Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Congress Holds Hearing on Planned Parenthood Funding; Interview with David Daleiden; Russian Airstrike Hits Syrian City; Kerry on Talks to Release U.S. Prisoners in Iran; Russia Launches Airstrike Near Syrian City of Homs. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired September 30, 2015 - 08:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[08:00:00] CECILE RICHARDS, PRESIDENT, PLANNED PARENTHOOD: The outrageous accusations leveled against Planned Parenthood based on heavily doctored videos are offensive and categorically untrue.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: In an emotional and fiery hearing on Capitol Hill on Tuesday.

REP. JOHN DUNCAN, (R) TENNESSEE: Do you defend the sale of baby body parts?

RICHARDS: No.

MALVEAUX: GOP members grilling Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards for more than four hours over the company's use of roughly $450 million annually of federal funding.

REP. MICK MULVANEY, (R) SOUTH CAROLINA: You could have provided every single service that you did to every single woman last year if you did not get a penny from the discretionary fund of the United States congress.

RICHARDS: I actually disagree.

MALVEAUX: At one point Republican representatives slammed for their line of questioning.

REP. GERALD CONNOLLY, (D) VIRGINIA: The disrespect, the misogyny rampant here today, tells us what is really going on here.

DUNCAN: Surely you don't expect us to be easier on you because you are a woman?

RICHARDS: Absolutely not. That's not how my momma raised me.

MALVEAUX: Congresswomen on both sides of the aisle fiercely advocating their positions.

REP. CYNTHIA LUMMIS, (R) WYOMING: Why do you need federal dollars? You are making a ton of dough.

REP. BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, (D) NEW JERSEY: We have so much good work to do, but instead what do we do? We harp on a woman's right to make the choices that are hers to make.

MALVEAUX: Richards then asked to explain the apology she issued after this undercover video surfaced in July. It was the first in a series produced by anti-abortion activists discussing the transfer of fetal tissue by Planned Parenthood employees.

REP. JIM JORDAN, (R) OHIO: Which statements were you apologizing for?

RICHARDS: I was apologizing for what was said in a nonclinical setting in a non-appropriate way and I don't believe --

JORDAN: You can't have it both ways. You can't say I'm apologizing for statements in one video and then not tell us what those statements were.

MALVEAUX: Richards reacting to the hearing on MSNBC Tuesday night.

RICHARDS: They are obsessed with ending access to reproductive healthcare for women in America.

MALVEAUX: Some Democrats at the hearing agreed.

REP. CAROLYN MALONEY, (D) NEW YORK: Republicans are doubling down on their war against women.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MALVEAUX: Senate Republicans effort to shut down the government over the federal funding of Planned Parenthood failed earlier this week. Today House lawmakers are going to take up the issue as part of a vote to continue to fund the government. Chris?

CUOMO: All right, Suzanne, let's bring in the man who produced those videos that started all of this, David Daleiden from the Center for Medical Progress. Good to have you with us as always.

DAVID DALEIDEN, PROJECT LEAD, CENTER FOR MEDICAL PROGRESS: Good to be with you again.

CUOMO: So a court says you have got to turn over your stuff, David. You have to turn over all the videos. You've got to turn over the supporting documents. You have got to show what you did. You've got to show how you did it. You are fighting that to quote or paraphrase Representative Jordan from Ohio, you want it both ways. You want to expose the videos for what you want them to be but not turn over everything. Why not turn over everything?

DALEIDEN: Interesting question. We're -- CMP is complying with all the Congressional investigations and all of the state investigations that have requested footage from us. And actually in that court case that you mention there is an unconstitutional prior restraint, temporary restraining order against us that prevents us from actually complying with a federal subpoena from the U.S. Congress to hand over all of the materials to the oversight investigations committee that's conducting the investigation right now. CUOMO: Three judge panel in the Ninth Circuit ordered you to

participate in discovery ordering you to turn over all those things. I think they understand what a TRO is. Are you going to comply?

DALEIDEN: Yes, so we're complying with -- we're engaging in the discovery in that lawsuit. I can't say too much about the legal specifics because I'm not an attorney, so I can't say so much about the litigation. But I think we're happy to talk about what we did and how we did it so long as the other party in that case is willing to talk about their fetal tissue sales contracts, their illegal late term abortion presentations, thinks like that --

CUOMO: One thing has nothing to with the other. I am a lawyer, as you well know. I'm raising it because it doesn't smell right, because you are about exposing but you don't want to expose everything. It makes it seem like there is something you want to hide. It feeds the perception that you selectively edited. Do you understand that criticism?

DALEIDEN: I understand the criticism. I don't think that that's accurate, and I don't think that's really a fair representation of what's going on in the court case. I'm sure you are familiar that discovery can often be used as the fishing expedition. There's oftentimes multiple motives there. So I don't think that's an accurate representation of what's going on in that case right now.

CUOMO: Did you edit the videotapes?

DALEIDEN: You know, we create summary videos similar to the summary videos you produce for a news broadcast like this one. But the full footage of the conversation with Planned Parenthood directors and executives, that has always been posted to our YouTube channel in addition to the summary videos.

CUOMO: But it is not the same as the summary videos. I've had the pleasure or the displeasure, whatever you want to call it. I've watched a lot of the raw and I've watched what you put out there. They are not the same. When you edit you make choices. Is it fair to say you did match certain questions with different parts of conversations and move things around to show what you think matters?

[08:05:09] DALEIDEN: No, absolutely not. No. The edits that are made in the summary videos are just to service out the highlights of those tapes. There is no changing in the ordering of the conversation whatsoever.

CUOMO: But do you believe it changes the context of what the conversations were?

DALEIDEN: No. No, not at all. And for statements, you know, when you are talking about using ultrasound guidance where to put your forceps on a late term fetus in order to harvest the brains or harvest the lung or harvest the heart, there is no context in which those statements become inoffensive or acceptable to most people.

CUOMO: Not most people, because you have 65 percent of the American people don't want to defund Planned Parenthood. So what you are talking about is conservative Catholics like yourself and people who are prolife. Let me ask you something about the video.

DALEIDEN: No, the poll that got those numbers didn't mention anything about the videos or the baby parts scandal that Planned Parenthood is embroiled in right now.

CUOMO: Of course it does because it's about whether or not to defund Planned Parenthood. That doesn't come out of nowhere.

DALEIDEN: The poll only asked about Planned Parenthood. It didn't specify the context at all.

CUOMO: But what other context could there be? All right, that is a conversation for another time, because that is just between your and my reckoning. That's not what --

DALEIDEN: Half the American people haven't seen the videos yet --

CUOMO: That's true. The question is however that assumes that seeing the videos informs you of the truth. And what Planned Parenthood and other people who see it, says no, you doctored them. You are doctoring it to make it seem like what you want it to be.

DALEIDEN: Right. There was a new forensic analysis, an actual forensic analysis, not a report produced by a political opposition firm which is what Produced yesterday paid for a few weeks ago but an actual forensic analysis yesterday --

CUOMO: Which one?

DALEIDEN: That showed the video tape -- the one from Coal Fire Systems.

CUOMO: Aren't they in part funded by a conservative group? Wasn't that study in party sponsoring by them?

DALEIDEN: No. CMP has no connections to Coal Fire Systems, but that's an actual forensic laboratory, an actual forensic report that found --

CUOMO: They have funding things that are a little curious also.

Here is what really created a flash point I want you do speak to. Carly Fiorina very passionately in the debate, very cogently brings across this image of an aborted baby on the table, the heart beating, the legs moving. Look at that video and tell me what you think. Let me ask about that image. Is that an aborted fetus that is in that image?

DALEIDEN: You know, actually in the video I don't have a visual of what you're showing me.

CUOMO: You know what I'm talking about David. It is a miscarriage. You know the mother was interviewed. You know you didn't ask her for permission for it, but that is beside the point. DALEIDEN: That is not what Carly Fiorina was referencing. Carly

Fiorina was referencing the sequence in our video that shows footage of a born alive infant from a late term abortion actually moving in a specimen pan while Holly O'Donnell, who used to work at Stem Express, is talking about the harvesting of a brain of an infant of the exactly same gestation --

CUOMO: So you think it's a different image than the one that was pointed out --

DALEIDEN: If you're --

CUOMO: OK.

DALEIDEN: If you're showing the image of the Walter Frets (ph) right now, that is not the image.

CUOMO: I don't know now the names. I don't own the material the way you do. I just know what I see and I know comported with what Carly Fiorina was describing and it seems like something that was certainly taken out of context by whoever put the video together because the mother says -- you know what I'm talking right? There was a mother who had a miscarriage --

DALEIDEN: Yes.

CUOMO: And you used that in the video right?

DALEIDEN: Yes I've spoken with Lexi Frets (ph), the mother. Yes, absolutely. And --

CUOMO: What do you use it to show? To show what?

DALEIDEN: Used to illustrate exactly the kind of late second trimester baby, fetus, that we're talking about in these cases of organ harvesting.

CUOMO: But if you are talking about organ harvesting and abortions and how terrible they are, why would you use a stillborn fetus, which is not a function of an abortion?

DALEIDEN: Do you think the fetuses are different somehow? It is the same gestational age. It is the same baby whether it's born dead or alive.

CUOMO: It is also --

DALEIDEN: That is the same kind of infant.

CUOMO: Absolutely. It is also completely irrelevant to the point you are trying to make, which is look what they do to these babies. It was born stillborn. It was not aborted. Doesn't that matter to you if you are talking about abortion?

DALEIDEN: I think what matters is that is an example of an 18 to 19 week fetus, which is the exact same gestational age that Planned Parenthood routinely aborts and harvests the organs from.

CUOMO: Right, but you used as an example of look at the babies that they abort. Look how it's a real person. Look how it is. Look what they do. But it wasn't aborted. Isn't that misleading?

DALEIDEN: No, because the subject, the creature that is being aborted is the same kind of thing. It is the same kind of fetus. That is not misrepresenting at all.

CUOMO: It is not a creature. It is not a thing. It is a little person. And the point is if you want to represent a little person, do it fairly, because this is such an emotional thing. It is so religious for people, it's so moral for people. That baby was not aborted. It matters in the context of your conversation.

[08:10:05] DALEIDEN: It's the exact same gestational age fetus. I don't see how you could say that's not fair to show an illustration of what a fetus at 19 weeks looks like.

CUOMO: My point is context. You are saying what they do in abortions. This wasn't abortion. That is my point.

Let's move on to a different point though. The one legal aspect of this, I don't know how important this is, but the law does matter so let's discuss it. There is a charge against you that you did illegal things to procure these videos. Do you believe that will be substantiated on any level or do you defend against that charge on any level?

DALEIDEN: Absolutely not. I don't think that that's going to be substantiated. The Center for Medical Progress follows all applicable laws in the course of our investigative journalism work.

CUOMO: And the idea that you obtained them illegally, that there wasn't consent to the subjects, that you needed the consent for them, what is your response to that?

DALEIDEN: Yes -- no. Most of the recording laws that are relevant -- I mean, all of the recording laws that are relevant to the conversations we taped, they are either takes place in one party consent states and in situations where the consent of one party was only necessary in order to record conversations that are held in the public area that are public conversations that you can reasonable expect people are going to overhear. Those are not private conversations that are prohibited from being recorded.

CUOMO: And you know that is often a question of discretion. You have to fight that out legally. You know that.

DALEIDEN: We're prepared to do.

CUOMO: If you could go back, would you not summarize the video? Would you not edit the video? Would you have just put out the raw and avoided what is certainly criticism of the production result?

DALEIDEN: You know, I think even if we just put out the raw files, which is quite a difficult thing actually. They are pretty hard to work with. Planned Parenthood and their allies in the media are still going to have problems with it, are still going to accuse them of being doctored, are going to try to say they are not real because that is the only thing they can say. They can't defend the actual content that's on the tapes, and so they are engaging in straight up denialism right now and trying to say that the videos are fabricated. They're not real.

CUOMO: But you gave them the ammo by doing the editing. And, look, I mean, you're talking to a guy who does this all the time. There is nothing easier than putting out raw footage. There is nothing easier than doing that. You could have easily produced the raw footage. It is the editing that takes time. That's what takes discretion and selectivity, right?

DALEIDEN: You know, I think it's important for the public, in order for the information or the accessible to make sure that you are presenting the highlights and presenting the most important pieces of what are --

CUOMO: To you.

DALEIDEN: -- two, three four hour long conversations.

CUOMO: To you, what's most important to you. And that's the point, it comes down to discretion and subjectivity.

DALEIDEN: That's why the full tapes are posted.

CUOMO: But post them, right. And then that takes us to the lawsuit where you are not putting everything out. I think the more disclosure there is the better because you've started a very important conversation in this country that goes beyond the law, that goes to things that are very visceral, so people need to have the full information.

David Daleiden, as always, thank you for representing your side. Appreciate it.

DALEIDEN: Thank you, Chris.

CUOMO: Michaela?

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: All right, we have breaking news. Russia is launching its first airstrike in Syria. Moscow has been building its military presence there, a concern for many in the Obama administration. Let's get right to CNN's Barbara Starr live at the Pentagon with the breaking details. What do we know at this hour, Barbara?

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Michaela. A U.S. official telling me a short time ago that all military intelligence indicators show that the Russians have conducted their first airstrike in Syria. It took place in the western city of Homs. Why is this so significant, this location? This is an area where ISIS is generally not operating, but anti-Assad forces are. Why would the Russians strike here unless they are planning to have an intent to prop up Bashar al Assad? That is what the U.S. is looking at.

The back story on all of this, apparently the U.S. official says earlier today a Russian general went to the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, spoke to the U.S. military defense attache there, and informed the U.S. that these airstrikes would happen within one hour of that notification and told the U.S. it should get its warplanes out of Syrian airspace. The U.S. not doing that. U.S. warplanes, coalition warplanes continue to fly their missions, we are told. The Russians did not tell the U.S. exactly where they were flying. They didn't say that it would be this area of Homs where there are anti-regime forces fighting the Assad government.

Now the next step remains to be seen. Both sides, Washington and Moscow were supposed to sit down and talk about this. We'll see what happens next. Alisyn?

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: OK, Barbra, thanks so much for all of that breaking news.

Secretary of State John Kerry responding to criticism of the Iran nuclear deal from Republican candidates. In his conversation with CNN's Elise Labott Kerry also addressed the possibility of release of American prisoners being held in Iran. And Elise joins us now with more.

[08:15:00] Tell us more about your conversation.

ELISE LABOTT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, it was remarkably candid conversation, Alisyn. We talked a about a lot of things. We talked about the situation on the ground in Syria which is obviously developing as we speak. But we also talked a little bit about Iran.

You know, there's been a lot of talk about four Americans being held in Iran, "Washington Post" reporter Jason Rezaian, we're also talking about Amir Hekmati and Saeed Abedini that had been held in Iran for years, recently there's been noise about whether there could be a possible prisoner swap.

I posed that to Secretary Kerry.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LABOTT: President Rouhani was speaking to CNN's Christiane Amanpour and he laid out very clear terms for a deal on prisoners, along the lines of what you did with Cuba, or Bowe Bergdahl. And he said there have been talks about that.

So, what are your red lines in these talks?

JOHN KERRY, SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, I'm not going to discuss, I'm not going to draw red lines and I'm not going to, you know, get into the details of any discussion of those talks.

LABOTT: But there are some talks about how to move forward though. KERRY: We are constantly. I have raised them in all of our -- in all

of our sessions. We've had a lot of conversations. We are continuing those conversations now. And I am hopeful that the day will come soon -- obviously sooner rather than later -- but soon, when all of our citizens can come home.

LABOTT: You know, several presidential candidates have talked about tearing up the Iran deal. Is that -- what do you think of that? Is that possible? President Rouhani called it laughable.

KERRY: Well, even -- I mean, Donald Trump has very clearly and other candidates I've noticed on the other side of the fence.

LABOTT: Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz.

KERRY: No, they have said --

LABOTT: They will tear it up day one.

KERRY: I don't know which ones have. Donald Trump I know said he's going to live with. He would work to improve it, but he recognizes it is not a wise thing to tear it up.

I haven't followed that. I'm not involved in the politics and I haven't followed closely who said what.

I just say this -- if this agreement is fully implemented over the course of these next 16 months, and Iran has rolled back its program and undone, destroyed their stockpile and limited their enrichment and reduced all of their centrifuges, and they have expanded the breakout time to one year, I would think it would be folly, pure folly for any president then to sort of walk right in and say, I'm going to tear it up.

I don't think the American people would allow it. I don't think the world would allow it. It would not be a wise, prudent move. It actually would be a very dangerous move and not well received anywhere in the international community.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LABOTT: So -- and not only on the face of the Iran deal but -- I mean, this administration wants to get that Iran deal implemented so it can work with Iran and Syria in other aspects. I mean, clearly, they want that relationship with Iran to flourish. I don't know how realistic that is, but they definitely want to see if there's more opportunity there.

I'd also watch the space on those prisoners. Secretary Kerry clearly doesn't want to get into the discussions and the intricacies. It's very sensitive and they don't want to do anything to jeopardize it. But I would watch that space.

CAMEROTA: OK, we'll do. Elise, thanks so much for all that.

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: Thousands are the fleeing the Afghan city of Kunduz overnight. Taliban fighters repealing Afghan security forces, fortifying their hold on the city. An Afghan official tells CNN there are not enough troops to combat insurgents.

Taliban fighters are shutting roads, torching government buildings. NATO confirming a limited number of coalition forces are on the ground in Kunduz this morning, advising and assisting Afghan troops.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: More breaking news: tropical storm Joaquin now a hurricane and posing a threat to the entire East Coast. Let's get to meteorologist Chad Myers with the breaking details. The problem with this one is, friend, we don't know where it's going.

CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Absolutely. After 48 hours, hurricane center says very low confidence. We simply don't know if it is going to go left into America or right and pass Bermuda.

But there is a hurricane hunter aircraft plane now in this storm, flying back and forth, north and south, and it found winds of 75 miles per hour. So, now, we are a hurricane. And we also find pressure. That hurricane hunter found pressure equal to a category two hurricane.

So, I am expecting rapid development into a cat-2 hurricane and then maybe even something more sinister than that.

I think something else that's happened today, too. The models have turned to the left. They've turned to the west. It is a certainty with the U.S. models that we get some type of impacts on the U.S. Not so with the European model we talked about for a long, long time here -- remember how well it did with Sandy. The European is all the way out in the ocean.

I think this is less likely, at least at this point. This is the outlier that it will miss America. Right now, it looks like it could be a significant storm.

Even without impact or an eye wall land fall, we will see an awful lot of rain, maybe 10 to 20 inches in some spots, whether it makes landfall or not.

[08:20:03] And that could be a bigger problem with flooding like we've had with Irene and Agnes and all of those storms that really -- weren't big storms but they were flood makers. We'll watch that, too.

CAMEROTA: Always interesting with the different models and how different they can be.

So, Chad, thank you. We know you'll be tracking those for us.

MYERS: I will.

CAMEROTA: All right. Back to our breaking news: what is next for Syria now that Russian air strikes have begun? We will hear from the State Department, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) CAMEROTA: Breaking news this hour: Russia launching its first airstrike in Syria. The Obama administration has expressed concern about the Russian military build up in Syria. But Secretary of State Kerry says the U.S. can actually benefit from Moscow's involvement there.

So, let's get the answers from State Department spokesman, John Kirby.

John, great to have you here in studio with us.

JOHN KIRBY, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESPERSON: Thanks for having me.

CAMEROTA: How does the U.S. benefit from Moscow being involved in Syria?

KIRBY: Well, as the secretary said, there could be an opportunity here. Look, Russia has a long-standing military relationship with Syria. They have had a long-standing presence there.

So, the fact they are adding to those capabilities is not new. What is new is what we are worried with them doing with those additional capabilities.

But, look, if they want to fight ISIL, well, we can that there might be a constructive role for Russia and the coalition to cooperate against ISIL going forward. So, having them there with sufficient military capability focused on ISIL and that threat, there is room for conversation.

[08:25:04] CAMEROTA: I mean, look, here's what some experts say Russia really isn't that interested in Bashar al Assad nor they are interested in Syria's sovereignty. What they are interested in, what Vladimir Putin is interested in is expanding Russia's reach. And by putting their military machinery into Syria, that's what they're really doing.

KIRBY: Well, you know, probably best to talk to Putin about what his overall strategic intent. I think what we're seeing is, and the secretary spoke to this, this is somewhat of a reactive move by Russia. They see the pressure that Assad is under. They know he's not gaining any ground. They recognize that he has lost the ability to govern wide swaths of his country. And they have got interests in Syria, long -- as I said, long-standing military presence.

And so, some of what they are doing is to shore up what they believe to be their own interest. What our concern is in doing that, you are propping up the Assad regime. And the future for Syria can't be under Bashar al-Assad. He's the reason ISIL has been able to fester and grow so much inside the country.

CAMEROTA: Right. So, where does that leave us? If Russia is propping up Assad, and the U.S. doesn't believe that there's any future with Assad, now what?

KIRBY: What that leaves us with is this very intense effort by Secretary Kerry to find a way to get a political transition in Syria. We all know that what's really good to get ISIL completely defeated, what will sustain that defeat is good governance. Good governance in Syria is not going to happen under Bashar al-Assad. It has to happen with a transitional government.

So, how do you get that done? How do you work out a transition where he gives power and a government that's responsive to this Syrian people can come in so that people can return to their homes and have a normal life.

CAMEROTA: He doesn't want to give up power. So, how does that transition happen politically?

KIRBY: Well, there's two countries that have influence over Bashar al-Assad. That's Russia and Iran. And Russia and Iran are both operating inside Syria. They have both had influence inside Syria. And one of the reasons why the secretary wants discussions with Foreign Minister Lavrov is to see what kind of pressure Russia can put on Bashar al Assad.

Now, to date, they have not shown much interest in pushing too hard on Assad. And we understand that, which is why also the secretary hosted two meetings here in New York City with our European and some of our Arab allies to try to get at what the guts of a political transition could look like, try to game that out so we can have those discussions with the Russians about working forward on options.

CAMEROTA: Is there a feeling at the State Department you wish you could rewind the clock four years and do something different, have taken a different tact with Syria to begin with?

KIRBY: No, I don't think so. Look, the conflict in Syria began with minor protests that Bashar al Assad reacted to swiftly and brutally.

CAMEROTA: You don't think that the arming the rebels would have changed the situation there today?

KIRBY: There's -- you can go back and look at this a million different ways. I think we've been very steady and we've been I think suitably candid about the challenges of the conflict inside Syria.

It was -- I don't think we should forget the credible threat of military forces which led Assad to give up his declared stock piles of chemical material. A credible threat of military force right off his coast actually did that. And inside Syria, we're not turning that blind eye. I mean, the coalition continues to fly, even today, continues to fly missions in Syrian air space against ISIL and we're going to continue to do that.

CAMEROTA: Let's talk about what's going on in Afghanistan. That too has become a hot spot, seemingly overnight, where the Taliban has seized control of a major city. What's the U.S.'s plan?

KIRBY: Well, what the U.S.'s plan is to continue to support the Afghan government as they go after the Taliban in Kunduz. And they are. They are undertaking operations to retake Kunduz. There have been at least I think one air strike there by NATO aircraft

there from Operation Inherent Resolve. I'm sorry, Operation Resolute Support, which is our support mission there in Afghanistan.

And it just underscores two things. One, the importance of our mission in Afghanistan, which is to continue to improve the capability o of the ANSF and get them into the fight.

CAMEROTA: But it doesn't seem to be working. I mean, they lost Kunduz. It doesn't seem to be working. The Taliban has, you know, regrown its strength.

KIRBY: Well, it's a fluid situation. Let's see how it goes. They are undertaking operations to get Kunduz back.

We all recognize that this is not insignificant development. Believe me -- and I don't just mean we the U.S. I mean, the Afghan government very much recognizes the threat the Taliban still poses.

And the ANSF, the Afghan National Security Forces are more competent can capable than just two years ago. This is their country. The whole idea of this mission is for them to secure their own country. Make their own citizens table and they're working through that.

CAMEROTA: John Kirby, nice to talk to you. Thanks so much for being here in studio.

KIRBY: My pleasure. Thanks for having me.

CAMEROTA: Let's get over to Chris.

CUOMO: All right. Listen to this one -- a lot of money, a lot of time, but not a lot of results. That's what a new report says that we've done nothing to prevent Americans from joining ISIS. The man behind the report joins us and he has alarming things to say.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)