped off of leadership.

WALKER: You would laugh for that , that`s all right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He took on the unions and he survived.

WALKER: If you`re not afraid to go big and go bold, you can execute


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

We start this evening with a new threat here at home.

This weekend, the terrorist group, Al Shabab called for attacks on shopping
malls in the United States, Canada and U.K. Al Shabab was the same group
responsible for the 2013 attack on the Westgate Mall in Nairobi, Kenya.
The cease (ph) lasted three days and left over 60 people dead.

This weekend`s video specifically mentions Minnesota`s Mall of America. On
Sunday, Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson said the public needs
to be vigilant.


JOHNSON: I`m sure that security at this particular mall will be enhanced
in ways visible and not visible. But it also involves public vigilance and
public awareness, "if you see something, say something" has to be more than
a slogan.

you`re not telling people not to go to the mall?

JOHNSON: I`m not telling people to not go to the mall. I think that there
needs to be an awareness, there needs to be vigilance and, you know, be
careful, obviously.


SCHULTZ: But we are in a new phase. What is that mean? At this time,
there has been no specific threat made in the United States.

For more, let me bring in NBC News Correspondent John Yang in Minnesota
tonight. John, what`s the latest?

JOHN YANG, NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Ed, so far maybe its terrorist threat
fatigue (ph) what shoppers seem to be taking and in strive. Store managers
I`ve talked to said that foot traffic has not decreased, and people are
still coming to the mall.

One person we talked to earlier today is a family who came from Kansas for
his week-ender (ph) shopping -- by the way, the father, incidentally, is an
army veteran who was a guard at Guantanamo. He said, he thinks the
Americans are tired of it all.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, it something keep in the back of your minds but
really it`s just a bunch of, you know, scared people in Middle East trying
to call something err (ph) than work so.


YANG: But security officials are not taking this widely, they say they are
doing things that can be seen and increase foot patrols on the mall by
police and by mall security, also K9 units patrolling the mall. But also
in ways that can`t be seen.

They`re also urging that vigilance that Secretary Jeh Johnson talked about
science reminding people if you see something, say something, all in order
to be prepared in case something does happen. Ed?

SCHULTZ: John Yang, reporting tonight from Minnesota. John, thank you so

The video from Al Shabab comes as Congress is at a standoff over Homeland
Security Funding. We`re just four days away from a partial government

Later in this hour, the senate is expected to vote on DHS funding. The
bill is expected to fail after a democratic filibuster.

Earlier today, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said the Congress
needs to do their job.


JOHNSON: Overall, a shutdown of Homeland Security would have serious
consequences and amount to a serious disruption in our ability to protect
the homeland.

To those in Congress who maybe contemplating, punting or kicking the can a
few weeks down the road, I must remind you that the consequences to this
department if we remain on a continuing resolution are also severe.


SCHULTZ: The bill gridlock because House Republicans attached immigration
amendments to the Homeland Security Funding bill, the amendment strip
funding from President Obama`s executive order to protect undocumented

As of today, the President`s immigration executive orders are being held up
in a Texas court anyway. And the Department of Homeland Security shuts it
down the blame, certainly, I think should go on the Republicans.

A new CNN poll shows 53 percent of American`s blame Republicans for all of
these, 30 percent would blame the President and of course, 13 would blame
both. I might be a 13 percenter tonight.

Senator Lindsey Graham knows Republicans are playing with fire.


SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, (R) SOUTH CAROLINA: I agree with the Texas judge who
said that the executive orders were illegal. I hope Republicans will come
together and back the court case, file a frame (ph) of the court brief
whether court and fund DHS.

I am willing and ready to pass a DHS funding bill and let us play out in
court. The worst possible outcome for this nation is to defund the
Department of Homeland Security given the multiple threats we face to our
homeland and I will not be part of that.


SCHULTZ: I would go along with that. And of course, if no action was
taken, Department of Homeland Security Funding will end Friday night at

This time, Republican obstruction could affect the security of the
homeland. And they wonder why we hate Washington?

The security of this country is now a political football and I would
venture to say that few Americans think the nation security should be
guided by a political calculation of winners and losers.

Let me tell you. There will be no winners. Only losers if we have to
bicker over the security of this country.

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

Tonight`s question, "Will you blame Republicans if the Department of
Homeland Security shuts down? Text A for Yes, text B for No to 67622, you
can leave a comment on our blog at We`ll bring you the
results later on in this show. And of course, you can get my podcast at It`s available free 24/7.

The security of the country, we`re even going to argue over that. And I
think the Democrats too -- have a little bit of blame here as well. Both
sides are wrong. Just fund the security of the country and be done with
it. And let everything else play out in court.

For more, let me bring in Congressman Jim McDermott of Washington and Steve
Clemons, MSNBC Contributor and Editor-at-Large for The Atlantic.
Gentlemen, good to have you with us tonight.


SCHULTZ: Let`s go back. Congressman, we`ll start with you. What is a new
phase here? How did you take that comment from Jeh Johnson?

REP. JIM MCDERMOTT, (D) WASHINGTON: Well -- he`s, obviously, speaking the
truth. Here you`ve got 300,000 people of the Department of Homeland
Security, 275,000 are declared important enough to be -- they have to stay
on the job but they`re going to get paid. So next Friday, or next
Saturday, or next Monday or whenever, they`re not going to get a paycheck.

So you`re putting people through a lot of agony. We ultimately (ph) know
that the Republicans are going to cave in. There is no question.

SCHULTZ: Well -- so, is this another defeat the President at all cost
moments for the Republicans to...

MCDERMOTT: That`s...

SCHULTZ: ... put immigration on the table to muddy the waters for
defending the country?

MCDERMOTT: Even Lindsey Graham, Ed, says that we had to let the courts
working out and funded agency and let it go on and do its job. Americans
don`t care whether its Republicans or Democrats, they want the government
to work.


MCDERMOTT: And what we`re saying is, we`re going to shutdown FEMA.

Now, you`ve got snow 10 feet deep in Massachusetts and you`re saying, we
don`t want the emergency cable have (ph) any money.

SCHULTZ: It also affects the coast guard.

Steve Clemons, does this make us vulnerable if we don`t get it funded?
What is it mean from a security standpoint?

CLEMONS: We just had threats against the Mall of the America in Minnesota.
We have concerns about sleeper cells in the United States. That`s just the
beginning, the tip of the iceberg of the kinds of things the Department of
Homeland Security is responsible for around the country.

You know, it would be nice, Ed, if Rudy Giuliani would come on the show and
question the patriotism of those GOP leaders that are undermining the
security of the nation and have him ask them, do they really love the
United States. That would be a nice turn around.

SCHULTZ: You know, I`d just think that Rudy Giuliani has diminished
himself so much by this. What the media is missing and me included, I
should have done the story tonight -- go back to September 10th...


SCHULTZ: ... 2011 and see how popular Rudy Giuliani was in this town
before the attack...

CLEMONS: But the point...

SCHULTZ: ... and he would still -- well, we just leave that there. But
the point he`s making I think is well-taken. He is trying to just focus
(ph) the country on a number of fronts. So that`s not the point...

CLEMONS: And I think the point you`re making -- and the point, Ed, is
that, we have many people in Congress that are willing to sort of walk away
from a responsible stance about the security of the nation over a small
bowl of issue that`s being dealt within the federal courts.


CLEMONS: It`s outrageous. And when you talk about in this climate,
people`s love of the United States, their degree of patriotism, I think
that focus needs to fall directly on those people that are threatening to
defund the DHS.

SCHULTZ: Congressman, President Obama addressed the economic impact of the
DHS shutdown today, just a moment ago. Here it is.


week from now more than 100,000 DHS employees, board of patrol, court
inspectors, TSA agents, will show up to work without getting paid. They
all work in your states. These are folks who -- if they don`t have a
paycheck, are not going to be able to spend that money in your states. It
will have a direct impact on your economy and it will have a direct impact
on America`s national security.


SCHULTZ: The President today speaking to the Governors across the country,
there at the White House, they`re all at the White House. He, of course,
is having a conference with them.

What does this do state finances? I mean, it would seem to me,
Congressman, that some Governors might connect with people such as yourself
not, you know what I`m saying. I would talk to the Representatives of
Washington and say "Hey, wake up on this deal".

MCDERMOTT: But, you know, Ed. If you try and put yourself in the shoes of
the people who were being impacted by this, we found that we had two coast
guards (inaudible) a man and a wife were both in the coast guard. They
aren`t going to have money to pay their mortgage on the end of the month or
next month.

Now, these people are working to protect us all over the place and we say
to them, you`re not worth it. We`re not going to pay you. We`re going to
use you as a pawn (ph) in our fight with this president.

That is not fair to the government employees that are going to affected by
this and this going to effect money for states. I mean, people don`t have
salaries, they can`t buy things, they don`t.


MCDERMOTT: . pay the sales tax. It runs right down the road. I mean, it
is a stupid and their going to ultimately back down.

SCHULTZ: Do you believe that Steve. Do you think their going to back

CLEMONS: I don`t know. I know that I -- when I hear people like John
McCain and Lindsey Graham making so much sense and John Boehner saying,
hey, you don`t believe me, we`re going to shut it down.

I mean at certain point, John Boehner won`t have credibility any longer
unless he does pursue the shutdown. And I agree with you, I`m probably
with the 13 percent because I think the White House is saying, bring it on.
We would love you to carry the responsibility for putting this people out
of work and endangering the security of the United States.

SCHULTZ: We just say -- can we find an issue that we can isolate where the
Congress can work together. I mean, if we can`t do it on the security of
the country. What can we do or not?

CLEMONS: Right now...

SCHULTZ: This is -- Steve, isn`t this the best example of dysfunction if
it does shutdown?

CLEMONS: Yeah. I mean it`s so sad to me because, you know, I was a
director of Nixon Center years ago, I share that with people. I work for
the Democratic Center during the Senate.

There was a time when people over a great number of issues much more
(inaudible) than today, would find a pragmatic middle, the way to move the
nation forward, not be gridlock on everything.

And the problem we`re seeing is not necessarily between Democrats and
Republicans. It`s between Republicans and Republicans. They have inner
caucus fight which is so profound in-depth and it`s.


CLEMONS: ... it`s so deadly I think and so devastating for the United
States, on not just this issue but issue after issue after issue.

SCHULTZ: And finally, Congressman, your comment on immigration -- you just
play out on the court says it right now. So why would the Democrats
filibuster this?

MCDERMOTT: I think what they`re dealing with is that, you can`t get
anything out of the House. You got 46 members in that Freedom Caucus who
can stop John Boehner from doing anything. And they simply -- there`s no
reason to work on this issue if the House is not going to back down from
this but absolute shutdown.

SCHULTZ: We`ll let me use TPP as an example. There is just a bunch of
Republicans in the House that are going to vote against Fast Track because
they don`t want to see the president have any authority at all. I mean, I
think that this -- for this probably has something to do with it too, your
thoughts quickly on that.

MCDERMOTT: It`s always. It`s been for the last two and a half years.
Don`t allow Obama to win anything.


MCDERMOTT: And that`s been the bottom line. And Mitch McConnell came on
and the first thing he said when he became majority leader, "There will be
no shutdowns in the Congress".


MCDERMOTT: Well, we`ve already had one and now we`re heading for the
second one.

SCHULTZ: Congressman Jim McDermott, Steve Clemons, great to have you with
us gentlemen. Thanks so much.

CLEMONS: Thank you, Ed.

SCHULTZ: You can get my podcast at, it`s free 24/7. Remember
to answer tonight`s question there at the bottom of the screen, share your
thoughts with us on Twitter @edshow, like us on Facebook. We appreciate
that. The WeGotEd Twitter account, its history. We can only do one,
@edshow. Thanks for signing up.

Coming up. Scott Walkers street credit with conservatives and giving him
cover in the national media gauntlet, yeah. Plus, we wrap up our series on
"The Gulf Today 5 Years after the Spill". Tonight, we take a look at legal
battle for financial restitution.


GILLYARD: I think their running out of clock. They have appeal this thing
that they first agreed to through various courts. And the Supreme Court
finally denied their appeal in December of this past year, which started a
six-month clock running.

So as of June 8th all submitted claims will have to seize.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is pretty rough around the edges when it
comes to being a national candidate early on. I mean some of his answers
on foreign policy and faith are simply evasive and quite often strange.

But he`s America`s number one union-buster and that is the attraction. To
get a sense how dangerous Walker is, look no further than his own state in
the latest union numbers out of Wisconsin.

Of the 26 states that do not have right to work-to-law in place, Wisconsin
had the third highest percentage drop in union membership between 2010 and
2014. According to the figure released by the of Bureau of Labor
statistics, the Wisconsin`s union membership fell by 11,000 to 306,000 in
2014. It`s a slight rebound from the state low for union membership in
2012 when it was 293,000 workers.

Union members made up 11.7 percent of the state workforce of 2014. That`s
down from 14.2 percent in 2010. The year before Governor Walker took
office overall, Wisconsin saw an 18 percent drop in membership between 2010
and 2014. So that chart tells the truth.

This all comes as a result of Walker`s passage of Act 10 which limited
collective bargaining rights for most public sector union workers.

Now, Wisconsin could go even further in the fight against workers.

On Tuesday, the Wisconsin States Senate slated to take up right-to-work
bill after the bill was quietly released on Friday afternoon. Like it or
not. Like it or not.

Walker has accomplished what he set out to do. He disseminated unions at
his own state. Walker might not be ready for prime-time of the cameras but
he is entering the field with a level of street cred and he is tried and
tested when it comes to union-busting. In fact, he maybe number one in the

Good for him if that`s what`s you`re into.

The fact to the matter is, it`s not a question about jobs in Wisconsin or
how the economy is because the overall mission for the conservative
movement in this country is to deplete the Democratic base and get into the
union as what it`s all about and that`s what Walker has been able to do.

For more on this tonight, let`s go to Ruth Conniff, Editor-in-Chief of the
Progressive Magazine, also with us tonight, Randi Weingarten, President of
the American Federation of Teachers.

And Randi, I want to start with you on this because in numbers published
recently, your union in Wisconsin has lost membership since Walker has come
in and I know that there`s an effort to try to reinvigorate the membership.


SCHULTZ: What`s the state of NAA (ph) in Wisconsin?

WEINGARTEN: Well there`s -- look, you know, what`s -- this is what -- you
can -- first of all, thank you for having me on. And what`s really
interesting is that, when you talk to people all throughout the country,
you know, our members want unions. In fact, our union even with everything
that`s happened in Wisconsin, has actually grown in the last two years
because people want to voice and -- but they want a real voice.

And so what happened is, Walker basically, you know, pulled the rag out
from everybody. People were used to bargaining in Wisconsin and he made it
so hard that you saw a huge drop in membership. That`s exactly what he
wanted but what we are seeing is you`re charts to show (ph) as well, is
that people really want to voice so that we`re starting to slowly, you
know, gain ground again but...

SCHULTZ: But his mission, to reduce union membership that`s really what he
wanted to do.

WEINGARTEN: Oh, always (ph). I mean, it was...

SCHULTZ: And, of course, obviously, he`s got the legislature to help him
on all of that.

WEINGARTEN: Right. But remember, Ed, as you so well-covered, you know, he
-- the unions, you know, in 2010 when he was first elected said, we`re
going to meet your demands about the budget and he said, no. I just want
you not to have a voice.

So what happen is, he took away everybody`s voice and then he cut public
school aid and then he cut higher ed aid and he cut pay equity. And so
basically what he wants...


WEINGARTEN: ... is to not have a middle class in Wisconsin and you have
one of the most (inaudible) states.

SCHULTZ: What do I`m missing here? The guy wins three elections in four
years, de does exactly what he says he`s going to do and I`m trying to get
union membership up. I mean, I believe in that. I believe in collective
bargaining but, Ruth, this has to have an impact on the Democrats and the
liberals in Wisconsin. What`s the end game here?

RUTH CONNIFF, THE PROGESSIVE MAGAZINE: Well, I think the end game is
topple (ph). I think the reason that Scott Walker is the Koch brother`s
favorite candidate is, as you pointed out, it`s very helpful to disempower
the Democratic Party when you cut off funds from unions and organizing
strength from unions that directly reduces the competition for the right.
And secondly, it suppresses wages. I mean, the Economy Policy Institute
has done studies...


CONNIFF: ... to show that all workers, not just the union members, lose
wages and right-to-work stage which Wisconsin -- it looks like we`re about
to become as weak (ph), you know. So, $1,500 a year less for every worker,
union or non-union, so you have a disempowered, disenfranchised workforce.
It`s a lot easier if you`re big corporation or billionaire and you want to
get as much money for yourself as you can...


CONNIFF: ... to operate in that environment.

SCHULTZ: OK. Now, I said in my opening that some of his answers are
strange. You know, according to a national review at last week`s off the
record dinner, Walker made the claim that his stance against unions in
Wisconsin would be a signal of toughness to Islamic Jihadists and Russian`s
-- Vladimir Putin.

I mean that just -- I mean this -- Ruth, this is but a biggest stretches
we`ve seen on the national scene, isn`t it?

CONNIFF: It is so strange. I have to tell you, I watched Walker`s speech
and Iowa with my 13-year-old daughter who marched with their teachers in
the protest here. And to see him described these folks who came out
(inaudible) drivers, firefighters cut (ph) as basically as terrorist,
right. He is comparing these people to ISIS.


CONNIFF: You know, my kid couldn`t believe it. And it`s just bizarre
rhetoric and that really is the point that he`s making is that, ordinary
working folks are terrorist and that they`re scary and that he`s been very
brave to standup...


CONNIFF: ... to this people. And it`s a parallel universe, you know, this

SCHULTZ: Well, maybe things will be different `16...

CONNIFF: ... the middle class. This is our teachers.

SCHULTZ: Maybe things will be different in `16 -- turning now to troubles
in Clinton land.

Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Clinton Foundation
dropped it self-imposed ban on accepting funds from foreign governments.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus is now claiming those donations would give
foreign governments undue influence if Clinton becomes president.

Priebus warned the donations could expose the American people to the
demands of foreign governments because they dumped massive sums of cash
into her foundation.

What`s your response to this, Randi? I mean, clearly, the Koch bothers
have funded groups that have attacked...


SCHULTZ: ... public education, people that they give to, obviously, they
expect something back. So here is Reince Priebus trying to draw a parallel
here. Your thoughts on that.

WEINGARTEN: Right. So I love it, like 48 hours after Scott Walker, you
know, met with the hedge funds. He decided he is going to go after, you
know, workers in Wisconsin and then Reince Priebus does this.

The Clinton -- Foundation has said that they`re going to do the right thing
if Hillary Clinton runs for president.

When she was Secretary of State, they intake any money from foreign
governments, since she has not been Secretary of State, they`ve done a
whole a lot of good work. In fact, they`ve actually done real job creation
with union pension funds...


WEINGARTEN: ... where we`ve worked together to try to build, you know,
rebuild our infrastructure, try to create jobs and try to have good, you
know, returns on the money and she has also done a lot of work in terms


WEINGARTEN: ... early childhood so this them carping.

SCHULTZ: Ruth, have you this, because I got anything else on Hillary right
now. They`re looking for something big time, so they got to go to this fun
(ph) which is done in men`s work around the globe.

CONNIFF: I welcome the Republicans intense scrutiny of the dark money. I
think that we should all be concerned about undue influence, foreign or
domestic on her politics, and that we should be concerned about democracy
and empowering ordinary people, ordinary citizens to have a voice.

So I think we should get all the stuff out on the table and we should talk
about it...

SCHULTZ: All right.

CONNIFF: ... who is really funding candidate.

SCHULTZ: Ruth Conniff and Randi Weingarten, great to have both of you with
us tonight. Thanks so much.

Coming up, a very political night at the Oscars. And later, the legal
fight for gulf residents continuous five years after the spill. We
continue our especial series ahead. Stay with us. We`ll be right back.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

Well, it was politics at the Oscars last night as Hollywood`s A-list
stepped out to honor each others work and bring light to some of the
important causes, I guess. Topics range from women`s rights to
incarceration and we were reminded to stay weird.


PATRICIA ARQUETTE, ACTRESS: It`s our time to have wage equality once and
for all and equal rights for women in the United States of America.

JOHN LEGEND, SINGER SONGWRITER AND ACTOR: There are more black men under
correctional control today than were under slavery in 1850.

Snowden reveals don`t only expose a threat to our privacy but to our

ALEJANDRO INARRITU, FILM DIRECTOR: The latest generation of immigrants in
this country, I just pray that can be treated with the same dignity and
respect of the ones who came before and build this incredible immigrant

GRAHAM MOORE, SCREENWRITER AND AUTHOR: When I was 16 years old, I tried to
kill myself because, and I felt weird and I felt different, and I felt like
I did not belong.

Stay weird, stay different and when it`s your turn and you are standing on
the stage, please pass the same message to the next person who comes along.

Thank you so much.


SCHULTZ: Well, it was the most political night I`ve ever seen at the

I appreciate all your questions tonight in our Ask Ed. We have question
pertaining to this, it comes from Julie. Do you think that celebrity
speaking out about issues helps the causes?

That`s an interesting question. Does it help the causes? In order words,
in anything happen today in regards to anything that was said last night?
I don`t know, but when it comes to watching and I think it`s probably 50-
50, probably as many people are turned off by that as they are turned on by
it, whatever works.

There`s a lot more coming up on the Ed Show. Stay with us.

MARY THOMPSON, CNBC CORRESPONDENT: I`m Mary Thompson with your CNBC Market

The Dow falls 23, the S&P in flat, the NASDAQ at 5 points.

Shares of Boeing shed more than 2 percent dragging down the Dow. Goldman
Sacks downgraded the aerospace giant to a "sell", saying the company is
exposed to aircraft demand risk.

Existing home sales fell more than expected last month sliding 4.9 percent
to a nine-month low.

And Apples closes at a new high bringing returns market cap to $775
billion, that`s more than twice sack (ph)of ExxonMobil.]

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


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

Tonight in our final installment of our series, "The Gulf Today 5 Years
after the Spill", we examined the legal battle for restitution.

The legal nightmare for many business owners and residents along the gulf
coast is now in year number five. Lawyers representing clients have
millions of information and stories to tell beyond.

I spoke with Glenn Gillyard, a partner in the Accounting Firm that
structured the now contested B.P. settlement.

Residents along the coast share their stories of tangled legal proceedings
and lost business.

Five years after the disaster, residents have concerns about B.P. meeting
their obligations and honoring their pledge.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No more tar balls.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Four to five largest companies in the world are oil

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They basically lied to the American public about what
they intended to do which was to take care of these people.

SCHULTZ: Five years after the oil spill, many coastal resident and
business owners are still seeking the compensation B.P. agreed to pay.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Top executives from B.P. at the White House today.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you know what the consequences are the fed would up
to obligations (ph)?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: After a meeting that went twice as long as scheduled
as administration officials hammered out details with B.P., the President
emerge (ph) to announce the $20 billion fund paid for B.P. to cover damages
from the disaster.

OBAMA: B.P.`s liabilities for the spill are significant, and they
acknowledge that fact. The people of the gulf have my commitment that B.P.
will meet its obligations to them.

fishing that I`ve got any restitution.

SCHULTZ: And have you gone through the process?

SCALONE: I`m still going through the process, been lied to, been told,
"OK, we`re going to give you this one on this day" and nothing.

OK. We have to wait but we need more information. We need more of this.
We need this. I don`t know how much information I can give you, gentlemen.

GILLYARD: Well, if review process was really become an overkill of what it
was intended.


SCHULTZ: Glenn Gillyard is an accountant at the Firm Carr, Riggs and
Ingram. Gillyard himself along with the firm helped design B.P.`s original
settlement plan.

GILLYARD: We were involved in the initial negotiations and we help write
this settlement. We`ve felt like we were creating a butterfly but it`s
been morphed into a buzzard because of the overkill and looking at the

SCHULTZ: Chip Wasson is a business owner battling the oil companies` legal

weren`t affected by the oil spill, we were a tourism related business.
Because of our tax return, we were considered wholesale, their methodology
said (ph) that we were considered tourism.

We thought that, it`s now avail and then finally said that, fine, we`ll
take care of formula that you`ve agreed to, just compensate special what
your formula says we are owe (ph).

MIKE PAPANTONIO, HOST RING OF FIRE RADIO: When every one of the claims
processes, they would appeal virtually everything, Ed. We had an appeal
going up to the fit circuit almost every two months there would be a new

WASSON: As I`ve heard of what it should have been, right, we were at the
point of we needed some relief...


WASSON: ... and decided that was better than continuing five-year
(inaudible) fund and we`ll take your number.

SCHULTZ: And then they bought on that?

WASSON: And then, three days prior to them issuing the payment, they filed
appeal and stop all of the process. Until since then, it`s now five years
hosting (ph) in the oil spill and we`re still waiting for the restitution.

SCHULTZ: According to the official court authorized Deepwater Horizon
Claim Center, nearly 300,000 total claims have been submitted for economic
and property damages from the spill.

Just over 80,000 claims have been paid, that`s 27 percent. Five years
after the spill, 73 percent of claims have gone unsettled.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They don`t want to pay and they don`t. They use their
political connections, they use their P.R. machine, they take advantage to
the court systems to delay all the dilatory plea and (inaudible) a lot of
good hardworking people out of business.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We`re paying for oil spill related clean-up costs.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you take a $200,000 claim and you get questions on
$25 repair invoice. You realizing that either way you go, it has no impact
on the claim. But it simply slows the system down and bunks (ph) the
system down and requires more data and more information from the claimers.

SCHULTZ: Over 100,000 total claims have been submitted for business lost,
under 15,000 claims have been paid. That`s 13.8 percent, 86.2 percent of
business owners have seen nothing from B.P.

Several claims from coastal residents and businesses remained tied up in
court. B.P. began fighting against the settlement they agreed too. In a
massive advertising campaign, they highlighted flagellant claims.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But now B.P. Vice President Geoff Morrell says the oil
giant is getting soak by business with loses that are not link to spill.

GEOFF MORRELL, B.P. VICE PRESIDENT: We`re talking about a wireless phone
company store that burned to the ground and shutdown before the spill.

DAVID BARBERS OWNER, BARBERS SEAFOOD: They paid some people, but the other
people like me they haven`t paid. And the several -- we`re a direct --
we`re direct hit on the oil spill, where in the seafood business and, you
know, it really affected our business.

KATHY RIVERS OWNER, CROSSFIT DESTIN: If it`s the tourism and destin (ph)
in San Rosa is slowed down or shutdown. The locals can`t make money. So
the locals can`t support the local businesses.

KEN PALMER, FORMER RESTAURANT OWNER: Spill took place. Sales dropped 45
percent, 50 percent, couldn`t make payments to the bank.

PAPANTONIO: They`re trying to discourage everybody from coming forward.

SCHULTZ: Well, that was my next question. Why have there been so few
claims in such a mammoth environmental disaster?

1PAPANTONIO: Yes. What B.P. figured out from the very beginning was, if
we can scare people into not coming forward, if we can do full page ads in
newspapers, if we can go the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, where say
that people who are bringing these claims are committing fraud, what does
that do? It scares everybody away.

SCHULTZ: So the advertising campaign out there was designed to discourage
people, to make them think that it`s a very exhaustive process and it`s not
worth it.

PAPANTONIO: That -- yeah. What they try to do, is they try to put
together a program to where it looks so impossible to participate, number
one, and that by participating, number two. The claim that might be
committing fraud, that was their whole angle.

SCHULTZ: B.P. appealed their original agreement. Their request was thrown

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (Inaudible) as Supreme Court refused without any
explanation to consider B.P.`s claim that the settlement administrator was
paying victims that weren`t harm by the spill. So it looks these coast
guard (ph) just keep backing up.

PAPANTONIO: And if you could imagine. B.P. picked the person who was
supposed to run the settlement process, they picked him. And now, when he
started paying money, they`re now arguing that they want to get rid of him.

to this job but I didn`t need to do it. My grandkids, family, things to
do, in this case and what we`re doing here is going to leave a footprint
for the entire nation for the next 100 years, is this how massive things of
this nature can be or should be handle.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They had multiple appeals already. They try to
appeal against the almost $10 billion settlement on economic of damages
related to the spill. They feel that the settlement arbitrator is handing
out too much money to people who actually didn`t lose anything during the

GILLYARD: I think they`re running out of clock. They have appeal this
thing that they first agreed to through various courts, the Supreme Court
finally denied their appeal in December of this past year, which started a
six-month clock running. So as of June 8th all submitted claims will have

PAPANTONIO: B.P. has run out of their tricks. They`ve run out of being
able to tell the lie. In the committee that put this together, the
settlement committee that put this together has just every step of the way
beat them down step by step. And now, you know what? They`re out of
things to do.

SCHULTZ: So they`ve made agreements and now their now backing out of those


SCHULTZ: And leaving people hanging who thought they were going to get
some restitution.

PAPANTONIO: Up to this point, that`s what they`ve been able to do. But
right now, they`ve extinguished their right to go to the Supreme Court,
they`ve extinguishes their right to go to fit circuit in a lot of ways. So
now they`re cornered, they have to leave.


PAPANTONIO: . with the lie that they`ve told.


SCHULTZ: We have invited representative from B.P. to join us on this
program. They have declined every night, the offer stays open. The
invitation always remains. B.P. has directed us to their website

Still ahead, I`m talking with two lawyers about the legal fight for
financial restitution five years after the spill. B.P. claims that they
have paid over $13 billion in settlement money. We`re looking at the
numbers, next. Stay with us.


SCHULTZ: Welcome back to the Ed Show.

We just wrapped up or series the "The Gulf Today 5 Years after the Spill".
You can view the entire series on our website,, and
you`ll find all five parts of our series along with interviews and more
information. Catch up, re-watch it and share with your friends.

Still to come, Attorney`s Mike Papantonio and Brent Coon, join me live for
the latest in the legal fight in the gulf. We`ll be right back.


SCHULTZ: And finally tonight, earlier in this program you saw the
conclusion of our series "The Gulf Today 5 Years after the Spill."

The legal struggle for many residents and businesses is far from over.
According to data from the court authorized Deepwater Horizon Claim Center,
only a fraction of the claims have been paid out.

In the statement B.P. told us, they paid out $13 billion on claims to
individuals, businesses and government entities. This includes payments
made as part of B.P.`s claims process, the gulf coast claims facility and
the court supervise settlement program.

The data shows that the program has issued initial determination notices
with regard to approximately 80 percent of the claims filed to date. In
addition to claims, B.P. has also spent to date more than $14 billion on
response and clean-up.

You can find the full statement on our website B.P. has issued several
payments but many more hardworking coastal residents are still only left
with their losses.

Joining me tonight two attorneys who have worked directly with the
claimants during the legal battle for restitution, Brent Coon of Brent Coon
and Associates, and Mike Papantonio, Ring of Fire radio host and America`s
attorney. Gentlemen, great to have you with us tonight.

Brent, you first. The numbers from the Deepwater Horizon Claim Center and
B.P. are so different. Who is telling the truth?

BRENT COON, BRENT COON & ASSOCIATES: Well, I wouldn`t believe anything
that B.P. says, Ed. First, go back 10 years very briefly. They were
convicted, convicted a felony manslaughter for killing 15 people in Texas
City. They killed 11 more in the Gulf of Mexico and what the court said
was grossly negligence (ph) of conduct.

Their last CEO was convicted a perjury in London and the last CEO that was
here said, he was going to stay `til the finish and that there were only
leaking 1,000 barrels of oil (ph) a day out when it turned out to be
50,000, it`s a lie.

SCHULTZ: So this statement, you know, and I mean, they`re saying B.P. says
they paid over 13 billion in claims and $11 billion to individuals and
businesses. Yet, the Deepwater Horizon Claim Center those numbers don`t
match up. Why is that?

COON: Well, I think it`s a shell game. Some of that money has been paid
out, some claims that have been paid. Note two things there, one is for
the people that have been paid, B.P. now says they`re owe that money back.
They`ve actually followed the motion. It`s all on appeal that they`re
entitled to the most -- they`re entitled to the moneys back over the few
people they`ve already paid. And (inaudible) that`s a small fraction on
people that they`re owed. And it`s just like someone that would say, we`ll
I paid my utility bill sometimes so I should be able to keep my...


COON: ... utilities all the time. These guys pay a few of their bills on
few of their time but they`re not owe enough to paying everyone that they
owe, all that they owe...

SCHULTZ: All right. Mike...

COON: ... in fact the DOJ dismissed their trial for $14 billion that they
owe the government that they won`t pay.

SCHULTZ: Mike, what`s your impression to these numbers? Why are they

PAPANTONIO: Well, they need to tell to their shareholders that they`ve
only paid a quarter. They say $14 billion. There only about a quarter of
a way there but they`ve to lied to their shareholders and that`s part of
the problem.

What they haven`t paid for is thousands of miles of coast that they`ve
obliterated. They haven`t paid for the hundreds of species of fish and sea
life that they disseminated. They haven`t paid for the hundreds of miles
of wetlands they`ve destroyed.

They still haven`t paid a dime for natural resource damage. They haven`t
paid up to $14 billion in claim water fund that Brent is talking about.
They haven`t done one single thing voluntarily like stroking checks because
they care about the biggest environmental disaster...


PAPANTONIO: ... in history that they caused.

SCHULTZ: What`s the original Gulf Coast Claims Facility run by Ken
Feinberg fair for gulf residents and businesses and what happened to that

COON: Yeah. I think it was fair. I think that the Feinberg program, what
I like about it was you could go to the program, submit your claim and
negotiate a value for it and if a claim that did not filled up was a faired
number, he was allowed to reserve that claim and go to court.

SCHULTZ: What happened?

COON: Most of the time is -- well, they pulled the money off the table.
And B.P. committed $20 billion to fund promised to (inaudible), promised or
what else, they would fund, that would $20 billion one year into it. When
no one was looking they shut the program down.


COON: It took $16 billion in unpaid benefits off the table.

SCHULTZ: OK. Mike, if they took the money off the table where is the
president? Where is the Obama administration? Where is this boot on the
neck of B.P.?

PAPANTONIO: It`s almost like he forgot about it honestly. I think Brent
would agree. It`s almost like the President forgot what`s going on down
here in the Gulf Coast. It was a big show, you know, it comes out of the
room $20 billion. B.P. knew that that was about a quarter of what it was
going to cost for the total damage but it came out acting like this was a
big event. It hasn`t been a big event for people who have lost so much.

Let me just tell you something and really quickly. If this company
believes in what they were actually saying...


PAPANTONIO: ... they would appear on your program...


PAPANTONIO: ... and they would look into a camera with people like us on
the other side and they`d be honest about the fact that they cannot be
proud about what they`ve done because they live in a criminal conduct kind
of culture and we`re seeing on the Gulf Coast right now.

SCHULTZ: What about the claims administer right now, Patrick Juneau. Is
he been doing a good job, Mike?

PAPANTONIO: He`s doing a great job. The man is working under impossible
odds. Everything Juneau does is appeal. This hasn`t been Juneau`s fault
and it hasn`t been the committee`s fault.

Look, one day we`re going to have -- Brent Coon is going to be in trial,
(inaudible) man to man with B.P. but while he is doing that the committee
is doing everything they can to get everybody paid as quickly as they can


PAPANTONIO: ... Juneau is doing everything that he can (inaudible) going
to be done with these people.

SCHULTZ: And, Brent, how much hope do you hold out that rough number here,
the other 70 percent of the people are going to get restitution?

COON: You know, I think those that are in the claim process now, the
majority of them are going to eventually get somewhat tragic, sad news and
disappointing this because it is a pay for wiping process that Mike talked
about. Unfortunately, B.P. to date got the better hand. They run out...


COON: ... of appeals but they want some battles in those appeals for the
people that have remaining toward claims which we hadn`t talked about...

SCHULTZ: All right.

COON: ... there will be another day for them hopefully.

SCHULTZ: Brent Coon and Mike Papantonio, great to have both of you with us

And again, we have invited comment on this program from B.P. They have
repeatedly declined. I appreciate you, gentlemen, being with us tonight
and I will have a commentary on all of this tomorrow night on the Ed Show.

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

PoliticsNation starts 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.>