Return to Transcripts main page

At This Hour

Vikings Reverse Decision on Peterson; Obama Due to Speak about Combating ISIS; Central Command Briefs Obama on Executing ISIS Strategy

Aired September 17, 2014 - 11:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: We are awaiting President Obama to speak @THISHOUR. He's at the U.S. Central Command headquarters in Tampa. Right now he's meeting with top military advisors. He is due to discus U.S. options for combating the ongoing threat from ISIS. We are expected to hear the president reiterate his promise not to put U.S. military troops backed on the ground in Iraq. However, just yesterday, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said he will continue to consider that option if necessary, though he admitted the president has the final call.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Other news, the Minnesota Vikings have reversed their reversal. They now say Adrian Peterson will not take part in any team activities until his child abuse case is resolved. So if you're keeping score at home, he was not allowed to play this last weekend against the Patriots. Then yesterday, the team said he will play this weekend against the New Orleans Saints. Now they say he won't play, not until, well, whatever the case is resolved. The team released this statement saying, "While we were trying to make a balanced decision yesterday, after further reflection we have concluded that this resolution is best for the Vikings and Adrian."

PEREIRA: NFL star, Reggie Bush, defending Peterson, using himself as a bit of an example. Bush says he received, quote/unquote, "whoopings" as a child and plans to discipline his one-year-old daughter same way.

Listen to the Detroit Lions' running back's controversial comment he made on the radio in New York.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REGGIE BUSH, DETROIT LIONS PLAYER (voice-over): I got what we call whoopings with belt and stuff like that. For me growing up it was normal.

I'll most definitely discipline my daughter. I have a one-year-old daughter I definitely will try to -- obviously, not leave bruises on her but I the discipline her harshly depending on what the situation -- again what the situation is.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Discipline a one-year-old for what? Being one? Complicated.

PEREIRA: She's looking at dad like what?

BERMAN: Then there are the sponsors who are now backing off because of Adrian Peterson. Castrol Oil, which used the star running back in Edge commercials. The Radisson Hotel chain, which suspended its team sponsorship and said it would evaluate the facts and circumstances. Peterson's other sponsor, Nike, said late last week it would stand by the athlete for the time being.

So this begs the question, what are the Vikings doing? Why these radical reversals? What is the NFL doing in terms of damage control?

Joining us from Washington is crisis management expert, Eric Dezenhall.

Eric, I want to leave aside the issue of abuse for a moment because we all can agree abuse is awful and something the NFL should figure out a way to deal with a lot better than they are. But let's talk about how they're handing the situation, the damage control, because it seems to be all over the place right now.

ERIC DEZENHALL, CRISIS MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT: Well, look, the central problem of crisis management right now is this desire to play Whack-a- Mole with the media and internet. This impulse to respond to every single catalyst. And the problem is this leads to very premature decision making and bad decision making before you know what the fact pattern is and what the whims are. The most famous example in recent years of why this is bad is if you remember the post office a few years ago made assurances that the mail supply was safe, and have the very place they held the news conference, the next day two people died of anthrax at that location. What is my point? My point is that this desire to make immediate announcements to please the media and the Internet is really 30-year-old logic. You can't do that in this day and age and you can't respond to everything because it leads to what you've got now.

PEREIRA: Fear-based decision making, right? You're reacting instead of having a plan in place. To be fair, this is an unprecedented set of circumstances.

(CROSSTALK)

PEREIRA: And we were talking about the fact that this is -- we've never seen a season start so -- in such rocky footing.

DEZENHALL: Well, you know, again, one of the things that I think the media have trouble understanding and that people in my business are not always very honest about is the fact is we are not, when you're in the middle of a crisis, in control. We do not control the media. We do not control social media. And the fundamental swindle of crisis management is if you have the right plan and you hire the right guy, you can control these things beyond your reach. You really, really can't.

But if you look at what is the solution to a lot of this? I would suggest there's three components with what the NFL is dealing with. One is hard tactics, firing people, suspending people. If you look at how the NFL is dealing with the issue of injuries, they're changing the fundamental rules of the game. This is very, very tangible. Number two, soft tactics. You've seen, in the last few days, the NFL is bringing in experts on domestic violence and women's issues. We don't know yet what dividends that will yield but those types of soft tactics matter. Third is the variable of time. The question that 100 percent of journalists ask me in crises is, can the NFL survive. Can Toyota survive? The answer is absolutely, just not before the next commercial break. And the cycle that will we are living in, everybody wants these things to resolve as quickly as the attacks commence. And the truth is, most popular companies and institutions do survive, they just don't survive immediately.

BERMAN: Eric, finish this sentence for me. "The NFL will be in even bigger trouble if --"

DEZENHALL: Oh, I think what has changed the world is video. 30 years ago -- yeah, it's these things. 30 years ago, if somebody made an allegation, you said it's not true, you denied it, you stonewalled. Now with everybody carrying their own network in their own pocket, it's very, very difficult to dodge. And wherever you hear this cliche that drives me crazy, "Oh, get ahead of the story," how do you get ahead of billions of smart phones capturing all this stuff? You don't.

PEREIRA: Eric Dezenhall, very good point. Social media changes the game.

We should point out you have a book called "Glass Job: Managing Fragile Reputations in an Age of Instant Scandal." The perfect man to talk about this.

BERMAN: This guy knows what he's talking about.

PEREIRA: Thanks, Eric.

DEZENHALL: Thanks for having me. Bye-bye.

BERMAN: Ahead for us @THISHOUR, President Obama due to speak soon from CENTCOM about the danger of ISIS and how the U.S. plans to fight the threat in Iraq and Syria, as well as here in the U.S.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PEREIRA: In just a few moments time, we are expecting to hear from President Obama. He's in Tampa at CENTCOM headquarters meeting with his top advisors for options about fighting ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

BERMAN: We expect the president might very well reiterate the claim he has made again and again and again that he will not send U.S. combat troops back to Iraq to fight in combat situations on the ground. However, speaking to Senators yesterday, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said that he doesn't take any options for asking for troops off the table.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN. MARTIN DEMPSEY, CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: My view at this point is that this coalition is the appropriate way forward. That I believe will prove true. But if it fails to be true and if there are threats to the United States, then I, of course, would go back to the president and make a recommendation that may include the use of U.S. military ground forces.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PEREIRA: Joining us, CNN political commentators, Reihan Salam and Sally Kohn.

Good to have you both here.

Of course, we know the Pentagon said, wait, let us clarify it, that's hypothetical. Obviously, General Dempsey would present all available options on the president, who has the ultimate call.

But, Reihan, my question is, this feels like mixed messaging, and does it indicate a lack of cohesion behind the scenes and confusion behind the scenes?

REIHAN SALAM, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No, I don't think it does. I think the president is very firm that he doesn't want ground troops in Iraq. But it's also true that it's the chairman of the Joint Chiefs to give advice and to do that openly and honestly. When, under President Bush, when General Shinseki said we're going to need possibly hundreds of thousands of troops in Iraq, he was doing his job, and that ought to be taken seriously. But the president is the commander-in-chief and the buck stops with him.

BERMAN: That's a good point. It may be that everyone is telling the truth saying what they think but the truth might be confusing.

Sally, I want to bring you in here because it's interesting. You are opposed to U.S. involvement in that region against ISIS, military involvement.

SALLY KOHN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Military involvement, yes.

BERMAN: Of any kind?

KOHN: I mean, look, of any kind. This is an interesting thing where it's the same kind of hypothetical that Dempsey walked into. Do I think that U.S. bombing ISIS simply inflames what is a political problem makes it a deeper -- tries to solve it with military solutions when we needs political solutions, and it risks not only inciting more terrorists hating America but it risks inciting blowback from ISIS? Yes, I do. And that's why it worries me.

BERMAN: As Christiane Amanpour used a phrase that stuck with me, which is to say, if you don't take action of some kind, are you de facto accepting this caliphate in the region?

KOHN: I think we as a country have to step back and have an important conversation about where we put the threshold for U.S. military action. It used to be we didn't not risk treasure, American lives, and put our military life on the line unless there was a direct threat. Remember, Roosevelt wanted to get into World War II. He was jonesing to get in. He didn't do it until Pearl Harbor was attacked. George W. Bush moved the ball on that. He said the "threat of an attack" was sufficient. I think President Obama, without us discussing it, has moved the ball further. It's the "possible threat." There is no current, direct, imminent threat that's been detected, but the possibility of the "what ifs" somehow are enough to justify military action.

SALAM: I don't think President Obama is doing this arbitrarily. One of his core beliefs he's articulated is that we live in a globally integrated world. That creates enormous opportunities and also real dangers. And so I think when you're looking at the world in 1939, 1941, and what have you, that was a very different world in terms of threats to the homeland, where they emerge and how quickly they can emerge.

PEREIRA: Quickly, last question to both of you, very quickly. Seven weeks away and counting to midterm elections. All of this conversation, all of this information, the announcement from Bratton about the threats, what the president is talking about, laying out his plan at CENTCOM today, this is all in the back of the minds of every candidate, every person that is running for office.

KOHN: There is no question that this is viewed. And unfortunately, that both Republicans thumping the president, trying to thump the drums of war and berate the president for not acting sooner, and now berating him even if he is acting, as well as the president's decision to act, there's no question that all of this happens within the landscape of politics, which, by the way, is really sad.

SALAM: But Americans tend to rally around the flag. That's what generally happens. How that plays out politically, we'll see. But that tends to happen when off military conflict.

BERMAN: Congress could take a vote. They could vote --

(CROSSTALK)

BERMAN: whether or not to take mill tar tear action if they chose to which they probably won't.

Reihan Salam, Sally Kohn, thank you for being with us.

PEREIRA: Good to see you.

BERMAN: Ahead for us @THISHOUR, we'll have comments from the president. He will be speaking at CENTCOM in Florida about his strategy to battle ISIS. We'll take you there when he starts speaking.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: We're just a short time away from the president who will be speaking about the battle, his plan to fight ISIS. The president is at U.S. Central Command right now in Tampa, Florida. This is a live picture right now. CENTCOM responsible for military activity across the Middle East and Central and South Asia, where a lot of fighting has been over the last several years. That includes Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria. The president is intensifying an operation right now to destroy ISIS militants.

PEREIRA: The president's spent a good portion of the morning meeting with commanders at the U.S. Central Command. They've been briefing him on how they'll execute his strategy against ISIS. Stick with CNN. We'll bring you the president's comments when they happen live. We'll keep an eye on that picture.

But right now, we have some guests with us, very special guests. Let's bring in Congressman Adam Schiff, a senior member of the House Intelligence Committee; and, of course, our military analyst, retired Lieutenant Colonel Rick Francona.

Gentlemen, thank you so much for joining us. I know both of you will be watching and listening anxiously.

Colonel, we'll start with you.

We know and we've talked about this so much about the president's assertion that he does not want to have, quote, unquote, "boots on the ground." And you've talked about the importance of having military support in addition to the air strikes. Yet yesterday, Martin Dempsey says that, if need be, he's willing to go to the president and say, the plan has changed, we need boots on the ground. This seems to me -- and you can tell me -- that's the way military operations have to happen. If they see a need on the ground, they go back to the president and talk about what needs to be done now.

LT. COL. RICK FRANCONA (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: General Dempsey was doing his job. He did exactly what he was supposed to do. He tells the president what he thinks needs to be done. If it requires ground troops, he goes to the president and says, sir, I think we need to change what we're doing and introduce U.S. forces in the area. And the president makes the decision. This is how it's supposed to work. Dempsey would have been derelict had he not gone to the president --

(CROSSTALK)

PEREIRA: You see the optics makes it seems there is confusion to some that maybe don't have an insider's view.

FRANCONA: No. Well, maybe. But this is how it works. Everybody makes their recommendations to the president and the president makes the decision. Once that decision is made, then everybody salutes smartly and carries out the orders.

BERMAN: Congressman, the colonel brought up the issue of doing your job. On the subject of doing your job, the Constitution says it is Congress' job to declare war. I know you've actually -- you're in the process of submitting a resolution to the House right now. You want a vote on the military action, not just funding to arm the moderate rebels in Syria. You want a full vote on military action. Why is that so important to you?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF, (D), CALIFORNIA: I think it's a constitutional obligation. Congress doesn't have to sit and wait to be asked by the president. This is our institutional duty. The president has made clear this is a war effort. It's likely to go on for years. That is quintessentially the type of declaration that the president can ask or make, but it's the Congress' power within the Constitution to do legally. And so I think that the underpinnings of using this old resolution, this 2001 authorization to use force are very tenuous. And the fact that we have elections pending isn't any excuse to be derelict in our duty. So I've not only introduced an authorization but have been calling for a vote in the Congress.

BERMAN: Now, that is not the vote that will take place as soon as today. The vote that will take place today is for funding to arm and train the so-called moderate Syrian rebels who the U.S. hopes will fight against ISIS inside Syria. Is this a measure you will vote for, sir?

SCHIFF: It is a measure I will vote for and it's something I've wrestled with, as I know all the members of the House and Senate have been. At the end of the day, it comes down to this for me to this, I recognize ISIL is a real threat. If they're allowed to consolidate these territorial gains, it will be a platform that they will use to attack us. And we also have these many thousands of foreign fighters who are going to pose a long-term challenge to us. It's a threat that has to be dealt with. The president has laid out a strategy to do that. And this funding of the opposition is one component. And I have to concur that we can't solve this problem through the air alone. And I feel very strongly, as I think the country does, that I don't want to see the introduction of American ground forces. If that's the case, we will have to rely on Iraqi Special Forces, Kurdish forces and, yes, Syrian rebel forces as well.

(CROSSTALK)

PEREIRA: You were reacting to his comments. I saw you. Don't hold back.

(LAUGHTER)

FRANCONA: I agree with the Congressman in theory. The problem is the people we want to train in Syria, the Free Syrian Army, have already said they're not interested in fighting ISIS. They're interested in overthrowing Bashar al Assad. And the colonel in charge there said, I can't do this unless I get an assurance from the United States that we're going to overthrow Bashar. Are we going to make a deal with the Free Syrian Army that if you help us fight ISIS, we'll help you overthrow Bashar? It gets very complicated.

(CROSSTALK)

FRANCONA: But if you have boots on the ground, these are the guys you want. They're capable of doing it and they can pass the vetting process. But it's a lot of money and it's something we should have been doing all along. People will argue that. But we have to -- PEREIRA: Tricky proposition.

FRANCONA: We have to make a deal with the Free Syrian Army. Right now, we don't have a deal.

BERMAN: Colonel Francona, Congressman Adam Schiff, great to have you with us. Appreciate it.

PEREIRA: We're going to take a short break. We're waiting for the president, speaking from Tampa at the U.S. Central Command. We'll take you there when he starts speaking. We'll take you there, live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: We have our eye on Florida right now where U.S. Central Command, the headquarters there, President Obama set to speak any minute. He'll be discussing the strategy to battle ISIS.

PEREIRA: He's been briefed by top military advisers. Love to be a fly on the wall in that conversation. Stick with CNN. We'll bring those comments from the president to you live.

Thank you for joining us @THISHOUR. I'm Michaela Pereira.

BERMAN: I'm John Berman.

"LEGAL VIEW" with Ashleigh Banfield starts right now.