Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

Obama, Congressional Leaders to Meet on ISIS; GOP Leaders Want Specific ISIS Strategy; Congressional Approval for ISIS Plan; Interview with Rep. Adam Schiff

Aired September 09, 2014 - 13:00   ET

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

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Right now, President Obama is about to meet with the leadership of both branches of Congress to discuss how the United States will take on the terror group ISIS. The former U.S. supreme allied commander of the national security adviser, James Jones, standing by live to discuss.

Also right now, backlash following the release of video showing former NFL running back Ray rice assaulting his then fiancee in a hotel elevator. The league now responding, just in the last half hour or so, with details of what they knew and when.

Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer reporting from Washington. President Obama tries to get Congress on board with his plan for defeating the terror group ISIS. He sits down with Congressional leaders just about two hours or so from now. The meeting comes a day before the president addresses the country on his new plan. And a new CNN ORC poll shows just how concerned -- the poll shows just how concerned Americans are. 45 percent say ISIS poses a very serious threat to the United States. Another 22 percent say it poses a fairly serious threat. 71 percent believe ISIS terrorists are already in the United States.

Let's go to our White House Correspondent Michelle Kosinski. Michelle, we're learning some of the details about the president's speech to the nation, indeed to the world tomorrow night. What have you learned?

MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, well, first of all, it's interesting that this is going to be in primetime and that tells you that this is going to be something significant. The question, of course, has been what news is going to come out of this, what that we haven't heard before. The White House is being a little facetious about that. They're saying, well, we're not going to rule out that there's not going to be a big announcement. It just seems very unlikely that it's going to be something concrete regarding Syria other than this planning stage that they've talked about just because things are still in that stage.

So, what the White House has framed this as being is a conversation with the American people, in their words. That he's going to lay out what he believes is the best path forward, how detailed that's going to be remains to be seen. And he'll lay out what tools are at America's disposal for, as they put it, degrading and ultimately defeating ISIS. Now, that ultimately has popped up within the last week and a half or so and they use that all the time now in describing the plan. And that is to tell us that this is going to take a long time. And we've heard from several now within the administration that it could take up to three years.

So, what Congress wants to know and what the American people want to know is what exactly is that plan? I mean, today, he's going to meet with Congressional leadership. But on the Senate floor, this morning, we did hear from Senator Mitch McConnell who said he needs to identify military objectives and explain how those ends will be accomplished. We already know that the military objectives, as regards to Iraq, are going to be air strikes, coalition building, expanding those air strikes, that's going to be likely. So, that could be what the bulk of this speech focuses on.

The bigger question mark is, of course, Syria. And it's really unclear as to how much of that plan has been shaved, at least in terms that are going to look like something comprehensive and very concrete to Congress moving forward -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Set the scene, specifically for the big meeting this afternoon at the White House in about two hours or so. The two top Democrats in the House, the two top -- and the two top Republicans of the House, plus the four leaders -- the two top Democrats and Republicans in the Senate. It's going to be four leaders, right? They're all going to be there. Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell, there you see the speaker, John Boehner, Nancy Pelosi. The four of them are going to be coming in to meet with the president. They're going to be spending some time. Will this be a meeting which the president basically previews to them what he's thinking or will they actually be seeking their respective input?

KOSINSKI: I think some of both. I mean, the way the White House has framed this, it's going to be more of the same, close consultation with Congress. The White House says that they've been doing that. This is going to be a continuation of that. He seems like he just wants to get Congressional leadership on board with what exactly this plan is.

I think what will be interesting will be how to set that balance between consulting with Congress and actually having them make changes to the plan if necessary or will the president ask Congress for authorization? That's been another question that's been out there. I mean, some have said specifically, they want to see a vote in Congress on authorization of any military force moving forward. But the White House has stopped short of saying that they will do that. It's all, of course, dependent on what this plan is going to be. But the White House has kept it at close consultation with Congress.

So, I think the most interesting thing here, we'll be seeing what people say, what those participants say coming out of this meeting. Are they on board with not only the plan as it stands now? And we all want to know how much of a plan is that plan? And also, are they on board with Congress' participation, at this point, as the White House sees it -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All right, Michelle, I know you're going to be busy. Thanks very much. We're already hearing from the two top Republican Congressional leaders who will be meeting with the president later this afternoon. They say it's critically important for President Obama to lay out his plan to destroy ISIS. Here's the House speaker, John Boehner.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BOEHNER, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: We have a very serious problem. What we need is a strategy. And until there's a strategy, there's no reason to talk about any of the specifics, because I don't know how they fit in to the broader strategy. So, I'm hopeful today.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE.)

BOEHNER: I am looking for a strategy from the president that takes on this terrorist threat and defeats it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: The senator minority leader, Mitch McConnell, says the president, quote, "needs to identify military objectives and explain how those ends will be accomplished. He needs to present this plan to Congress and the American people." That's Mitch McConnell.

Let's bring in our Chief Political Analyst Gloria Borger and our Chief Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash. Gloria, it's fair to say this speech the president will deliver to the nation, 9:00 p.m. Eastern tomorrow night primetime, is critically important.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: It is. And I think what he's got to explain to the American people is the nature of the threat. And, you know, what he has told us, originally, was that air strikes in Iraq were because of humanitarian reasons in protecting personnel in Baghdad. If this has creped over into air strikes over Syria, for example, he has to explain to the American people why we're doing this.

I would also add, Wolf, in talking to folks at the White House, it's not clear to me, and Dana would know more about this, that they intend to ask for permission from Congress. They're clearly going to consult with Congress. But it's their understanding, from talking to lots of members, that members aren't exactly eager to vote on the use of military force this close to an election.

BLITZER: What are you hearing?

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: The same thing. I just came from Capitol Hill, and I'm hearing from top sources in both parties that there's no plan right now in the works to have a vote --

BLITZER: For a roll-call vote.

BASH: -- right. An authorization for force, for more military strikes. And you're right, this is -- this is a classic case of what comes first, the chicken or the egg? And this is also a case where they're sort of happening at the same time, meaning the White House isn't going to ask for something it's not going to get. And there -- while there are some very powerful voices on Capitol Hill in both parties saying Congress must have a role in this, you have as many voices, maybe more voices, saying, wait, wait, wait, maybe we don't need a role, especially when we're eight weeks before an election where any kind of vote on military action is dicey.

BORGER: You know, and it depends, of course, on what the president actually asks for. I mean, how much budgetary information is he going to provide? You know, how much more spending is this going to cost? And that --

BASH: That's a different question, right?

BORGER: Well, if you vote for more money, you're voting for the authorization of force. We know that from Iraq.

BASH: Well, that's true. No, there's no -- there's no question. But we've been hearing that he is going to re-ask for what's effectively a counterterrorism fund which he's asked for before and hasn't gotten. So, if that is really an ask, then that could be something that they debate. But it would be different, legally, from an authorization of force. But you're right, politically, practically, maybe not so much.

BLITZER: Because it's not going to be cheap. The American taxpayers are going to spend a lot of money to try to destroy ISIS over the next three years.

BORGER: Right.

BLITZER: U.S. taxpayers have been spending a lot of money over the last 12 years trying to destroy Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is still around, as we know, and getting ready for the eve of 911. And so, not exactly sure why they think they can destroy ISIS in three years. Here's the question, will they seek special -- a supplemental budgetary request authorizing additional funds to go ahead and destroy ISIS?

BASH: That's the open question, I mean, whether or not -- whether or not it is -- what we've been hearing is that it might be, again, that fund which would be more money. We have don't know if it's going to be a specific ask in this meeting right now or when he gives his speech tomorrow night. But what --

BLITZER: Because Congress is only in session for another two weeks or so.

BASH: Exactly.

BORGER: But we haven't heard Democratic leaders coming out and saying, let's have a vote. We really need to have a vote. You're not hearing that demand --

BLITZER: But if he needs more money, Congress has to appropriate the money.

BASH: If he needs that then Congress has to appropriate it. But let's also see -- remember where we are right now. We are in a sprint for them to get in, get done, fund the government and get out of town.

BORGER: How many more days are they in session, actually?

BASH: It's -- I mean, that's -- it's flexible right now. But probably a week and a half. But they want to get back home and if --

BLITZER: But if the U.S. is --if the U.S. is about to go to war big- time in Syria and Iraq, and the U.S. might be doing it, maybe Congress should stay in session instead of going back on vacation.

BORGER: Well, that would be a suggestion that perhaps the president ought to make, if that's what he wants. And he --

BLITZER: I know, technically, it's called recess. But if the country is about to go to war, maybe Congress should stick around and get involved.

BASH: I don't -- I don't disagree. But as I -- as we've been talking about, there are very different opinions on how much Congress should be involved. And there are some who think that -- ironically, even some who say that this is an imperial president. They're putting it on the president now to be the leader on this --

BORGER: And what's your --

BASH: -- and Congress to recede a bit.

BORGER: -- and what you're probably going to hear from the president is somebody talking about, this is what he's going to do in concert with the allies. Yes, it's going to take more money. This is not going to be a short-term solution. This requires due diligence over a period of years. We eventually will wipe them out. If I come back to you and ask you for more money, because my money has run out, would you do that for me?

BASH: But right. I want to say that you make a good point. There is a lot of punting going on right now on Capitol Hill.

BLITZER: Well, it's about time. If the country is about to risk American lives.

BORGER: Well, especially by the president, too.

BLITZER: If the country is about to risk American lives, including fighter pilots who will be flying over not only Iraq but maybe over Syria which has a very strong anti-aircraft missile system, shoulder firing missiles, the Congress has got to do its job. The president has to do his job as well. Guys, thanks very, very much.

BASH: Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: Just ahead, we're going to hear from a top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee about the president's ISIS plan. Congressman Adam Schiff, he's standing by up on Capitol Hill. There he is, see him? I'm going to ask him what he thinks Congress needs to do to authorize and fund these kinds of strikes. And later, the Ravens' Ray Rice banned from the NFL but is this

something the NFL should have done a whole lot earlier? We're taking a closer look.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: President Obama lays out his ISIS strategy for Congressional leaders today and for the entire country, indeed the world, tomorrow night. So, what kind of support can he expect from the U.S. Congress and does the president need approval from the lawmakers to go ahead and escalate this war?

The Democratic congressman, Adam Schiff, is a key member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence. He's joining us from Capitol Hill.

Congressman, thanks very much for joining us.

So let me pick up on what I was just talking with Dana and Gloria about. You guys up on The Hill, and I'm talking about Democrats and Republicans, you're only supposed to stay in session, what, for another two weeks or so before everyone goes back, starts campaigning, getting reelected. But if the country is about to go to war, don't you think Congress needs to stay in town and get the job done, whatever it takes?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA), SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE: Absolutely. And I think you're exactly right, Wolf, we are really going to war. When the president talks about taking the offense against is, what we're really saying is we're engaged in a long-term military campaign. Now, the military part is only one piece of it but clearly we're going to be risking people. We already are. And this is something that we have a constitutional obligation to take up and to vote and to authorize. We've moved well beyond the protection of American personnel in Erbil or Baghdad. We've moved beyond that already. But certainly if you're contemplating widening that military engagement in Iraq or going into Syria, that's something Congress really has to vote on.

BLITZER: A formal roll call authorizing this kind of operation, that's what you want, but you know a lot of your colleagues, they want to run away from that kind of sensitive vote as quickly as possible. Will the president seek such formal authorization based on what you know?

SCHIFF: Well, my guess is that he won't ask for that. But that doesn't prevent us from taking it up ourselves. We're not some suitor that has to be waited to be asked to the dance. We can take this up, should take this up in Congress. Now, it's going to be tough to draft this. And this is the challenge and probably why the president doesn't want to put all of his eggs in the basket of a congressional authorization. We're a pretty dysfunctional lot, to put it mildly. But we should able to draft something that authorizes and approves of what he is doing already, which has broad support in the Congress, and I assume there will be a buy-in with what the president announces tomorrow. That narrowly cabins (ph) that in an authorization. That's something that we should be able to draft. And I think we ought to stay as long as it takes to get that job done. There are few responsibilities more important in the Congress of the United States than declaring war when that's necessary.

BLITZER: And you know, congressman, it's not going to be cheap. The U.S. taxpayers spent over $1 billion getting rid of Gadhafi in Libya. It hasn't exactly turned out the way the U.S. and so many other countries would have liked. It's a horrible situation in Libya right now. But it's going to be expensive. If there's no formal vote authorizing this escalation of the military campaign against terrorism in Iraq and Syria, there could be some specific votes appropriating additional funding. And that would be one way to get around what you want, right?

SCHIFF: Well, I think that is probably the strategy that the White House will employ, and that is they'll request the money from Congress. And if we appropriate the money, as we are likely to do, they will say that Congress has quite literally bought into this strategy. But I don't really think that's enough. But if we don't do more, frankly, Congress has no one to blame but itself for the weakening of our institutional role in the checks and balances of our system and it's a real abdication on our part. So I don't think we can lay this at the feet of the president, although he has a role here. But this is fundamentally Congress' responsibility to declare war, as well as to fund it. And given the long duration, we're talking about a period of years here, we're talking about a military campaign that will go well into the next presidency, this is really incumbent on us to act.

BLITZER: Congressman Schiff, thanks very much for joining us.

SCHIFF: Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: Let's go right to the White House. The press secretary, Josh Earnest, is answering reporters' questions.

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: A very important message about our priorities and our national security to the American public and the president's looking forward to the opportunity.

QUESTION: Does he plan to lay out any specifics of his plan to the lawmakers this afternoon? Does he have an ask (ph) that he wants them to take back to their caucuses?

EARNEST: The president believes strongly in robust congressional consultation. And so I am confident that the president and the congressional leaders will have the kind of meeting that reflects the seriousness of the situation. But because that meeting hasn't started, I don't want to get ahead of any message the president may communicate in the context of that meeting. We are going to work at the conclusion of that meeting to try to provide you a readout, to give you at least some sense of the issues and priorities that were discussed in that meeting.

QUESTION: Chairman McKeon (ph) said he doesn't really think there's time to have a robust vote on The Hill since they only have a few more days that they're meeting before the election. Does the president think there's time for Congress to weigh in as much (ph)? EARNEST: Well, I did not see those comments from Congressman McKeon. The -- what I'll say just as a general matter, it's hard to respond directly to these comments. And just as a general matter let me say that the president does believe in robust congressional consultation. That's why the president is convening the meeting with the congressional leaders at the White House today. I would note that over the August recess, the last five or six weeks that Congress has been out of town, that has not prevented the president or the members of his staff from consulting regularly with members of Congress about this dynamic situation.

In the last week alone, the president, the vice president, members of his national security staff and cabinet have consulted with dozens of members of Congress from both parties about the situation in Iraq and Syria as it relates to ISIL. Senate and House staff have received classified briefings this week and all members of the House and Senate will receive briefings from the administration on Thursday, in just a couple of days.

I also know that the Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committees in the House and Senate are convening hearings next week. And I understand that Secretaries Hagel and Kerry will be testifying before those committees next week. So that is an indication and just gives you a little snapshot of this administration's commitment to robust consultation with Congress.

The president believes that's important because he understands that Congress has and should have a role as these important decisions are being made. And the president would certainly welcome support from members of Congress, however they choose to show it, for the steps that we're taking to confront ISIL and mitigate the threat that they pose to American national security interests and to the homeland.

This is a priority because the president believes that when you have the executive branch and the legislative branch, Democrats and Republicans, bridging divides to present a united front both to our enemies but also to the international community, it only strengthens the hand of our country as we confront those threats. It makes it easier to build strong international coalitions. It certainly makes it easier to unite our country as we take the steps that are necessary to confront this threat. So a congressional buy-in, as the president described it, is very important. It's a priority. And the president would certainly welcome the opportunity to have it.

OK. Roberta (ph).

BLITZER: All right, so there he is, Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, making an important statement. Adam Schiff, the congressman from California, still with us. He was listening, as all of us were listening. I want to get your reaction, not only as a member of Congress, but as a member of the Intelligence Committee.

Congressman, what did you think?

SCHIFF: I think they're still trying to take the temperature of the congressional leadership. Does the leadership want this taken up in Congress, do they think they can produce the votes? My guess is the president would like nothing more than to have the president ratify in an authorization his ability to use force in these circumstances. But until he gets a sense of that's really doable, he doesn't want to completely rely on that. He's not going to want to take the position that that's fully necessary. At the same time, from my own point of view, it is a constitutional necessity and I hope we take it up.

BLITZER: What about a simple congressional resolution of approval, if you will, for what the strategy is without going into all the specifics. Just a -- it's not necessarily a formal authorization. It's not necessarily an appropriation. It's just a resolution of approval. Nonbinding, if you will.

SCHIFF: Well, I think there are any number of ways that the Congress can show its support for what the president is doing. It could be through a funding measure. It could be through a more generic resolution as you're talking about. The Constitution gives us the power to declare war, but it doesn't prescribe how that declaration needs to be written. So it could be done a number of ways. My own feeling though is if what we're really talking about is an authorization to use force and we want to cabin (ph) the use of that force and we've seen with the originally AUMF from 2001 how, if you're not careful, those terms can be broadened to include conflicts in places in the world against organizations that didn't even exist at the time. If you want to cabin the president, then I think the way you do it is through a very specific authorization.

BLITZER: Congressman Schiff, thanks very much for joining us.

SCHIFF: Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: Up next, Ray Rice and the power of the videotape. We're taking a closer look at how it changed the mind of a professional football team and the whole league.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Next hour, the vice president, Joe Biden, will be speaking at the National Archives. The ceremony is commemorating the 20th anniversary of what he calls one of his proudest moments, passage of the Violence Against Women Act. Biden tweeted that that act, quote, "changed a prevailing culture from a refusal to intervene to a responsibility to act."

The vice president says the Baltimore Ravens did the, quote, "right thing," when they released running back Ray Rice. Rice was dropped by the team and subsequently suspended indefinitely by the NFL after this video surfaced on TMZ showing Rice punching and knocking out his then- fiancee, who is now his wife. The White House released this statement. Let me quote. "The president is the father of two daughters. And like any American, he believes that domestic violence is contemptible and unacceptable in a civilized society. Hitting a women is nothing something a real man does."

Rice was already serving a two-game ban for domestic violence in this case. His wife, Janay Rice, is also speaking out. She posted this on her Instagram account. "I woke up this morning feeling like I had a horrible nightmare, feeling like I'm mourning the death of my closest friend. But to have to accept the fact that it's a reality is a nightmare in itself. No one knows the pain that the media and the unwanted options" - we think she may have meant opinions there - "from the public has caused my family. To make us relive a moment in our lives that we regret every day is a horrible thing. To take something away from the man I love that he has worked his (EXPLETIVE DELETED) off for all his life just to gain ratings is horrific. This is our life. What don't you all get? If your intentions were to hurt us, embarrass us, make us feel alone, take all happiness away, you've succeed on so many levels. Just know we will continue to grow and show the world what real love is."

The termination of Rice's contract will cost him nearly $10 million. Still collecting that $15 million signing bonus he got when he signed with the Ravens.

Let's bring in Brian Stelter. He's the host of CNN's "RELIABLE SOURCES," our senior media correspondent.