Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

DHS Funding Battle; Jihadi John Unmasked; GOP Presidential Race Examined; FCC Votes on Net Neutrality Rules

Aired February 26, 2015 - 15:30   ET

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

ANA CABRERA, CNN ANCHOR: Tit for tat. Democrats versus Republicans, here we go again. Now, the speaker of the House, John Boehner, did have a response to all this. Let's listen to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: Put it on the floor, you are going to kill it; you want to vote on it? Have you had this discussion?

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: When I make decisions I'll let you know.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: OK. Let's get out to Dana Bash. She was there during that press conference with John Boehner.

Really didn't get much out of that. I mean, basically he kept on passing the buck to the Senate saying they're waiting their turn. Senate has to deal with this first, Dana.

DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right. And John Boehner's inimitable way, that's what he said. But what is going on right now since that press conference just a few hours ago is in fact if you look at the Senate floor, the Senate is moving forward. John Boehner knew that when he had the press conference. But not only is it moving forward, some of the most ardent conservatives, ardent supporters of not funding the homeland security department without also cutting off the president's ability to implement his executive action with regard to immigration, they are backing down on the tactics. Not on the substance but on the tactics. And Jeb Sessions is one of the people on the Senate floor saying he supports the idea of trying to stop the president, but he's not going to hold up funding for the department of homeland security right now.

So that is interesting. His brethren in the house, they are going to meet in a couple of hours about 5:00 eastern to figure out what are going to do next. It sounds as though a very likely scenario is that they are going to kick the can down the road one more time, probably at least begin to talk about the idea of a what's called a continuing resolution, a stopgap measure, to make sure that the department does not run out of money at midnight tomorrow night while they try to figure out on the Republican side how to fund the department while also sticking to their promise to fight the president on some of the things they disagree with him the most on. Of course, immigration is right up there -- Ana.

CABRERA: All right, Dana Bash again watching the drama unfolds on Capitol Hill once again. Just less than 12 hours now until that deadline comes around. We'll see what happens. We appreciate your reporting, Dana.

We'll take a quick break and be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: It's a historic day for the Internet and for all of you who use the Internet. I'm talking about some new rules designed to keep the net neutral. The FCC just voted to preserve equal opportunity for Internet speed and access to website giving government more authority over the information superhighway. You might be asking what the heck is net neutrality. We've got you covered. Our Brian Stelter explains net neutrality and why it should matter to you.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BRIAN STELTER, CNN HOST, RELIABLE SOURCES (voice-over): What is net neutrality? It has nothing to do with a volleyball or tennis court. The net refers to the Internet, something that's become as necessary as water and power for most of us. The neutrality part is about keeping the net the way it is today. It's a set of rules the FCC approved in 2010 to prevent speed traps on the information superhighway. In other words, speeding up access to some sites and slowing down access to others or blocking certain sites entirely.

So are these rules a bad thing? It depends who you ask. The companies that deliver your internet, like Comcast, Verizon and AT&T, has spent millions in lobbying money to get rid of net neutrality, arguing that having the government micromanage their business is not good for them or their consumers.

On the other side are internet giants like facebook and Google, streaming services like Netflix, and President Obama. They all argue the Internet is a public good and should be regulated like one. They also say the companies that only pipelines can play favorites. For example, content provider like Netflix is in direct competition with Comcast, which owns NBC universal and controls access to the internet for more than 20 million customers. You can imagine a scenario where NBC might want to speed up streams of its shows and slow down streams of its rival Netflix. Now, Netflix can afford to pay for a fast lane. They make $4 billion a year. But the next Netflix, some awesome start-up, can't.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CABRERA: All right. Let's bring in senior media correspondent Brian Stelter, the host of CNN's "RELIABLE SOURCES."

So Brian, of course the major telecom companies are going to challenge this court ruling, I imagine. How long until these rules could go into effect? STELTER: There's a possibility of lawsuits from companies like

Verizon and Comcast. Comcast put out a statement about a few minutes ago actually saying we're going have to look at what our investment plans will be with respect to broadband going forward. Because companies like Comcast and Verizon have said, we may not be able to make the investments required in broadband if these rules and regulations are put into effect. Others say that's just bluster and these net regulations are necessary to protect against those practical and potential issues I was describing in the explainer there. The idea maybe there could be fast lanes and slow lanes should be stopped by today's results.

CABRERA: Is this going to limit what we can get online now?

STELTER: Well, it really is intended to focus on access to the Internet, not to the content of the Internet. That's very important to say because there's been some rhetoric around this, I think that's been overblown.

This about making sure that the access you get at home in Colorado and the access I get here in New York is the same, is equal, that we can all have fast mobile broadband and wire broadband. And we saw President Obama who supported this a few months ago come out with a tweet this afternoon signed with his initials, so we believed it is from him. He says the FCC just voted to keep the Internet open and free. That's the power of millions of making their voices heard. Thank you.

So that's his tweet about this. He says he's crediting the people who wrote petitions to the FCC, signed petitions, et cetera, all supporting this idea. There was some backlash though especially from the right. This was basically a Democratic-Republican vote down the middle 3-2 with the two Republican commission members voting against it.

So it did become pretty politicized. It seems to me most people around the country, they just want their internet to work, they just want it to be fast, and they don't want it to be impeded or harmed in any way.

Weirdly, the government's put rules in place hoping to stop harm in the future. I know that can seem counter intuitive, but so far today, that seems what they've done.

CABRERA: But it's the critics of big government who are really just drawing a line with principle of all of that.

STELTER: That's right. You know, they're saying that land line phones the way that land line phones, the way that landline phones are regulated utility. That should not be applied to broadband. Verizon came out with a statement that's written like you saw a typewriter from a 1930. They are saying 1930s laws should not be applied to 2015.

And that's an understandable critique. But I think (INAUDIBLE) advocates would say is they can't get Congress to pass new laws so the FCC is doing it through existing laws instead applying this old to a new medium. Netflix account doesn't slow down or speed up today. It's about trying to protect against any dangers down the road. This basically puts a legal framework in place to try to stop those sorts of dangers down the road.

CABRERA: All right, Brian Stelter, thanks for helping us all understand. We appreciate it.

Up next, back to our top story, the identity of ISIS killer jihadi John revealed.

More on that when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: New video shows just how destructive ISIS terrorists may be, not only to people but to history. We'll explain more about that in a moment.

But first I want to return to our top story. We now know the name of the masked terrorist, jihadi John, seen threatening the enemies of is as he stands next to the captives ISIS later beheads.

Two U.S. officials and two congressional sources are telling us the man's name is Mohammed Emwazi, born in Kuwait, raised in middle class family his former home.

Let's turn to CNN's Nic Robertson in London and our Ben Wedeman in Erbil, Iraq.

Nic, to you first, I know you've been digging on this guy. What is the latest?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: The latest that we have is he is a young man, 26 years old, got a university education here in London. 2009 as a graduation gift from his computer studies course that he'd undertaken his family gave him a trip to Tanzania that was supposed to be safari trip.

He came back to that trip and complained to an activist organization here called Cage that when he landed in Tanzania, Tanzania authorities detained him. And then when he was sent back to Britain, he was interviewed by MI-5 British intelligence service and counterterrorism officials who accused him of wanting to go and join Al-Qaeda affiliates in Somalia. They tried to recruit him for the British intelligence services. He said -- and this was something that went on over a number of years.

So the details that this organization Cage put forward is of a young man who was a nice young man, a quiet young man by their accounts, and they have no explanation why at the end of 2012-2013 he went to Syria and became such a radical jihadist.

And of course, the bit of information we don't have is why he came under the attention of the British intelligence services in the first place. And the reason we don't have that information at the moment is the police here, the metropolitan police in charge of counterterrorism here in London, they say they're not going to comment on the case of jihadi John while they have an active terror investigation. Lives are at stake. British government ultimately would one day like to bring jihadi John to trial in the U.K. for these alleged atrocities -- Ana.

CABRERA: I think a lot of people would like to see him in custody as well.

Ben, I know there are some new disturbing video. You're there in Iraq. And we are seeing video now of is terrorists destroying precious artifacts. What can you tell us about that?

BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Ana. This was a five-minute video that appeared on the internet this afternoon. It appears to show men in the Mosul museum.

First of all, toppling over a series of statues from their pedestals, they smashed to the floor. After that we see other men with sledge hammers breaking them into pieces. Then we see in a different location what appears to be a man using a drill to deface the famous winged bulls of Nineveh which date back to 700 B.C.

Now, during this video there's a man who's not identified who explains that the reason they're doing this is that these were statues and idols built or made by people many centuries ago who did not worship God. And he says that God has ordered us to destroy idols, even if they're worth billions of dollars.

However, when you look closely at this video, you can tell that not all of these artifacts, these statues are in fact original. Some of them appear to be made of plaster of Paris. Experts say the only clearly original piece there are those winged bulls of Nineveh.

Now, we did also had an opportunity today to speak to some sources in Mosul who tell us in addition to this vandalism, whether it's of real artifacts or replicas ISIS has sold hundreds of valuable items from that museum on to the international black market for antiquities -- Ana.

CABRERA: We have all wondered how ISIS is continuing to be financed. And perhaps that answers a small portion of that question.

Ben Wedeman and Nic Robertson, thanks to both of you for your great reporting.

Up next, with CPAC underway, we want to turn to Maryland. What's behind Governor Scott Walker's sudden rise in the polls? We have the conservative minds all meeting. We are going to break it down next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: Well, virtually every major Republican presidential contender is making his or her case as to why they should be elected to the White House next year. Hopefuls that have gathered at the banks of the Potomac River in Maryland are talking at the conservative political action conference. And we heard from New Jersey governor Chris Christie among the headliners who have taken the stage. We have Texas Senate Ted Cruz there, just wrapped up a little over an hour ago.

So I want to bring in CNN's chief political analyst, Gloria Borger, who is live there at CPAC.

All right, Gloria, who or what has stood out to you so far?

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, we are all waiting to hear from Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin, who as you know is running sort of first in the polls in Iowa and is very appealing to this conservative audience.

What was interesting about what we heard before, you know, we heard Governor Christie in a Q&A session with Laura Ingraham of FOX. And he sort of took on Jeb Bush by saying look, if you want an elite candidate and deals in the back room, you know, I'm not your guy. I'm up front. Who would he be talking about when he talked about an elite candidate, or when he was asked about his temperament as whether it's presidential, he said do you want someone who just gets questions that are pre-cleared and asked of him at events or do you want somebody who is willing to communicate directly with the American people? So that was interesting from Chris Christie. It's clear that he believes he's got to out-conservative Jeb in order to get this nomination.

CABRERA: And maybe out-conservative Scott Walker, because what you just said could apply to him. You mentioned that he is rising in the polls ahead of the Iowa caucus polling. He was near the top in Texas with recent polls at the university. And all of that despite the criticism of him last week that he was dodging questions, refusing to come out and make a strong statement about Mayor Giuliani's, you know, claim that the president doesn't love America. So maybe his strategy of being a little wishy-washy is working.

BORGER: Well, first of all, people in this room don't believe it's wishy-washy. People in this room like Scott Walker -- Scott Walker's response was fine with them and -- or his non-response, and you know, he is as are a lot of people here, turning this into sort of an anti- press issue.

I just had a meeting with a couple of Scott Walker's top aides and they believe and I believe they have some reason to believe this, that Walker is a candidate, new on the scene, doesn't look like been there, done that, somebody who is a proven governor, has won re-election, won a recall vote, shows he's got a spine, and they believe he can unify the Republican coalition because he's talking about economic reform, pension reform, collective bargaining. They are with him on that.

And you know, they also think that he can unite social conservatives around him. So when he comes to play on this stage in a little bit, I guarantee you he will be real popular here, and all of the other candidates, and I have to say, Ana, that this is a very good, interesting, large field of Republican candidates. I think all of them are taking Scott Walker very, very seriously.

But one of Rudy Giuliani's people said to me today look, remember, we were number one going into Iowa. How did that work out for us? Not so well.

CABRERA: I want to ask you about Hillary Clinton also, who again appeared in the news this week, made a first speech of the year, really. She's kind of been in hiding according to a lot of pundits. She is facing scrutiny as well because the Clinton foundation has apparently accepted a lot of money from these foreign donations when after her time as secretary of state. So should that be an element, you know, in the conversation, should she run for president? Could that hurt her?

BORGER: It will be. It obviously will be an element in the conversation. It is already an element in the conversation. Let me play a little bit for you what Republican potential presidential candidate Carly Fiorina had to say here at CPAC today about that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CARLY FIORINA, FORMER CEO, HEWLETT PACKARD: In the meantime, please accept and explain why we should accept that the millions and millions of dollars that have flowed into the Clinton foundation from foreign governments do not represent a conflict of interest.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BORGER: You know, I think that it raises the question of trust about the Clintons which is exactly what Republicans are going to do, all kinds of ethics issues. And you can be sure that any Republicans who run against Hillary Clinton is going to be talking about this again, Ana.

CABRERA: All right, Gloria Borger at CPAC, thanks so much.

That's going to do it for me. Thank you so much for staying with me. I'm Ana Cabrera.

We have "the LEAD" with Jake Tapper starts right now.