Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Ray Rice Appeals Indefinite NFL Suspension; Vikings Ban Adrian Peterson; New York Man Accused of Supporting ISIS; U.S. Combat Troops in Iraq?; Interview with Congressman Jim Himes of Connecticut

Aired September 17, 2014 - 06:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Breaking news, chaos in the NFL. Star running back Adrian Peterson benched again. The Vikings now exempting him indefinitely. And Ray Rice officially appeals his suspension and asked Roger Goodell to stay out of it. We'll tell you if he'll get what he wants.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Breaking overnight, a New York store owner charged with recruiting for ISIS and planning to kill U.S. troops once they return home. This as the chairman of the joint chief says if conditions change he may recommend the need for U.S. combat boots on the ground.

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: Man hunt. A survivalist on the run in Pennsylvania accused of gunning down two state troopers. Police fear he wants to kill even more. He is armed, he is dangerous. We're live on the scene.

CUOMO: Your NEW DAY starts right now.

ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo, Kate Bolduan, and Michaela Pereira.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CUOMO: Good morning. Welcome to NEW DAY. It is Wednesday, September 17th, 6:00 in the east and we have breaking news coming out of the NFL -- a major about-face by the Minnesota Vikings, the team announcing its star running back, Adrian Peterson, on the exempt list.

That's a nice way of saying banned from all team activities, pending the outcome of his child abuse case. Peterson, you'll remember, had been deactivated when his indictment first became public, but then he was reinstated by the Vikings on Monday.

BOLDUAN: All of this as more major sponsors are weighing in as well. Look at the list there, McDonald's, Pepsi, Budweiser, all expressing concern about how the league is handling these issues.

Breaking also overnight, Ray Rice, formally appealing his indefinite suspension and asking that Roger Goodell, the commissioner, not be part of the proceedings. We're going to break all the developments down for you. Let's begin with Nischelle Turner. It's like one head-fake after another, Nischelle.

NISCHELLE TURNER, CNN ENTERTAINMENT CORRESPONDENT: You saw something coming, though, Monday during the Vikings general managers press conference, people were really peppering him. He did seem very uncomfortable. You may have seen a change coming.

But you know, we always say the market will drive decisions by big corporations and companies. We also said when the sponsors start asking questions and stepping back, we could see the NFL change its tune. And this morning the song sounds a little different.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TURNER (voice-over): It's a stunning reversal, star running back, Adrian Peterson benched again. The Minnesota Vikings announcing just hours ago that Peterson will be required to remain away from all team activities until his legal proceedings are resolved.

The team had previously announced that Peterson, who is facing a felony child abuse charge, would be allowed to practice this week and play on Sunday's game against the New Orleans Saints.

In a statement, the Vikings ownership now says after further reflection, we have concluded that this resolution is the best for the Vikings and for Adrian. We want to be clear -- we have a strong stance regarding the protection and welfare of children, and we want to be sure we get this right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The first thing that comes to my mind is we need to get this process started immediately.

TURNER: This news coming shortly after Peterson was dropped by one of his most significant sponsors, Castrol Motor Oil, the hotel chain, Radisson also suspending its sponsorship of the Vikings and advertising giant, Anheuser Busch weighing in saying it is, quote, "disappointed and increasingly concerned by the recent incidents involving players."

Also breaking this morning, the NFL Players Association formally filing its appeal of embattled runningback, Ray Rice's indefinite suspension. He was initially suspended for two games, but his penalty was increased once NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell saw a video of Rice knocking out his then-fiancee.

The union arguing that Rice cannot be punished twice for the same action when all the facts were available. The union also asking NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, to recuse himself from the case.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Obviously there's an issue with player conduct like you've been referring to. And maybe it's time to take that out of the commissioner's hands and put it into a neutral arbitration process where there can be a fair process for everybody involved.

(END VIDEOTAPE) TURNER: Now we should say going back to the Peterson case, his attorney, Rusty Hardin, says quote, "Adrian never intended to harm his son and deeply regrets the unintentional injury. Adrian Peterson has also defended himself saying that, quote, "I am not a perfect parent, but I am without a doubt, not a child abuser" -- Chris.

CUOMO: This is a very twisted situation, Nischelle, because you have a guy being punished more harshly in the eyes of the public. In a better situation, even though he's got a case against them. So it's very complicated.

Let's break it down. We have former NFL agent and professor of sports management at NYU, Bob Boland, and Giants legend, George Martin, a former president of the NFL Players Association. So some good perspective here.

Right off the bat, George, right move?

GEORGE MARTIN, FORMER NFL PLAYER: Right move. But in the wrong sequence, had they done this initially and let the legal system run its course and play itself out, I think we would have had less controversy surrounding it.

However, they came out in support of Adrian initially and they've reinstated him back on the team. Now they're reversing it, and it seems eerily similar to what Roger Goodell has been done all along, which to me denotes dysfunction.

CUOMO: Why is he doing it, new information or new information from the sponsors?

ROBERT BOLAND, FORMER NFL AGENT: I think new information from the sponsors and that's the challenge here. You want to be sensitive to your sponsors' concerns, but sitting Peterson generate a grievance and that's another challenge. Does it fix anything? The about-face is a challenge here.

CUOMO: The about-face is a challenge, maybe too extreme. George, any chance that Adrian Peterson has played his last game as a Viking?

MARTIN: I don't think there's any chance of that. I think that they will reinstate him after the dust settles, but a process will have to play itself out. He's too valuable of a commodity for them to just jettison.

CUOMO: Very interesting, Adrian Peterson indicted, facing a case here. Could get probation, that's what we understand, but it seems the public is more on his side, even though he's indicted for child abuse, than in the Ray Rice situation, how do you make sense of that?

BOLAND: I think the issue of the defense. I think he's saying he was being a parent disciplining his child, which a lot of parents believe is an appropriate response versus Rice where there's really no justification for.

CUOMO: And yet, Ray Rice, in better shape than Adrian Peterson probably in terms of his beef with the league. What do you think happens in his appeal?

MARTIN: I think he wins on appeal, I think he has the basis to say he had earned the right to be professional athlete with the Ravens and that I think Roger Goodell, absolutely overstepped his bounds and just imposed a harsher penalty than was necessary under the circumstances because they had all the information to begin with.

CUOMO: So he set the policy, Roger Goodell, six games, but then he has Ray Rice indefinitely suspended. Doesn't make any sense. He probably ends up getting the six games, right, Bob?

BOLAND: Something like that. He certainly gets paid and maybe he gets his cut reversed and gets paid by the Ravens.

CUOMO: All right, so you teach sports management at NYU has this become the test case for you of what not to do in sports management?

BOLAND: It's a case of what we should be looking at. How a league should react and the labor law issue, do you have due process concerns in all of this you have to observe and you can't just bow to pressure and the moment.

CUOMO: Have you ever seen a worse situation for the NFL in terms of how they've handled drama?

MARTIN: Not in succession, this is a perfect storm. You've got so many cases that have converged at the beginning of this season, this NFL season, I think Roger would prefer to have a reset button, but unfortunately he can't. It's something I haven't seen in the likes of my 14 years as a professional athlete. That's for certain.

CUOMO: Is it on him?

MARTIN: I think for the most part, yes. He didn't go out and create these situations, but the way he mishandled them I think exacerbated them in the long run.

CUOMO: Now when we started this, you think he's in worse shape now? You think it's starting to get likely about whether or not he stays, Bob or he gets pushed out?

BOLAND: I think the only set of facts that push him out is if you watch the video and lied about it, or is that's proven. I think the question however is, the league is going to have to do some serious damage control in coverage. I don't know quite how do you that right now.

CUOMO: If the money starts pulling out, what do you think the money is going to ask for? Get rid of the good players? That's not what the money wants, right?

BOLAND: That's the challenge. If we look back at a lot of sponsorship cases, they pull back for a while and ultimately come back, or come back with a competitor. There's no damage to their stock price over any kind of crisis. CUOMO: Now George, this isn't the sexy angle, but it seems like it's fair. Domestic violence, the cops didn't make a case, they gave a plea deal to Ray Rice, people don't have that right. He was indicted, he pleaded not guilty, they cut him a deal, OK?

There's not the outrage against the system, there's the outrage for the NFL for how they handled it. What Adrian Peterson did is no question worthy of an indictment, right.

He may get a simple penalty of probation, but that's not on the league, it's on the system that and our culture that says spanking is OK. Is the NFL getting too much heat for things that exist in larger society?

MARTIN: I don't think so. I think the NFL appropriately because it's a high-visibility, high-profile institution, I think they have to set the lead, they have to set the standard. They're not doing that right now.

The other thing that's very important, there's three things that we have to look at as a culture. Number one, our cultural indoctrination, being from the south, it's acceptable to discipline a person severely.

Number two old school, discipline is something we should employ. And religious objections alike, spare the rod and spoil the child. Those are three dynamics we have to put in the equation.

CUOMO: We've been seeing it in responses to the story. A lot of people talk about how they were spanked as a kid and they're OK, almost as a badge of honor. No question the league is mishandling it.

But we'll have to see where it goes, because Adrian Peterson, Ray Rice, you need them in the league if you want to make money, what's the league to do. Bob Boland, thank you very much. George Martin.

I want to remind you about George, he's written a book you should check out, called "Just Around The Bend: My Journey For 9/11." Probably has a new book in him because of what's happened here -- Mich.

PEREIRA: I think so. Let's get him writing. All right, Chris, thanks so much. Great conversation.

Let's look at more of your headlines right now, 9 minutes past the hour. The first public hearing is on tap today for the House committee investigating security lapses in the 2012 Benghazi attack. Former homeland security and Secret Service officials are among those set to testify.

This committee will review how the State Department implemented changes following a report that blames systemic failures and deficiencies for inadequate security.

South Korea's military have arrested an American who they say was trying to swim to North Korea. The unidentified man reportedly told investigators that he wanted to meet with North Korean Leader, Kim Jong Un. That man is now in custody. He is being interrogated by quote, "relevant South Korean officials."

American Ebola survivor, Dr. Kent Brantley will spend a second day testifying before Congress about the ongoing Ebola outbreak. As you'll recall, Dr. Brantley contracted Ebola while working in Liberia. He recovered after treatment with an experimental drug.

In the meantime, President Obama is declaring war on Ebola. He is sending 3,000 U.S. military personnel to West Africa. They will build clinics and help train medical staff, all in an effort to contain the spread of Ebola.

It is the last day of furious campaigning before an historic vote in Scotland. People there heading to polls to answer yes or no to this question -- should Scotland be an independent country? This is expected to be an incredibly tight race, with a huge, unprecedented turn-out.

If the outcome is yes, the Scottish government will start an 18-month process to final independence, expected to take effect in March of 2016. We'll watch this, a 307-year history would come to an end if they vote for independence.

BOLDUAN: It's amazing to consider.

PEREIRA: It really is and so many ramifications across the board, internationally, domestically.

CUOMO: It's interesting how it's been kind of like bubbling below the surface for a long time. Everybody is paying attention to Ukraine because it's violent. But essentially you have the same thing, you have somebody who wants to separate and say we're our own people.

BOLDUAN: Breaking overnight, a New York man charged with aiding ISIS, if you can believe it. Recruiting fighters to join the terror group. He was plotting to kill American soldiers himself. A live report on what is going on here straight ahead.

CUOMO: And there's a manhunt under way right now in Pennsylvania. Look at your screen, this man wanted for last week's deadly ambush of the state police barracks and cops have good reason to believe he may strike again soon. The latest on the search for Eric Matthew Frane.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BOLDUAN: Breaking overnight, an upstate New York man is now facing charges of providing support to ISIS. Thirty-year-old Mufid Elfgeeh, an American citizen, born in Yemen, was indicted Tuesday on charges that he tried to help three men travel to Syria to join ISIS fighters and that he plotted himself to murder U.S. service members.

This, as a top U.S. general opens the door, seems to be opening the door to putting boots on the ground in Iraq in order to fight ISIS.

We're going to be covering every angle for you. Let's begin this morning on this topic with Evan Perez on those ISIS charges facing this man in Upstate New York.

What are you learning, Evan?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, we know that federal prosecutors say that 30-year-old Mufid Elfgeeh tried to recruit three people to travel to Syria to join ISIS terrorists and he plotted to carry out attacks against U.S. soldiers returning home from Iraq and against Shia Muslims in the New York area.

He's a naturalized American citizen from Yemen and he ran a convenient store in Rochester, New York. The FBI says two of the people he tried to recruit were actually undercover informants for the FBI and another one was in Yemen. Now, the FBI noticed him last year because he was active on Twitter, expressing support for al Qaeda and for ISIS. He sent tweets urging people to donate money to ISIS. He even used a hashtag, $5,000 from every household to support buying weapons for fighters.

Now, the two informants that the government used are both on the FBI's payroll. One of them paid more than $21,000. And the FBI has helped get visas for some of his family members. And the other one is a former drug felon and he's been paid about $4,000 so far.

Now, Elfgeeh spoke to one of the FBI informants in December 2013, about the Kenyan mall attack, which is carried out by the Somali group al Shabaab. This is what he said, "Me myself, I'm thinking about doing something to be honest you. I'm thinking about buying a big automatic gun from off the street or something and a lot of bullets and put on a vest or whatever and just walk around and start shooting."

Now, Kate, his lawyer says that he's going to enter a not guilty plea when he appears in court today.

BOLDUAN: Yes. But it seems pretty brazen, some of the comments that he's been putting out there. And it seems that the government has quite a case that they're lining up right now. We're going to be watching this very closely.

Amazing details that you're uncovering, Evan. Thanks so much.

Chris?

CUOMO: All right. You have been told that there will be no U.S. boots on the ground in the war against ISIS. The problem is, that doesn't make a lot of sense.

The president is at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa this morning. He's preparing to talk strategy. And for weeks, he has promised to get your support, because he knows the polls show, as do all the politicians, that you are war-weary. So, the promise is no U.S. combat troops except the thousands that are going over there as advisers.

Now comes a Senate hearing Tuesday, Obama's top general, you're looking at him, Martin Dempsey. He tells Congress he has not ruled it out -- it being U.S. boots on the ground. What's going on here?

Jim Acosta joining us live from the White House this morning.

I don't think I'm overstating the proposition, Jim. This was about a political fix to a military situation. And now is the reality, the practicalities come home. The message is in doubt. Fair statement?

JIM ACOSTA, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: They're not singing from the same song sheet this morning, Chris. That's right.

And White House officials say General Dempsey's prepared testimony was vetted, but he was engaging in hypotheticals, when he said he could recommend that U.S. ground troops be directed into combat roles against ISIS, but the White House insists the president's pledge of no combat boots on the ground is not changing.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ACOSTA (voice-over): As President Obama landed in Tampa to hear from U.S. Central Command leaders orchestrating the fight against ISIS, the White House was busy clarifying some surprising statements from the Pentagon's top brass, on the role of U.S. military advisers in Iraq.

GEN. MARTIN DEMPSEY, JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN: They are not participating in direct combat. There's no intention for them to do so. I've mentioned, though, that if I found that circumstance evolving, that I would of course change my recommendation.

ACOSTA: That comment, at a Senate hearing from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Martin Dempsey, put him at odds with President Obama.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: These American forces will not have a combat mission. We will not get dragged into another ground war in Iraq.

ACOSTA: Asked about that presidential pledge, Dempsey suggested there was wiggle room.

SEN. KELLY AYOTTE (R), NEW HAMPSHIRE: Has the president ruled it out?

DEMPSEY: Well, at this point he's, his stated policy is that we will not have U.S. ground forces in direct combat. But he has told me as well to come back to him on a case-by-case basis.

ACOSTA: White House officials tell CNN Dempsey is free to make any recommendations he chooses. But it's the president who has the final say.

Aboard Air Force One, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters, "I'm confident if you asked General Dempsey if he's on the same page as the commander-in-chief, that he would say that he is."

Still, administration officials acknowledge combat situations could always arise and that the hundreds of U.S. military advisers already on the ground in Iraq are authorized to defend themselves, which is why the president's critics say he's engaged in word games. SEN. JAMES INHOFE (R), OKLAHOMA: Well, first of all, the president is

flat not telling the truth. We already have boots on the ground there. He knows we're going to have boots on the ground. Let's just go ahead and face it and admit -- we're in a war.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ACOSTA: Now, the president is expected to make some remarks after his meeting with CentCom officials later this morning. A White House official says the president is likely to repeat that pledge that U.S. combat troops or U.S. troops are not returning to combat roles in Iraq. Also expected later today, the house is set to vote to authorize the Pentagon to train Syrian rebels to battle ISIS.

Of course, House votes are not always set in stone. So, we're waiting to see if that will happen indeed later today, Chris.

CUOMO: Jim, no small irony, that they're getting ready to vote, but not on what matters the most, the actual tactics of this military plan, the actual commitment to this war and, of course, the issue of U.S. boots. Thank you very much for the reporting.

Kate, over to you.

ACOSTA: You got it.

BOLDUAN: Let's talk about all of this with Democratic Congressman Jim Himes from Connecticut. He sits on the House Intelligence Committee.

Congressman, thanks so much for coming in this morning.

REP. JIM HIMES (D), CONNECTICUT: Good morning, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Good morning.

So, what do you make of the comments coming from General Dempsey yesterday? Opening the door to a recommendation coming from him at some points that boots on the ground in Iraq could be needed. What do you think?

HIMES: Sure. Well, an awful lot of my colleagues sat up yesterday and said wait a second. And that, look, it wasn't a surprise, right? I mean, one of the reasons the vote today --

BOLDUAN: Why not?

HIMES: -- is so challenging is because -- well, because, you know, once you have made a commitment, both to putting people on the ground in Iraq, which we have, and increasing number of people on the ground. And, of course, funding a proxy group of Syrian rebels who are acting in our name, you can't predict the outcome.

The Middle East, if it's one thing, it is unpredictable. So, as people think about casting this vote today, I think they're understanding that really, we, there may be a presidential pledge, there may be an ability or there may not be an ability to vet Syrian rebels, but once the pieces are in motion, unpredictable things can happen.

BOLDUAN: It sounds to me like you're not trusting what you're hearing from the president over and over again, that there will be no combat troops on the ground. Is that fair?

HIMES: Well, you know, first of all, as the senator pointed out, there already are troops on the ground. And you know, anybody who is cognizant of history, who looks at the history of Vietnam or any number of other conflicts, you know, things are unpredictable.

Look, if a couple of airmen are downed over Iraq and find themselves in the hands of ISIS, guess what, there will be a lot of American combat troops there to find them and to rescue them. So, again, this is very, very unpredictable thing. And that's why the vote is so hard today.

BOLDUAN: Well, I'm going to get to the vote. But on boots on the ground, in order to defeat ISIS, many military experts, many former military guys are saying, that combat boots from someone are going to be needed. And often, that means the United States is going to lead.

Are you at place where can you say, even though it is hypothetical at this point -- if the president requested and said he needed combat troops in order to take out ISIS, that you could support him?

HIMES: I personally would not support that.

Look, the American people are well, well tired of having our troops exposed in places like Afghanistan, and Iraq, and having military missions which don't end well. I, of course, referring not only to Afghanistan and Iraq, but to Libya, where we made a substantial military commitment. I'm not sure anybody looks at Libya and says, gosh, we're an awful lot better off today than we were before we committed significant airpower.

And look, this concept of defeating is, what can we do with air strikes? With air strikes, we can disperse ISIS. We can, you know, they'll blend into the villages and stop sort of concentrating. With boots on the ground, you might, you might -- not defeat them, but at least be more aggressive about finding them in the villages.

Look, you don't defeat terrorism at the end of the day, and Afghanistan and Iraq have shown this until you get at the underlying conditions, the money that is flowing there from the Persian gulf, the kinds of economic and political conditions that turn a 17-year-old into an ISIS monster. Until we begin to address those things, terrorism will not be, quote-unquote, "defeated."

BOLDUAN: General Dempsey even acknowledged that yesterday. In that hearing, he said no matter how you slice it, there is no military solution to taking out ISIS that involves diplomacy, it involves political. It involves all the things that you mentioned there.

I want to ask you, though, about the House vote, the House vote on arming and training Syrian rebels. It's been tacked on to a bill -- an essential bill as I well know from covering Capitol Hill for years, to keep the government funded. Where are you on this vote today?

HIMES: Well, at this point, I still have an awful lot of unanswered questions about exactly what arming the Syrian rebels does or means. You know, I, we're being asked to fund essentially a proxy army here that would be doing two things at once -- fighting Assad, which, of course, is what these moderate rebels, we call them the opposition, that's opposition to Assad, you know, but also, fighting ISIS. Which by the way, is also fighting Assad. That's a very, very complicated operational thing.

There's questions about how well we can vet these guys. What kind of weapons they'll be provided. Might we see those weapons again from the other end?

You know, there are a whole lot of questions here that I think an awful lot of members of Congress have. I can't predict for you where this vote is going to go. This is something that the Congress was not thinking much about two weeks ago.

So, a lot of people are being socialized to some very scary concepts and still unanswered questions.

BOLDUAN: This is an approach, though, Congressman that was advocated by President Obama, Vice President Biden, by the White House. They wanted this vote to be tacked on to this funding bill, because they thought it would be more palatable if it was masked in a must-pass vote. But you still sound like you're a no.

HIMES: Well, look, you get to the process by which this is all happening. And here you've got a little bit of a mess, too. Yes, this is being done as a separate amendment to a must-pass vote. We've got to keep the government open by passing a continuing resolution.

But look, the more fundamental issue on the part of the Congress is an awful lot of members of Congress believe that the president needs a separate authorization for this set of hostilities. The president does not believe that and so now, we're being asked to sort of go halfway and approve the money for a new, you can use the word "war" if you want, certainly you know, a set hostilities that involve arming the Syrian moderates, without actually having authorized the fight itself. Now, the White House thinks differently.

(CROSSTALK)

BOLDUAN: So, two important questions to you then, Congressman. Are you a no vote on the Syrian, on the amendment to arm Syrian rebels?

HIMES: At this point in time, remember the vote is later on today.

BOLDUAN: That's right.

HIMES: There's a lot of information and questions being answered. But at this point in time, I'm a no vote.

BOLDUAN: So, then, do you believe there should be a separate up or down vote on any authorization for further military force, use of military force?

HIMES: I do. Look, this is an offensive action in the sense that we're --

BOLDUAN: Where are the leaders on this? I'm sorry to cut you off. But I think this is important, because I feel like every member of Congress we've had on, Democrat or Republican, rank and file, they have said the same thing, they believe an up or down vote should happen. But it's not happening.

Are you talking about your leaders about the need for an up or down vote?

HIMES: Yes, look, there's been an awful lot of advocacy. The president has said he does not think he needs the up or down vote.

BOLDUAN: True.

HIMES: He thinks he has the authority. An awful lot of us disagree.

And, look, this as you now is a fight that's been going on for 60 years between the White House and Congress, about exactly where war- making authority lives.

BOLDUAN: Well, and this is also a fight when you look overseas, even General Martin Dempsey said it's a generational problem, is going to go far beyond the three years that have been forecast in the fight against ISIS going forward.

Congressman Jim Himes, thanks so much for coming on this morning. It's great to see you.

HIMES: Thank you, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Of course.

So, the manhunt for a police killer is underway in Pennsylvania. Authorities are desperately searching for a suspect who's armed and very dangerous. We're going to be live at the scene of the search. You want to see this and you have to learn the details.

Also, CNN has learned, while Joan Rivers was under anesthesia, her personal physician was busy taking a selfie. That is from -- in the room, one report. All of this is happening moments before rivers went into cardiac arrest. That's not all we're finding out this morning.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)