Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

Trump Accuses Obama of Wiretapping; Trump Signs New Travel Ban; Trump Travel Ban Now Excludes Iraq; Syria Remains on Trump's Travel Ban; International Condemnation, Concern After North Korea's Missile Launches. Aired 1:30-2p ET

Aired March 06, 2017 - 13:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


[13:30:00] JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANAYST: It is one of the basic rules of classified information in this country that the president of the United States on his own initiative can declassify anything. So President Trump, if he is aware of a FISA warrant, a FISA application that involves him that he thinks is inappropriate, tomorrow, he could issue an order that says this is declassified, and there's nothing anyone could do to stop it.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: He doesn't have to wait until tomorrow. He could do it today, even, if he wanted to.

TOOBIN: Fair point.

BLITZER: Thank you very much. Jeffrey Toobin is our senior legal analyst.

Still ahead, the travel ban, take two. Our panel will help sort out what's changed from the president's original travel ban ordered six weeks ago. Who will this one impact and what happens next? We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:35:05] BLITZER: Let's get back to our other big story today. The Trump administration releasing a newly revised travel ban, one that excludes Iraq from the list this time.

Let's discuss with our panel. Wajahat Ali is a lawyer, a writer, contributing -- contributor at "The New York Times." Laura Coates is a CNN legal analyst, former federal prosecutor. Gloria Borger is our chief political analyst.

Gloria, what about the time of this order? Six week's almost exactly to the original failed order.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Originally, we thought it would come last week, but then they heard perhaps they would not want to step on the president's good reviews after his address to the joint session of Congress. I believe they also had a lot of work to continue to do on this. And we see that, for example, Iraq is no longer on this travel ban because the case was made, at the highest levels, including by the secretary of state, and the highest levels from Iraq to the president that, in fact, they are our allies in terms of fighting ISIS. They have also changed a bunch of other things, and they're taking 10 days to implement it as opposed to having it implemented right away.

BLITZER: So, Laura, will the federal courts be nicer to part two than it was to part one?

LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I think Trump is hoping they will be. They probably will be because it's a much better written travel ban. The three areas they were lacking before was the issue of contemplating due process for people who had a right to be here because they were visa holders or permanent legal residents. You had the issue of the establishment clause. That old First Amendment hook that says you can't prefer a religion in this country or promote one. And the final one was justification. Why are the existing vetting measures insufficient to counter a threat to this country? Now you have those kinds of wrapped up with a bow at this point. But you still have the lingering issue of whether or not this was a pretext for discrimination against Muslim-Americans or Muslims around the world. If that's the case, you're going to have that same hurdle. But the other ones are not as slam-dunk against the administration.

BLITZER: You're a lawyer, Jihad. How do you see it?

WAJAHAT ALI, ATTORNEY, WRITER & CONTRIBUTOR, THE NEW YORK TIMES: A recovering attorney.

Look, a ham sandwich without mayonnaise is still a ham sandwich. And I realize, as a Muslim, I just made a ham analogy.

(LAUGHTER)

Just like the last one, like this one, I'll call it what it is, a Muslim ban. No need to engage in verbal --

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Tell us why most Muslims around the world are not impacted by the Muslims who live in Saudi Arabia or Egypt, the largest Arab country, or Indonesia, with the largest Muslim population, or even Pakistan.

ALI: What Laura mentioned, I'm going to go on intent. Donald Trump campaigned on specifically a permanent Muslim ban, which he then changed to a temporary Muslim ban. He also said extreme vetting of Muslims. He also said a registry for Muslims. And God bless Rudy Giuliani, of all people. I'm going to applaud Rudy Giuliani for the first time, who, when the first Muslim ban came out said Donald Trump came to him and said, I want to do the Muslim ban, show me the legal way to do it. The six countries are six Muslim-majority countries.

9/11 was cited today by DHS Secretary Kelly. Well, if you look at 9/11, for a second, 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, two from UAE, one from Egypt, one from Lebanon. None of those countries are mentioned on this ban, but Donald Trump has business dealings with three of those countries. So, look, it's ineffective. It's counterproductive. It's cruel. It

is a Muslim ban, and that's how it's being read by our Muslim allies all around the world.

BLITZER: The ACLU and other organizations already have been issuing statements saying they want to go to court.

COATES: And they will. The reason they will is because the justification prong I talked about, the idea that you could not make a bald assertion that national security, the statement alone, was somehow enough to get you over the legal hurdles. I know this administration often uses bald assertions to try to support their claims. In the courts, that's not going to be good enough.

Of course, one of the things they focus on today is that they have 300 or more people who are being currently investigated for counterterrorism activities. They were prior refugees entering this country. The court will look at that and could say that's a reason, but are these people entering when they were children. Were they radicalized someplace else?

ALI: What country?

COATES: What can the are they from? Was it one of these six? The courts have a requirement as an equal branch of the government to look behind that veil and say, is it good enough to pass constitutional muster? This is a better travel ban in terms of the Constitution. It's still not a slam-dunk.

BORGER: Don't you have to offer proof? If you say there are these 300 people, well, where are they? What countries were they from? Were they self-radicalized once they were here?

ALI: Or in Europe.

BORGER: Did they come over? Or in Europe? Or did they come over as radicals with the intent to commit terror? There are questions I would presume that would need to be answered where.

COATES: You know, the court did make clear that the president does have deference, is entitled to deference on the grounds of national security. No one should debate that point. What you debate is if it's a bald assertion, and you are claiming national security justification, and really a wink and a nod that it's really an unconstitutional act.

[13:40:04] ALI: If you look at even the intelligence analysis of Donald Trump's own intelligence team, the DHS intelligence analysis, which the A.P. got last week, they said country of citizenship is not a reliable indicator of a threat. It's unreliable. He goes against his own intelligence agency, goes against our own counterterrorism experts that say this is ineffective. It won't work. And, B, it will be counterproductive. Because what's number one recruitment of al Qaeda and ISIS. The West is at war with Islam. And a lot of people are seeing this as, again, a continued campaign against Islam. Not just radical Islam, but all Muslims. When zero foreign nationals -- you haven't mentioned this -- zero foreign nationals from these six Muslim-majority countries have committed a violent act of terror on this soil. Zero refugees, since 9/11, have committed acts of violent terror on the soil. Again, why do the Muslim ban?

BLITZER: We did get a statement from Lindsey Graham, Republican. He put it out on twitter just a little while ago. Let me read it: "Today's executive order will help achieve President Trump's goal of making us safer."

At least you have Lindsey Graham on board.

(LAUGHTER)

ALI: There you go. That's a win.

BORGEDR: That's good for Lindsey Graham. He isn't on board very much.

I think this is going to help him politically with some Republicans. It is not going to help him good politically, I do not believe, with Democrats --

ALI: No.

BORGER: -- who still have lots of questions about it, like the questions that you both raised here. I think they're going to want to see more evidence, which they believe is not forthcoming because it doesn't exist.

ALI: It's also a pivot from the news from last week.

BORGER: We know about these pivots. They come for a day, and then there is some other news.

BLITZER: Yeah. The six Muslim-majority countries that are listed in this new revised ban, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Iraq no longer on that.

Guys, thanks very, very much, Gloria, Laura and Wajahat.

We have a lot more coming up, including the president's revised executive order banning travelers from those six Muslim-majority countries. We're covering this story like only CNN can. We're going to go live to the region for international reaction and fallout right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:46:38] BLITZER: The new version of President Trump's travel ban does not include Iraq. That change follows an intense lobbying campaign on the part of the Iraqis that included a phone call between the Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al Abadi and President Trump. Even before details of the new travel ban were announced, Iraq's foreign ministry released a statement saying, in part -- I'm quoting now -- "This is considered an important step in the right direction that strengthens and reinforces the strategic alliance between Baghdad and Washington in many fields, in particular, the fight against terrorism."

Let's get some more international reaction to this latest development. CNN's Arwa Damon is in Istanbul, Turkey. Ben Wedeman is joining us from Irbil in northern Iraq.

Ben, listen to the secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, what he said just a little while ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REX TILLERSON, SECRETARY OF STATE: Iraq is an important ally in the fight to defeat ISIS. I want to express my appreciation to appreciate to Prime Minister al Abadi of Iraq for his positive engagement and support for implementing these actions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Ben, you are there. Tell us why the Iraqi government pushed so hard to get off the list.

BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: When the first order came out on the 27th of the January, Wolf, the Iraqis were enraged they were thrown in with countries that are enemies of the United States. Keeping in mind, of course, there are more than 5,000 U.S. military personnel here. In fact, when the day -- the Iraqi government -- or rather, the parliament voted to implement reciprocal measures against U.S. citizens. In fact, I was lined up to pick up my visa at Baghdad airport when that vote passed. It was not binding, but it really sent a clear message from Iraq that the people here were very upset. So after it came out, it was really the sole subject of conversation in the Iraqi media, in the social media. And so the Iraqis put a lot of pressure on the United States. In fact, when Defense Secretary Mattis went to Baghdad, that was also on the agenda. It is an airing of the Iraqi annoyance that they were included.

The Iraqis have reassured the Americans that they will implement ever more stringent measures for vetting people, screening people before they even get to the process of applying for visas to the United States. And we've seen just how precise they have information about their citizens. When we were right outside Mosul, when they were processing people who were fleeing from the city, they have a computer there. He looked at everybody's I.D.s, and they know everything. They basically see the whole intelligence file on every one of them. So there is a system in place. But it appears Iraqis are going to strengthen it even more -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Arwa, the ban still affects Syrian refugees, but now their ban is no longer indefinite, like it was in the original order. It's for 120 days, as is the situation for refugees from elsewhere. What do you expect the reaction to be to that change?

[13:50:03] ARWA DAMON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think it might give them a little bit of hope, Wolf, but that's only because the Syrian population is so desperate for anything that they will cling to even an inkling of a possibility. The problem is that even though Syrians are not indefinitely banned,

there are no guarantees they will be allowed in after the 120-day time period. Just imagine, if you are a Syrian family and you have already been probably waiting years to have even got that far -- because the process does take years and it is fairly lengthy -- to all of a sudden see this door shut face, maybe open again, now saying, well, we are going to look at reopening it in another four months or so, that is psychologically crushing on an individual and populations who frankly have been through much more than many of us can imagine.

For these six countries, for their nationals, this is basically the United States of America saying, we are not sure about you, we don't think we like you, so we are going to screen you a little bit more. It doesn't make sense to anyone, Wolf, because a lot of these people from these countries will say, we never did anything to America. It wasn't our nationals who carried out 9/11. The damage this does when it comes to how Muslims in the Middle East perceive America is very difficult to put into words, because so many people no matter how they view U.S. policies, still wanted to believe in this concept of the American dream. Now with this, even that is being taken away from him.

BLITZER: Arwa Damon, in Istanbul, Ben Wedeman in Irbil, Iraq, guys, thanks very much.

Still ahead, days after it promised retaliation over U.S. and South Korea military drills, North Korea fires ballistic missiles into the Sea of Japan.

Our Alexander Field is joining us live from Seoul.

ALEXANDRA FIELD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Wolf. And that ballistic missile launch isn't the only North Korean activity that's troubling U.S. officials. We will have more on that coming up right after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:56:16] BLITZER: International condemnation and concern over North Korea's launch of four ballistic missiles early this morning. Officials say the intermediate-range missiles traveled more than 600 miles toward the Sea of Japan. Three them landed inside Japan's exclusive economic zone, 200 nautical miles from its coastline. CNN also learned U.S. Intelligence is watching underground test site to see if they are preparing for another underground test.

CNN's Alexandra Field is joining us live from Seoul, South Korea.

Alexandra, what do officials think precipitated the launch of these four missiles?

FIELD: Well, look, Wolf, timing is everything. And the launch of these missiles doesn't come as a surprise to anyone in South Korea or frankly in the U.S. because it seems that this launch was clearly intended to send a message to the governments of both countries. This launch of these four missiles sent to the Sea of Japan, also known as the East Sea, comes at the same time that we are seeing the begin of the annual joint military exercises between South Korea and the U.S. These are very involved operations that last for about two months. And every year, these operations really rankle the North Koreans. Earlier this year, Kim Jong-Un again demanded these countries put a stop to these exercises, threatening action if they didn't. What you have seen now is this firing off of these four ballistic missiles at this time.

These exercises are seen by Pyongyang as evidence of preparation for an invasion. Kim Jong-Un has said he is protecting and defending his missile and his nuclear program because of what he sees as the U.S.'s hostile policy toward his country. If the past is a precedent, we can remind viewers North Korea took similar actions just a year ago, when these exercises kicked off also launching missiles at that time.

BLITZER: Alexandra, what does this launch tell us about North Korea's missile program.

FIELD: You do learn a little more about the program in that reclusive country every time you see a launch like this. What is interesting is the fact that this launch has come so quickly after the last launch, which was just a month ago, when the North Koreans tested a new intermediate range missile that's able to be fueled up a bit for quickly. Five months prior to that launch, there was another launch of three missiles. What the analysts are saying is it certainly appears that North Korea's missile program is becoming more sophisticated. They need less downtime between the launches. We have had 20 missile launches in the last year. That part is significant to the international audience.

What is also significant, Wolf, is the fact we have now seen two tests, one why they launched three missiles, this most recent, they launched four missiles. Some are saying this is a possible sign that they are preparing for how they could invade THAAD, the South Korean missile defense system set to be deployed later this year. So there's some theory here that North Koreans are looking at their capacity to multiple projectiles at the same time to see if that would be an effective way to get around the THAAD system -- Wolf?

BLITZER: Quickly, Alexandra, the reaction where you are, in Seoul, South Korea, only 30 miles or so from the DMZ.

FIELD: They look at this as business as usual to some extent. The missile launches are not uncommon. That's why you have got U.S. officials saying they expect to see more launch in the future. They are observing signs of activity at a launch site, and also, as you mentioned, at an underground nuclear site -- Wolf?

BLITZER: Alexandra Field, in Seoul, South Korea, thanks very much.

That's it for me. Thanks for watching. I'll be back at 5:00 eastern in "The Situation Room."

The news continues on CNN.

[14:00:11] DANA BASH, CNN ANCHOR: Good afternoon. I'm Dana Bash, in for Brooke Baldwin. Thanks for joining me.