Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Ferguson Grand Jury Decision Could Be Soon; U.S. Airstrikes Attempts to Kill ISIS Leaders; Berlin Wall Torn Down 25 Years Ago Today; North Korea Sets Two Americans Free
Aired November 09, 2014 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: All right. We begin this hour with Ferguson, Missouri, where a grand jury decision may be imminent in the shooting death last August of unarmed African-American teenager Michael Brown.
The 12-person panel has until January 7th to decide whether to indict Police Officer Darren Wilson for killing Michael Brown, but prosecutors say a decision is actually likely by the middle of this month.
Protest organizers have presented police with a list of 19 proposed, quote/quote, "rules of engagement." They say the first priority is that no one else is killed, and they also want a 48-hour heads-up before the grand jury decision is announced and they want the actual announcement to be made on the weekend or after 5:00 p.m. during the week. They also are police to avoid wearing riot gear and not use armored vehicles, or tear gas or rubber bullets, or any other military-style equipment. In addition, they don't want police to make arrest in any protests that may occur and they want police to treat protesters as citizens, not, quote, "enemy combatants."
I want to bring in the panelists to discuss this.
Kevin Jackson is executive director of the political Web site, "The Black Sphere". He's also author of the book "Race Pimping: The Multitrillion Dollar Business of Liberalism."
Also with us again, joining us this hour, CNN political commentator Marc Lamont Hill who spent time there in Ferguson on the ground.
Thank you both for being with us.
Let me start with you, Kevin.
Police haven't said yet whether they're going to follow these 19 proposed rules or not, but they have acknowledged getting them, say they want to work together with protesters, make everything safe and calm on the ground as they can. What do you make of this list of rules?
KEVIN JACKSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE BLACK SPHERE: Well, Poppy, they're not asking for much, are they? Look, the police have rules of engagement they have to follow. As is
the case with shooting, you know, we're looking at the fallout from that. What's interesting about it is they aren't asking the protesters to do anything. If you really analyze that list, what they're saying is when we create disruption, when we do things to antagonize you, you should do nothing, you should maintain your professionalism, et cetera. And I think it's absolutely ridiculous.
Yet again, we're going to spend a lot of time and energy over a tragedy that should never have occurred but I believe is probably more Michael Brown's fault than people want to admit publicly, but I'm not afraid to admit that. So, this is a ridiculous thing that they're asking for, because guess what, most of it the cops are going to do anyway, and a lot that they're asking them to do are things that would put police in harm's way.
HARLOW: Kevin, let me bring in Marc Lamont Hill here.
Marc, you spent time on the ground during the protests at the height of it. The mayor of Ferguson is saying they are preparing for the worst if need be. One of the requests here is the grand jury give the public, the protesters advanced notice of when this decision is going to come. Is that the right move? Does that help? Does that hurt?
MARC LAMONT HILL, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think it absolutely helps. I think the last thing we want is a sense of surprise. I think the last thing you also want is for people to feel as if this news was floated out at a time that was convenient.
People do it all the time. Politicians do it. Corporations do it. They float out things at moments where they think it's going to be a slow news cycle, a moment where things will go undetected. And I think protesters don't want to away feeling like that is what happened because all that would do is further stoke the situation.
I also strongly disagree with -- Kevin said that protesters are asking police to maintain their professionalism in the midst of an uprising. Well, yes, they are asking them to do that, and that's exactly what they're supposed to do. However, the protesters are not saying, we want to antagonize you when you do nothing. What they're saying is, we don't want you to interpret protests as antagonism.
People have a right to protest. People have a right to stand in the streets. When I was there, oftentimes what I saw is many of us were standing in the streets doing nothing, some of us were praying, some of us had our hands up like this. And yet police were aiming guns at us, they shot tear gas at us, even when they said they would not.
So, it's not -- it's dishonest, or at least inaccurate at best to suggest somehow that police were simply minding their own business. No one needs to antagonize. Protest is fine, but respect and community engagement is necessary.
HARLOW: Kevin? JACKSON: Yes, well, the response to that would be, you get a Molotov
cocktail thrown at you, get spit at, get all the things that were happening.
Look, that's a ridiculous comment, Marc, to be honest with you. The cops are, yes, they are supposed to be professional. When things happened --
HILL: Which part? Which part was ridiculous? Which part was ridiculous, Kevin?
JACKSON: You look at the 19 -- you look -- what parts are ridiculous is most of the things you just said. What you're essentially saying is if these cops get Molotov cocktails thrown at them, if they get people who are firing firearms in there, they're not supposed to respond to any of this?
(CROSSTALK)
HILL: I didn't say that. I didn't say that.
HARLOW: I'm going to jump in here. Marc --
HILL: No, no. Hold on. I didn't say that at all. I said if they're protesting or praying. I didn't say Molotov cocktails or weapons. I said if they're --
(CROSSTALK)
HARLOW: I'm going to break in here because I want our viewers to be able to understand what each of you are saying. And when you talk over one another, they can't hear you. I like you both to address this question. OK?
Everyone saw -- some people on the ground experienced what happened. No one wants -- no one wants things to get escalated like they did, whatever side you blame.
So, what can be learned? I'm going to begin with you, Marc, then I want you to address this, Kevin. What can be learned from the past protests that we saw in Ferguson in case there are protests again and everyone has the right to make their voices heard? What can be learned, Marc?
HILL: I think what can be learned, again, we have to make a distinction between forms of antagonism and forms of protest. Obviously, again, let me be clear on national television, lest I be misunderstood -- I'm not saying that anyone should stand by idly by if they get hit with Molotov cocktails or shot at.
What I'm speaking about at a moment and I was standing there when this happened, this isn't conjecture. I'm saying that when people have their hands in the air, or when people are praying as the pastors were doing, and get dragged by their hair or they shot at or they tear gassed, I'm saying that's inappropriate. Conversely, citizens have to draw and respect the lines that have been
laid out for them -- meaning that everyday citizens can't antagonize. They can't throw cocktails, can't shoot people. I don't expect police to do nothing if they get shot at. HARLOW: Kevin, quick response, please?
JACKSON: Yes, I agree with that point. But, you know, the first thing you need to do when you have a protest is you need to be right. How about you be right on the principle? The idea that Darren Wilson actually shot this kid in cold blood is a false notion. So, we're going to spend a lot of time, energy, and money. These people put out 19 points I suggest Marc take a look at that essentially put all the blame on police.
HILL: I saw them.
JACKSON: I would love to have the counterpoints to that that says what is the responsibility of a protester? If you want to -- if you want to protest something, I'm all for it. Protest the right thing, do it in the right way. Don't put all the responsibility on law enforcement.
HILL: Protesters have done that.
HARLOW: It is going to be up -- it is going to be up to the grand jury to decide on that. We will see what happens. We, of course, will be watching.
Gentlemen, thanks for joining me tonight.
JACKSON: My pleasure.
HARLOW: Over the next few days, we may get clarity on reports that is leader Abu al Baghdadi may have been injured or even possibly killed in recent coalition air strikes. The U.S. military is not confirming whether al Baghdadi was even in the convoy that targeted this week that is group.
Also, our correspondent Brian Todd has more on how al Baghdadi became so powerful.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Some call him the new bin Laden. He is ruthless, known for ferocious attacks. His mission, to fight for Islamic fundamentalist takeover of Iraq and Syria. Much about Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is a mystery, but not his viciousness.
DOUGLAS OLLIVANT, FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY COUNSEL OFFICIAL: Very brutal, very extremist fighter who would execute his rivals.
TODD: As leader of the Islamic state in Iraq and Syria, al Baghdadi is seen as the man behind the capture of Iraq's second largest city Mosul, and now a push towards Baghdad. But al Qaeda leaders recently severed relations with him, saying he was insubordinate, killing too many civilians. OLLIVANT: And al Qaeda thought his infliction of random violence was too extreme, even for them.
TODD: Yet now, with his recent victories on the ground, he is growing in power.
PAUL CRUICKSHANK, CNN TERRORISM ANALYST: Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is emerging as a central figure in the jihadist movement and his organization is growing ever more popular.
TODD: A counterterrorism official tells us al-Baghdadi is based primarily in Syria, and is just as ruthless as his well-known predecessor, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. But While Zarqawi released menacing statements and videos before being killed by American forces in 2006, al-Baghdadi keeps a lower profile. Some call him the invisible Sheikh.
OLLIVANT: Except among his very, very inner circle, he is rumored to disguise his identity, wear masks, wear turbines, wear face cloths, not let his identity be known.
TODD: According to this biography circulating on Jihadi web sites, he got a Ph.D. in Islamic studies in Baghdad, then formed a local militant group.
American forces had him in custody for four years in a prison for insurgents where he may have built ties with others. He was freed in 2009, and within a year the leader of the al Qaeda affiliate in Iraq, heading up a renewed campaign of bombings and assassinations.
What's Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi's future?
CRUICKSHANK: If he is able hold on territory in northern Iraq for an extended period of time, he may well eclipse Ayman al-Zawahiri in terms of being a leader figure in the global jihadist movement.
TODD (on camera): But to do that, he's got to survive. All three of his immediate predecessors as top jihadist leaders in Iraq were killed. And right now, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has got a U.S. bounty on his head of $10 million.
Brian Todd, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HARLOW: Brian, thank you for that.
Let's talk more about this brutal leader. Joining me now, Michael Daly, special correspondent for "The Daily Beast". Also, CNN national security analyst Bob Baer, he's former CIA operative and also author of the book, "The Perfect Kill: 21 Laws for Assassins."
Michael, let me go through this with you, these scenarios. Of course, CentCom isn't saying whether Baghdadi was even in this group of ISIS leaders that were struck. But how does it change the situation if we were injured? MICHAEL DALY, THE DAILY BEAST: If he were injured my guess is it
doesn't change things much. I mean, I think there's many guys than him. And I think really their power is not him. Their power is they took kind of Islam Islamic fanaticism and combined it with the military expertise of the old Saddam Hussein guys and they created quite a power.
HARLOW: So, he shouldn't be the focus?
DALY: That's my feeling. I mean, I think he -- you know, by declaring this Islamic state and putting himself at the center there, he's -- that's kind of part of their delusion and their propaganda, but I think that if he wasn't from tomorrow, I think they would probably be just as powerful.
HARLOW: Interesting because Bob Baer has been saying something along the same lines.
That, by the way, right, Bob, you don't know who he would be replaced with if forces -- coalition forces were able to take him out.
BOB BAER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: No. We don't understand the organization well enough. We don't understand the military officers which is driving the ISIS offensive. He is well educated. He's particularly articulate. We don't know anything about his organizational abilities and I suspect there are a lot more people behind him.
And killing him and his convoy yesterday wouldn't get us much. Assassination works when a group like ISIS is falling apart and you decapitate it, then it will speed up the falling apart. But right now, I don't see the Islamic State collapsing on its own.
HARLOW: Michael, what about Western hostages being held by ISIS? Is there any strategy here when it comes to how the West is targeting is to keep in mind and try to protect as much as we can?
DALY: It's not working too well because they keep cutting these poor guys' heads off. I mean, they -- I don't think that they're going after ISIS just to go after is. I don't think they're thinking if we keep hitting them they're going to say, all right, we'll let the hostages go, stop hitting us. I don't think they --
HARLOW: Or by targeting specifically the leadership for al Baghdadi.
DALY: I don't think so. I spoke to the guy who ran the Camp Bucca where Baghdadi was held for those four years and he remembered him.
HARLOW: Right.
DALY: And said that he wasn't anything special as far as he can tell, he's not someone who really stood out. He was not someone everybody in the camp looked to for leadership. He was actually very surprised that he went on to such prominence.
HARLOW: Bob, are you surprised hearing that and what you know in terms of al Baghdadi, his past, that he's in a prominent position within ISIS now?
BAER: I suspect he's a figurehead, Poppy. By the way, his Arabic is beautiful. I listened to the sermon he made a couple months ago.
He's very well educated. He can speak in Koranic Arabic. And I think as a figurehead, he serves quite well. But there are clearly officers, military officers or very well-qualified jihadists who know who they're doing in the field of battle. The siege of Kobani, taking of Mosul, and the rest of it, it's a military organization.
If we decide to embark on assassination, we'd have to hit more than just Baghdadi, we'd have to keep going for possibly years.
HARLOW: And to continue on that, Bob, the strategy that the U.S. is using right now, this ramping up of military advisers, up to 1,a00 more going in, but no, quote/unquote, "boots on the ground." You believe this is not the right strategy, it's not enough?
BAER: Well, I'd go farther and say it's folly. What we're doing is we're taking these 1,500 military advisers and we're putting them with Shia units. Which in the eyes of the Sunni, and that's of course, what ISIS is, is we've taken sides in the civil war. And this civil war goes back to the 7th century.
Do we really want to get into this? I mean, what we need is a legitimate government in Baghdad that represents all Iraqis and once you get that, then you go on the offensive against ISIS but not before.
HARLOW: Do you agree with Bob on that point?
DALY: Yes, absolutely. I've got a friend who was over in Iraq previously training guys, helping to equip guys. We gave those guys billions of dollars in equipment and they ran away the minute someone stood up to them. Now, we're going to -- the same guy I know is going to retrain some other guys? I mean --
HARLOW: That's what was asked at the Pentagon, what's different this time around?
Stand by. We'll have you both back with us later this hour. Thank you so much, Michael Daly and Mr. Baer.
On this 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev warns the world is on a brink of another cold war. What exactly did he say? Is he right? We'll discuss, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARLOW: Images and memories came flooding back to Berlin today, as the city and the world commemorating the Berlin Wall literally being torn down piece by piece.
Fireworks and music marks this 25th anniversary, as thousands gathered around the city's iconic Brandenburg Gate.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel offered words of hope to a United Germany.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANGELA MERKEL, GERMAN CHANCELLOR (through translator): Berlin Wall showed us that dreams can come true. Nothing has to stay how it is, even if it's so difficult. This memory, we want to share with our partners in the world.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARLOW: Look at this. Beautiful -- as 8,000 glowing balloons were released into the night sky, representing where the Berlin wall used to stand. And while Berliners celebrate tearing down that wall and really for decades symbolized the frosty relations between the U.S. and Soviet Union, it is worth remembering it happened just two years after then-President Reagan spoke at the Brandenburg Gate.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RONALD REAGAN, THEN-U.S. PRESIDENT: Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.
(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARLOW: Mikhail Gorbachev was the leader then of the Soviet Union and it didn't seem possible when Reagan said those words that it would happen or happen any time soon. And yet the wall came down. The Cold War ended.
Well, Gorbachev now in his 80s was one of the elder statesmen at today's ceremonies in Berlin, but he said this. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL GORBACHEV, FORMER PRESIDENT OF SOVIET UNION (through translator): The world is on the brink of a new Cold War. Some are even saying it has already begun. And yet while the situation is so dramatic, we do not see the main international body, the U.N. Security Council, playing any role or taking concrete action.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARLOW: Michael Daly, special correspondent with "The Daily Beast." He joins me again now.
What did you think of those comments?
DALY: Well, I immediately thought of Mr. Putin. And he was in East Germany when the wall came down. And you can beat when -- if he watched those fireworks today and those beautiful balloons, he was remembering a humiliation. He's remembering from his point of view a betrayal. And I think that that's been compounded from his point of view of what's going on in Ukraine. I mean, you know, Crimea is part of the Russian soul. It's, you know,
the Sevastopol, it's Nicholas I whose portrait hangs in Putin's office. It's Tolstoy fought there. The first movie the Russians ever made was about the battle of Sevastopol.
And I just think that if you ride the subway with Russian people as I do coming from Brooklyn --
HARLOW: And we all do. Me, too, come from Brooklyn.
DALY: Right. You, too. You look and you say, how is it ever possible we almost vaporized each other?
HARLOW: Right, sure.
DALY: I look at these nice women and kids and say, we were going to turn each other into ashes?
HARLOW: That's why when you hear comments from Gorbachev -- look, we heard Dianne Feinstein from the Senate Intelligence Committee a month or two warning about this given when the plane was shot down, et cetera. But do you really think that we are near a brink of another Cold War?
DALY: I mean, I don't, but at the same time, when I look at those Russians on the subway, it seems so insane that we ever were at that point. It seems so illogical that we were at that point.
HARLOW: We were at that point.
DALY: I say to myself, maybe logic, insanity is not the way to predict what's going to happen.
HARLOW: We also heard Gorbachev comment on what he calls a complete lack of action by the U.N., by the Security Council. On that fronts, does he have a point? Could more be done?
DALY: I think that -- first of all, he's got a big pal of Putin. So, for him to be saying this means from his point of view this is a real thing, and, I mean, clearly there are Russian sensitivities. I'm not a big -- you know, Putin, as far as I'm concerned, is a gangster. But there are Russian sensitivities, and there are Russian feelings that I think we just need to be more cognizant of.
And that, you know, we won that Cold War, right? But we got to be a good winner. I think from their point of view we've not been very good winners.
HARLOW: So, let's talk about the fact that this is the 25th anniversary of this historic moment, right? And there's been a lot written about what can be learned, whether it's how the west and the Middle East, you know, co-co co-exist in this world, whether it's about how we move forward with U.S./Russia relations.
What do you think can be learned? DALY: I think what we should learn is that the -- that not everybody
viewed that wall coming down as a triumph and that some of those people who didn't view it as a triumph now have tremendous power in this world, and it may be mainly destructive power, but they have that power. I think that one of the things we -- you got to look to the totality of it, and we need to somehow convince everybody this was a victory for mankind, humankind. That's my feeling.
HARLOW: The G-20 about to begin in Australia. The president, President Obama will be there. Vladimir Putin will be there. See if the two men will talk and see what can get accomplished.
Michael Daly, thank you.
DALY: Thank you.
HARLOW: We appreciate it.
Two Americans once detained in North Korea are now free. They are home safe this weekend, these two men. It seemed to capture everyone off guard. It happened so suddenly.
Why did it happen now? We'll talk about that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARLOW: Three words: Papa John's Pizza. That is what we're told Kenneth Bae and his family ordered for a welcome home celebration meal last night. What a night it was.
He and one other American, Matthew Todd Miller, are back on U.S. soil, suddenly freed from custody in North Korea. And their long hard labor prison sentences.
Our Paula Hancocks is in Seoul with more on how their freedom was negotiated.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A top secret mission in the dead of night. The top spy chief for the United States arrives in Pyongyang, carrying a letter from the U.S. president. He leaves one day letter with two former prisoners. No conditions and no strings attached according to the U.S. so why this sudden humanitarian gesture from North Korea?
CHRISTOPHER HILL, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO SOUTH KOREA: Clearly, they crave having this high level attention so, obviously, they are pleased that General Clapper came.
HANCOCKS: Another suggestion Kim Jong-un wants to show he's still in charge after disappearing for six weeks recently, he's back in the spotlight, limping but without the cane.
Other experts believe Pyongyang's recent charm offensive, including a high-profile visit to Seoul, technically enemy territory is a PR exercise to improve its image. The trigger: the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on human abuses in North Korea, abuses the report termed crimes against humanity.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It had to basically showed a lighter side, a more human side to the international community, because although there could be legal sanctions or even International Criminal Court proceedings against North Korea, North Korea is also very much conscious of its reputation.
HANCOCKS: The release of Kenneth Bae and Matthew Todd Miller comes more than two weeks after a third U.S. citizen, Jeffrey Fowle, won his freedom. No U.S. citizens remain in North Korean captivity.
(on camera): Two things are certain. This decision came from the top and it was made for a reason. Pyongyang released a statement claiming that the U.S. president had made many requests and also an apology.
Now, if that's the case, this domestically is propaganda gold for a leader who wants to remain and show that he's relevant on the international stage.
Paula Hancocks, CNN, Seoul.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HARLOW: Thank you for that.
President Obama vowing to act on immigration despite Republicans taking control of Congress. So will we see some compromise? Or more years of gridlock? Ahead, we'll discuss that, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: The midterm ballots just counted when President Obama met with House and Senate leaders at the White House this week. And immigration emerged again as a political flashpoint.
The issue dominated Friday's power lunch. And the president said, again, today that he is prepared to work around Congress and take executive action if Speaker John Boehner can't get a bill through the House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'd prefer and still prefer to see it done through Congress, but every day that I wait we're misallocating resources, we're deporting people that shouldn't be deported, we're not deporting folks that are dangerous and need to be deported.
So, John, I'm going to give you some time, but if you can't get it done before the end of the year, I'm going to have to take the steps that I can.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARLOW: All right. Let's talk about this, immigration and the midterms, with Mickey Kaus, he's a columnist for the "Daily Caller."
Thank you for being with us from L.A. Appreciate it.
Yes, thanks, Poppy.
HARLOW: You have written a lot about this. I mean, when I looked up your articles and read through them, I feel like every other one was about immigration. This is something you are very invested in. But does the president have a point saying he's waited and he's waited and hasn't seen the House take up -- take up the bill?
MICKEY KAUS, COLUMNIST, THE DAILY CALLER: I don't think he has a point because, first, this bill he wants was a big loser in this past election. Several Democrats who voted for it got bounced by the voters. It was an issue in several other races where the Democrats supported it and didn't win. And in Oregon, the only place that had direct immigration issue on the ballot, the voters voted 2-1 not even to give illegal immigrants driver's licenses.
So there's no groundswell of support for this and he's asking for the whole enchilada. He's saying he's going to go ahead and do this by himself unless Boehner passes this bill which Boehner's caucus doesn't want.
(CROSSTALK)
HARLOW: Well, it brings it up.
KAUS: They don't think it's good for their politics.
BALDWIN: Brings it up. Brings it up.
KAUS: No. No. He said pass. Other people suggested to just bring it up, but Obama said pass.
HARLOW: I want to tell our viewers if you go on to the "Daily Caller" Web site and look at what you've done, you have documented all of the Democrats who lost on Tuesday who supported the main Democrat-backed immigration bill.
Do you think that comprehensive immigration reform, a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, at this point in time with the makeup of Congress that we will have, come January, is a loss for Democrats, that there's no way to get it done?
KAUS: There's no way to get that done. I mean, they've already given up on citizenship. They're willing to settle for just legalization, but they're not even going to get that done. There is a comprehensive bill that would involve securing the border first, then waiting and then having the legalization once all of the border security measures are done.
That's what Obama should have done from the beginning, and, you know, he might have gotten his bill. But instead they passed a bill that legalized people immediately and then did the border security and our side just doesn't trust them and the Republican caucus doesn't trust them. And I don't see a way to bridge that gap certainly before the end of the year when Obama has locked himself into doing this executive amnesty.
HARLOW: One thing that no one wants to see in the next two years is the gridlock in Washington that we have all been living through and experiencing. And we heard Speaker Boehner warn the president of that this week saying don't go it alone on this, you're going to make it even harder, you're going to increase the gridlock. You're going to burn yourself.
Do you believe that that is the case if we do see the president go it alone on immigration? Do you think that just changes the game completely from both sides we've been hearing saying that they will work together?
KAUS: I think it certainly poisons the well for a few months. I think it ends up in the courts. I think if Obama does this, the -- I don't think the House -- the Republicans can block it, but I think the courts wind up making a decision on it.
HARLOW: Let me --
KAUS: But why are we talking about this? There are so many other things we could break gridlock on. I think the voters are wondering why are we still talking about immigration?
HARLOW: Let me ask you this before we go. Fareed Zakaria on his show this morning here on CNN made a really fascinating point. And he believes that the president has to use the next two years to make a big foreign policy move. Whether it is something with Iran, whether it is with China. Rather than focusing domestically, saying that there is no way that he's going to be able to accomplish things with the Republican control of Congress.
Do you agree that should be the president's focus now is something big on the foreign stage? On the international stage?
KAUS: That would be good, but I don't think -- I think there are things domestically he could do. There's corporate tax reform, regular tax reform, trade deals. There are all sorts of things he could do domestically. But I don't think immigration is one of them.
HARLOW: I wish we had a lot more time for a longer conversation with you. Thanks for coming in. We appreciate it.
Coming up, a former federal agent apparently knew about terror attacks before they happened. A pretty shocking report. But really didn't do a lot anything to stop them. We're going to talk about it next with our experts.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARLOW: Well, "The New York Times" rattled the U.S. intelligence community today when it published a report naming a former government agent and suggesting that that agent kept contact with the terrorist group operating inside of Iran. The report goes on to say that this agent knew about at least one
deadly bombing before it happened. So far, the CIA and the FBI and the Pentagon aren't saying anything about the report.
I want to bring in Bob Baer, he is a former CIA operative and can shed some light on this for us.
Bob, I know there's still a lot of outstanding questions. This is a report in "The New York Times." But what do you make of it in terms of, you know, what people in the field on the ground, the contacts they have, who they stay in touch with, what they know, what they report, what they don't to keep those sources?
ROBERT BAER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Yes, Poppy, I know the detective at the center of this. He was in New Jersey, worked for the Port Authority. Very capable, aggressive. And he made contact with these Iranians, Beluch, as they were, who happened to be -- have relatives that were committing terrorist acts. And his position was, well, we should know about this and pass it on to the White House which he did.
You followed up the context in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He was well wired into this group. Told the White House everything he knew. But at that time, frankly, the White House was looking at possible covert action in Iran. Even lethal covert action. And this was sort of kept on a back burner. So it gets very murky and we can't blame this detective.
HARLOW: What about you, Bob? I mean, all the time that you spent in the field, CIA operative, when it comes to keeping those contacts, keeping your list of sources, what is the protocol when one leaves the CIA?
BAER: Well, when you leave the CIA, you're not supposed to go back and get in touch with your assets. You want to, you know, give them on -- give them to the next guy. But, you know, even when you're in, I'll say this again, you want to keep in touch with the dark side. And it's up to Washington and the lawyers back there what they do with the information. For instance, should we have passed it to Iran before these bombs went off?
This was a very violent group, by the way. They killed women and children and attacked buses and the rest of it. So this is, again, very murky area.
HARLOW: Are you -- we have to go quickly, but are you surprise that we haven't heard any reaction from the intelligence community yet?
BAER: Not now. I mean, the Iranians are going to be furious about this. You can count on it that Tehran is blanket covered with this story because they're saying, look, the United States was involved in terrorism. This is not going to do us any good with Iran.
HARLOW: All right, Bob Baer, appreciate the expertise on this one. Thank you.
Coming up, Kenneth Bae now home after being held captive in North Korea for two years. Moments after he landed he spoke with the media.
Ahead, we're going to discuss what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KENNETH BAE, AMERICAN RELEASED BY NORTH KOREA: It's been amazing two years. I learn a lot. I grew a lot.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARLOW: Freed American Kenneth Bae now back on American soil. Moments after he landed last night he described his two years as a prisoner in North Korea like this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BAE: It's been amazing two years. I learn a lot. I grew a lot. Lost a lot of weight. In a good way. But I am standing strong because of you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARLOW: Joining me now, Michael Daley, he's a special contributor for the "Daily Beast."
You heard this, I heard this. He also said thank you to all of the people around the world who were rooting for him, helping him. He thanked the government of North Korea for letting him go. But I think hearing those comments certainly stood out to some people saying it's been an amazing experience I learned a lot. Granted, he has just been released from two years of hard labor.
What is your reaction to that?
MICHAEL DALY, SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT, THE DAILY BEAST: My reaction is that you shouldn't put a guy in front of cameras until two weeks after he --
HARLOW: I was very surprised he spoke.
DALY: -- stopped being traumatized. It's easy for us to go and look at this guy as minimizing it or maybe he got cushy treatment or maybe, you know, he's deluded. I mean, the fact is he must have been terrified.
HARLOW: Absolutely.
DALY: The whole world was surprised that he was released. Well, guess who was more surprised than us? Him. And all of a sudden, you know, you're sitting in North Korea, you got to figure you're not going to make it out alive. Fifteen years there hard labor. You figure that's it. Next thing you know --
HARLOW: And his health was deteriorating. DALY: Right, he's got to figure it's over. Next thing you know he's
in an airplane with the head of American intelligence?
(LAUGHTER)
HARLOW: For hours and hours and hours. Lands at midnight Eastern Time.
DALY: Correct.
HARLOW: And I was very surprised that he went in front of the cameras.
DALY: Yes. I mean, personally if he was, you know, my relative, I would have gone off to a Holiday Inn for a week.
HARLOW: And we know the family has said, you know, we want our privacy and, you know.
DALY: Right.
HARLOW: That he certainly is not doing interviews right now. However, Kenneth Bae's sister, Terri, who has been very outspoken on his behalf trying to get him out talked to our Ana Cabrera tonight. And I want you to listen first to what she said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TERRI CHUNG, KENNETH BAE'S SISTER: He went there because he wanted to contribute to their economy. And he wanted to -- you know, he wanted to connect with the people. And he does -- he has a love of that. So I think he still want -- and, you know, he still wants that connection and he still wants, you know, to see the country and the people thrive and to be happy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARLOW: I think that's a very important point. A care for the people of North Korea.
DALY: Right.
HARLOW: Not necessarily the regime. So in those comments, do you think he could possibly have been saying something also about the people of North Korea?
DALY: Well, maybe he, in that camp, saw some remarkable people who were surviving in terrible circumstances.
HARLOW: Yes.
DALY: And that could be very inspiring. I mean, you could be, you know, in terrible circumstances and see somebody do something and you can walk away saying that's the most amazing thing I ever saw. And you know he can be uplifted by that.
HARLOW: I think that's important because we know he took like some 15 trips to North Korea.
DALY: Right.
HARLOW: Bringing tours there. And the people there, clearly according to his sister, meant a lot to him. All -- go ahead.
DALY: We're talking about the Berlin Wall coming down, I mean, that's a wall that's like 10 times the Berlin Wall. And the people on the other side of that wall are suffering terribly. But maybe along with suffering terribly, he saw some noble things.
HARLOW: Also, we know his religion is very important to him and his family.
DALY: Right.
HARLOW: His family went to church this morning. So I wonder what your perspective is on that, in sort of having some unique sense of peace in terms of finally, finally coming home, getting to be with his family?
DALY: Well, he may feel the prayers were answered.
HARLOW: Yes.
DALY: I mean, that may also make him feel uplifted.
HARLOW: And his family talks a lot about that.
DALY: You know, and if you feel that God has delivered you here, what are you going to do, complain? I mean, the other thing is, he may have had a couple of roommates he's thinking about back at the camp. And they may say, this guy's best friend. And, you know, if he starts complaining about the bosses over there, that might not be so good for his pals.
HARLOW: You know what, all such good points to put that in perspective.
Thank you, Michael. Good to have you on this evening.
DALY: Thank you. Nice to see you.
HARLOW: Good to be with you.
DALY: Coming up next in the NEWSROOM President Obama entering his last two years as president. If we do not see major compromises with the Republican Congress, will his legacy be two years of success and six years of gridlock? Will it be all
gridlock? What will happen?
We'll see. Next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARLOW: President Obama will spend his final two years in office battling with the Republican-controlled Congress. He's also entering the phase of his term when many presidents really begin to focus on their history. Their legacy.
Let's talk about all of that with an expert in that and the political challenges that they face. How he got to this position, et cetera. We're going to talk about it with Princeton University historian, Julian Zelizer.
Thank you for being here. You're also the author of the book, "The Fierce Urgency of Lyndon Johnson, Congress and the Battle for the Great Society."
Thank you for coming in.
Thank you.
HARLOW: Let's talk about the midterm elections. The president, you know, said in this interview on CBS this morning the buck stops with me. I think he certainly took some responsibility for the losses.
Do you -- do you think he's taking the right amount of responsibility for this? Or do you think it is the gridlock that he also pointed to that is equally to blame?
PROF. JULIAN ZELIZER, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY HISTORIAN: It's both. Look, Republicans ran a campaign that primarily revolved around President Obama. That was the theme. You're like Obama. That's what they said. Then the Democrats --
(CROSSTALK)
HARLOW: And then many Democrats distanced themselves.
ZELIZER: Right. And it registered. So it's out there in the electorate. But Americans are also tired of the gridlock which is about the Republicans as well. So both things are happening at once. And I think both parties are trying to figure out politically what do we do in the next two years to do well.
HARLOW: Because the landscape, the map of the seats that are up in the next two years is very, very different and tougher for Republicans than it was this time around.
When you look at what the president said also in his interview this morning that I found very interesting, Bob Schieffer asked him, do you like politics? Do you like politicians? Because there have been many that have criticized the president and said that he's too isolated and then not reaching, extending a hand out enough.
What did you make of that?
ZELIZER: Well, it's a big question about President Obama. Does he actually enjoy the political part of his job? He, himself, admitted he often thinks the right answers are enough and he's learned that that's not enough, that he has to be out there campaigning, fighting, and setting the agenda and making his arguments. And I'm not sure he's fully comfortable with the job that he has in that respect.
HARLOW: You know, it's interesting, you wrote recently, quote, "Obama campaigned in poetry and continued far too often to govern the same way. And that approach repeatedly failed to yield results." What do you mean?
ZELIZER: Well, I think he's a great orator. And I do think he has many ideas that are important, but it gets back to what we're talking about. Sometimes he was not willing to get engaged in the kind of hardball political fights that are necessary in Washington.
HARLOW: So what can -- two years left.
ZELIZER: Not a lot.
HARLOW: Two years is -- well, you can look at it as not a lot.
ZELIZER: Right.
HARLOW: Or you can look at it as plenty of time to work together.
ZELIZER: Well, plenty of time to work together or executive power. And that's something he's been hinting at. That's the aggressive move to deal with immigration, to deal with climate change. Not through Capitol Hill, but to use the power of the presidency. I don't know if he will, but he's hinting --
HARLOW: So what happens if he does go it alone?
ZELIZER: Well, he can get things done. He can make progress on policy. It will fuel the political fire. If he does that on immigration, he'll have even more intense and stronger anti- immigration forces develop on Capitol Hill, but he'll get policies so --
HARLOW: If this were the end of the president's term.
ZELIZER: Yes.
HARLOW: Well, let's say before the midterm election results, right, I mean, how do you think President Obama would be remembered?
ZELIZER: He has the potential to be remembered well. He has a lot of policies on the table. What we don't know is how they'll do. Will the health care act not just survive this new Supreme Court challenge?
HARLOW: Right.
ZELIZER: But will it thrive? What will happen in the Middle East 10 years from now based on this?
HARLOW: Historically speaking, when we look back and we remember presidents, what are they most remembered for in the long run? Not just the near term.
ZELIZER: Their policy. It's not about approval ratings, it's not about whether they were liked or not liked. What did they do? What were the policies they put into place and how did those change the nation?
HARLOW: Yes. Two more years left. I think it's plenty of time. But you can also see it as not that much time left. We'll see what happens.
Julian Zelizer, thank you for coming in tonight.
ZELIZER: Thank you.
HARLOW: We appreciate it. Good to be with you.
ZELIZER: Thank you.
