Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

How Did TMZ Get Rice Video; U.S. Goes on Offense Against ISIS; Obama to Lay Out Plans Against ISIS Tomorrow; Rice Speaks Out to ESPN; Initial MH-17 Report Doesn't Assign Blame for Crash

Aired September 09, 2014 - 13:30   ET

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

WOLF BLITZER: CNN ANCHOR: A lot of questions surrounding the release of this tape. Here's the latest statement, Brian, from the NFL as to why they didn't see the video until this week. Quote, "We requested from law enforcement any and all information about the incident, including any video that may exist. That video was not made available to us and no one in our office saw it until yesterday."

That case was pretty much over and settled until the tape, as you know, did come out. So why did the tape -- the TMZ release of this tape have such a profound -- why did TMZ get this tape that apparently the Ravens, the NFL didn't have?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT & CNN HOST, RELIABLE SOURCES: Well, for one thing, Wolf, I think TMZ was more motivated to see it. TMZ is sort of famous within the media for going to extreme lengths to get material, to get media. And what I mean by that is they're willing to pay. This heralds back to the "National Enquirer" decades ago willing to pay sources. But TMZ always focuses on trying to pay for video or audio or for images, for evidence that they can then publish. TMZ doesn't shy away from the fact that it does pay. It's part of the media eco system. It's willing to pay when others are not. And then the rest of the media climbs on board later and covers it later. We should mention TMZ is owned by the same company that also owns CNN, Time Warner. It's a sister company to CNN although it is pretty separate. I've been trying to talking to the operator of TMZ and haven't been able to get ahold of him today. But TMZ is part of this media eco system and is willing to pay for material. I think it was just more motivated to get this material than the NFL was.

BLITZER: This was done in an elevator in a resort in the casino. You know there are cameras almost everywhere, you go to these kinds of hotels, these kinds of resorts. Wouldn't it have been normal for the NFL, wouldn't it have been normal for the Baltimore Ravens or for law enforcement in this particular case to say, we want to see the video from the elevator?

STELTER: You would expect so. That's why people are so unsatisfied by the NFL's latest statement. TMZ's come out and said they don't think the NFL ever went to the casino and asked for the tape. The NFL is saying they would have had to get it through the police. That's why you talk about the idea of motivation. TMZ knew it was going to drive traffic to their website and attention to their brand. It's not the first time. Earlier this year, they were the ones that got that tape of the elevator altercation involving Beyonce and her sister. They also broke the Donald Sterling story wide open. A lot of complaints about people -- from people in the media who say TMZ shouldn't pay. But they are able to break news in a way others aren't because they pay. I think that's why they're part of this ecosystem that exists.

BLITZER: Have they issued another statement today? There was word last night they had more evidence they were about to release today as far as the NFL, the Baltimore Ravens, what they knew, what they didn't know. Have they --

(CROSSTALK)

STELTER: TMZ came out and said they believe that the NFL never contacted the hotel, contacted the casino. That was their latest bit that they've released. They're very good at letting stories roll out over time. That way that keeps TMZ in the center of the story. This is just the latest example of the power of video. Imagine if there had been a police dash cam or a body cam on the officer that shot Michael Brown, a story that dominated the headlines for weeks, in part because we still don't know exactly what happened. On the other hand, Ray Rice's now wife feels her privacy has been violated by TMZ. That's a point to keep in mind. Even though many, many people are watching this video and reacting to this video, she feels her privacy's been violated by the release of it. That's something that's been glossed over in some of the coverage.

BLITZER: Do you think she might have a legal suit or a lawsuit against TMZ for releasing the video?

STELTER: I would be very surprised. TMZ has never successfully been sued. That is one thing that's striking about their -- about the way they do their work. They might come right up to the line. But they're very careful not to cross it. As a result, they've never been successfully sued.

BLITZER: Brian Stelter, as always, thanks very much.

STELTER: Thanks.

BLITZER: Still ahead, the U.S. goes from the defense to the offense against ISIS. But what will it take to win the battle? We'll examine the strategy. That's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. I'm Wolf Blitzer, reporting from Washington.

Tomorrow night, 9:00 p.m. Eastern, the president is set to outline his new strategy for attacking the terror group ISIS, also known as ISIL, while the details remain sketchy, the president did reveal this much in a recent interview.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: More than anything, I want the American people to understand the nature of the threat and how we're going to deal with it and to have confidence that we'll be able to deal with it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Let's bring in Brian Stelter.

The president said his goal is to degrade, ultimately to destroy ISIS. But so far, the U.S. hasn't targeted any of its leaders, the leaders of the Islamic State, as it's called, for assassination. Why is that?

STELTER: We've been pressing White House and Pentagon officials on that over the past couple of days. The Pentagon says the policy is that they're conducting air strikes to protect U.S. personnel and facilities, to support humanitarian efforts and to support Iraqi forces that are acting in furtherance of the objective overall of removing ISIS. That's their lane, as far as the Pentagon is concerned, to protect U.S. personnel and assets, to protect humanitarian missions, to protect Iraqi forces. Then we asked why hasn't there been the policy from the get-go to mix in air strikes targeting the ISIS leaders among them? Why not make that part of the policy? We're trying to get answers now, Wolf, right now from the White House. And that may be more of a question for the White House policymakers to answer this afternoon.

Of course, we know that could all change tomorrow night when the president addresses the nation about a strategy for ISIS. The president has mentioned in past days and recent days the need to decimate ISIS and taking out ISIS leadership is part of that. But as far as why they haven't tried to do that up to now, that's kind of a burning question. Some analysts say they may not have had quite good enough intelligence to really strike and conduct specific air strikes toward ISIS leaders. The intelligence community brushes back on that saying, look, our intelligence capability is good and is growing there. So there's a little bit of some vague policy and vague pronouncements on this as far as why they haven't targeted ISIS from the get-go.

BLITZER: There's a little nuance there, too. I've covered the national security beat for a long time. It's one thing for the Pentagon, the U.S. military to say they haven't been authorized to go ahead and engage in targeted killings of ISIS leaders. And the military's been precise in that statement you just referred to. But what about the CIA? The intelligence community? As you know, in Pakistan and elsewhere, it's the CIA very often who launches those drones and gets ahead and launches the missiles on Taliban leaders.

STELTER: We're pressing the CIA and other intelligence agencies on that as well. And you're right that they are the ones, sometimes, to get the go-ahead. But it has to, often, come from the White House itself to give the final order to actually target a specific leader. That's been the case with Osama bin Laden, presumably with the al Shabaab leader, who was recently killed. We're trying to get answers on that. Why haven't you targeted ISIS leader? Why not target Baghdadi from the get-go? This could change tomorrow night when the president lays out the strategy and maybe some of the equation will change. But also maybe a reluctance to go into Syria where al Baghdadi might be hiding. It could be part of that equation as well, Wolf --

BLITZER: All right.

STELTER: -- a reluctance to go into Syria at this point.

BLITZER: We'll all be waiting to hear what the president has to say tomorrow tonight, 9:00 p.m. eastern. CNN will have live coverage.

Up next, President Obama, as you know, is ready to unveil his new anti-ISIS strategy. The former national security adviser to President Obama, retired general, James Jones, he's here with me. We'll discuss what's going on when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: President Obama will lay out his strategy to the American people tomorrow night, 9:00 p.m. eastern, in a major address.

Joining us now is retired U.S. Marine Corps General James Jones, the former supreme allied commander for Europe and the also the national security adviser to President Obama.

General, thanks for coming in.

This war on terror, I've always thought, basically since 9/11, it's almost like the war on drugs, the war on crime, it's never going to be completely won, if you will. It's just going to go on and on and on.

GEN. JAMES JONES, FORMER SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER, EUROPE & FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR TO PRESIDENT OBAMA: It's going to take a long time.

BLITZER: Three years to destroy ISIS. If the president and his aides think they can destroy ISIS and al Qaeda -- al Qaeda hasn't been destroyed since 9/11. It's still around. They have various branches, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, al Qaeda in the Maghreb. But they're still something the U.S. has to worry about.

JONES: Not only the U.S. And I think what's really changed is the international community has also wakened up to the fact that they also have to be involved in this. This is not a unilateral world or a bilateral or bipolar world anymore. It's multilateral. Everybody has to get in this. Where al Qaeda's concerned, it's certainly been defeated and degraded at times. But look-alike organizations crop up.

BLITZER: So even if you get al Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, if you kill him -- and I don't know if the president wants to kill him or doesn't want to kill him. But let's say you kill him, some other guy is going to jump up and take over.

JONES: Yeah, until you really get at the long-term issues here with regard to the future of how various countries are going to live and work together, whether it's the Islamic world and the rest of the world and the like, but it has -- the strategic -- the long-term strategic goals have to be laid out in such a way that we realize there's more than just military aspects here that have to be solved. This is one that's imminent. But long-term economic plans, education, diplomacy, cultural assimilation, all those things have to be factored in the long-term goal that will convince people that there's a better way to live on this planet.

BLITZER: That's going to take an enormous amount of work. Not going to be resolved in three years. Take us behind the scenes. You were there, not only as the NATO supreme allied commander but the president's national security adviser. He has to personally, as commander-in-chief, authorize the targeted killing of a terrorist leader, is that right?

JONES: Yes.

BLITZER: So it's one thing for the military, as the U.S. military did against the al Shabaab leader in Somalia, the one that launched missiles from drones, fighter aircraft overhead, they killed him. It's another thing for the CIA to do similar operations as opposed to the military. What's the difference if the president authorizes the CIA to kill a terrorist as opposed to the U.S. Marine Corps or the Army or the Navy --

(CROSSTALK)

JONES: Hopefully, the effect is the same. Hopefully, we'll be successful. But generally speaking, at least up to now, with regard to Iraq, there's been a -- fairly well-defined lanes of operation --

BLITZER: Between the CIA and the military?

JONES: I think so, yeah.

BLITZER: Explain.

JONES: I think the CIA generally operates covertly and clandestinely. The military is more in the white world, except for the Special Forces sometimes. So it kind of depends what tools you have, where they are, what's available. And it's not to say that they don't work together as well because in the raid to kill Osama bin Laden, it was a SEAL raid, Special Forces. But the whole community works very well together. That's one of the things that, if I were an ISIS leader, I would be thinking very hard about, because when the president gives the word, it will be a formidable capability that we launch against this organization and perhaps against them.

BLITZER: Yeah, I have to assume all those top leaders of ISIS right now are worried the United States is going to try to kill them.

JONES: I would be very worried about that.

BLITZER: And I would be shocked if the president decided not to do that. In other words, if the president knew where al Baghdadi was, or who the executioner of those two American journalists, where they were, I assume the president quickly would say, go ahead, kill them. JONES: Well, after the evidence of two beheadings on television,

which really galvanized the world against them, I would be very surprised if that isn't done at some point.

BLITZER: General, thanks very much for coming in. Let's continue this conversation.

JONES: Thank you.

BLITZER: General James Jones, the former NATO supreme allied commander.

Up next, we have the initial report on what brought down flight MH-17 over eastern Ukraine. Richard Quest is standing by to explain why it doesn't assign blame for the crash.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: This just coming in. The released Baltimore Ravens running back, Ray Rice, now speaking out, speaking to ESPN. Rice saying, and I'm quoting now, "Good spirits after being suspended." He says he's in good spirits after being suspended by the NFL over the video sowing him punching his now wife then fiancee. Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSINA ANDERSON, ESPN (voice-over): I called Ray Rice this morning and spoke very briefly. When I was able to ask him how he was doing, he said to me, I have to be strong for my wife. She's so strong. We're in good spirits. We have a lot of people praying for us. And we'll continue to support each other. And then after that, he added, I have to be there for my family right now and work through this. After we talked briefly, he actually handed the phone off to his wife. And we were able to chat. And she told me, look, I love --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Well, we lost the end of that part. But you get the gist of what he said. That was Rice -- Ray Rice speaking to Josina Anderson of ESPN. Much more coming up on that story in the next hour.

The preliminary report, meanwhile, is out on the crash of Malaysia Airlines flight 17, which was shot down over Ukraine in July.

CNN aviation correspondent, Richard Quest, is joining us.

What is the bottom line? What does the report say, Richard?

RICHARD QUEST, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: The bottom line says that the plane was struck by those high-energy objects which came from outside the aircraft. They ripped into the forward parts of the fuselage, caused the plane to break up in midair with the forward section falling immediately where the plane was, and the other part of the plane continuing to travel on. It is an awful prospect of what it was like, except in one respect, that which happened, happened fast. There was no warning, no May Day, no distress call. Nothing, Wolf. The plane was shot out of the sky.

BLITZER: We all assume it was a surface-to-air missile. Why can't they say that?

QUEST: Because it's the job of this investigation to -- not to apportion blame and only to give on the facts. They haven't managed to get any of the fuselage yet. They're dealing with pictures. They can see how the metal has been bent, the indentations, the sort of penetrations. But what they haven't got is the metal itself. They are expecting to get it, but this is a war zone at the moment, as you've been reporting. Until they can get coordinated response in there, they're not going to be able to say exactly what sort of missile it was, if, indeed, they ever do. This is as good as saying someone shot the plane down.

BLITZER: And they certainly don't say who was responsible for launching that missile or whatever it was. That area where the plane went down, it's still an awful, awful scene, right?

QUEST: Not only is it horrific, it is exactly as it was then because there have been limited number of people who have been able to go in. But there's been nothing like the large-scale recovery operation to get the pieces. I saw this morning the pictures that we were showing. Compare them to what it was like there, same bits of engines, same bits of fuselage, same bits of aircraft. Nothing has moved in the two months since the plane was shot down.

BLITZER: Richard's going to be back later today in "The Situation Room" and we'll have more on this story. What an awful story it has been.

Richard, thanks very much for joining us.

QUEST: Thank you.

BLITZER: And I'll be back later today, 5:00 p.m. Eastern, another two-hour edition of "THE SITUATION ROOM."

In the meantime, CNN NEWSROOM with Brooke Baldwin will begin right after this quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)