Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

House Met to Vote on Homeland Security Funding Bill; Senate Passes Clean Funding Bill For Security; U.S. Will Hunt Down Terrorists; How Did Jihadi John Slip Under Radar; Hunting Down Terrorists; Leonard Nimoy Dies; GOP CPAC Conference

Aired February 27, 2015 - 13:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer. It's 1:00 p.m. here in Washington, 6:00 p.m. in London, 8:00 p.m. in Jerusalem. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us.

There is a huge fight over funding over the Department of Homeland Security here in the United States and lots hang in the balance right now. The U.S. House of Representatives was expected to vote on a bill that would at least continue funding that agency for a few weeks. That's the agency that keeps Americans safe. The bill would extend funding for only, though, three weeks. But just a few moments ago, the House went into recess without doing anything, at least so far.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate passed its own bill just a couple of hours ago. It keeps funding for the department open, keeps funding going until the end of the current fiscal year. That means through the end of September.

Our Congressional Correspondent Athena Jones is up on Capitol Hill. So, Athena, it's complicated but lots at stake right now, as far as Homeland Security funding is concerned. Where do things stand?

ATHENA JONES, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Wolf. That's right. Right now, the House is in recess. This happened just a few minutes ago. They were supposed to have already voted on this three- week continuing resolution, funding the Department of Homeland Security. That hasn't happened. And when the House recesses like this, past experience shows us that means that the Republican leadership is having a hard time getting the votes they need.

Here's what's going on. You have moderate House Republicans, people like New York Representative Peter King, Pennsylvania Representative Charlie Dent, and others, who want to go ahead and pass the bill that the Senate just passed a few hours ago, that clean spending bill -- that clean funding bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security for the rest of the year. Wouldn't do anything to block the President's executive actions on immigration.

Now, you have conservatives in the House who say, look, the whole plan -- the whole plan we worked out last night in our meeting was that we would pass this three-week funding bill. And then, we would vote to conference, to bring our bill, the House bill that includes restrictions on immigration moves by the president. And we'll conference that with the Senate bill that doesn't have those measures. We'll try to reach a compromise. And so, you have some House conservatives who may say, look, if we're not going to conference that bill with the Senate, then we're not going to vote on this three-week extension.

So, it's a bit of a mess right now. We're going to be watching closely to see what happens over there. A House GOP leadership aide told my colleague, Deirdre Walsh, who's over there off the House floor, not to expect a long recess.

But the bottom line is Democrats have already said they only want to vote on a bill to fund Homeland Security for the entire fiscal year. So, they're relying now on Republicans' votes to pass this. And it's just not clear, right now, that speaker Boehner has those votes -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Yes, it's a tough situation all around. And just under 11 hours to go. You see the countdown clock there on the screen before funding for the Department of Homeland Security, border control, immigration control, airport security. So much is at stake right now. Just 11 hours until money starts running out. Athena, stand by.

I want to get more on what's going on. Right now, joining us, our Chief Political Analyst Gloria Borger and our CNN Political Commentator Kevin Madden. You know, Gloria, he's going to make a major decision right now, the House speaker, John Boehner. Is he going to accept what the Senate has already passed? Is he going to try to do something differently? Is he going to just punt for three weeks? There's a lot is going on right now. The American public --

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: I think --

BLITZER: -- is pretty frustrated.

BORGER: You know, if you take a step back for a minute, Wolf, this is about the president's plan, his executive order on immigration. Republicans don't want to fund that. And so, they -- this is their way of saying, look, we don't want to fund immigration, therefore we're not going to fund DHS. They're kind of related. What the -- what the leader in the Senate is trying to do is decouple them so you can vote on one and not vote on the other.

And John Boehner has his hands full, as, by the way, he always has his hands full with his Republicans, some of whom are balking. And the Democrats are sort of sitting back saying, OK, you want a three-week extension? We think it's a dumb, dumb, dumb idea, just fund the department. They're sitting back and saying, you're going to have to pass it with Republicans votes. We're not helping you out. So, by the way, everyone ends up looking dumb.

BLITZER: The Senate majority to Mitch McConnell, he agreed to decouple these two sensitive --

BORGER: Right. BLITZER: -- issues and allow a funding bill to go forward that keeps the department operating full strength, at least until the end of the current fiscal year. But speaker Boehner hasn't agreed to that yet.

KEVIN MADDEN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Right. The Senate's only one part of the equation. John Boehner, when he went into this fight, had two priorities. The first was to make sure that the government didn't shut down. To sure that the government was funded, including DHS.

The second was to make sure that Republican priorities -- and by fiat, I think Republic -- priorities of the American people, when it came to the enforcement of immigration, that those were reflected in any agreement. And that's what he's actually done. The key question here is whether or not we're going to see this go to conference, whether or not that would be the next step.

And that's, I think, what John Boehner is going to insist upon is that this is how the government works which is that if you have differences, between the Senate and the House, that you've worked them out in a conference. And if they can do that, while they have this other three-week reprieve on a C.R., that that's the best way to do that. And that's consistent with John Boehner's objectives.

BLITZER: But promotionally (ph), the Democratic leader in the House has already told all the Democrats, don't vote for a three-week extension, force them to do what the Senate has already done.

MADDEN: And so, look --

BORGER: And she doesn't want to go to conference on something she shouldn't -- she believes should not be a part of this -- of the funding of the Department of Homeland Security. So, she's saying, immigration's not on the table. Why would we put it on the table?

MADDEN: And, look, let's remember that John Boehner, his strategy is not out of step with where the American people are. They've made it clear that they disagree with the way the president went about his executive actions on immigration. The president himself said, 22 times, that he didn't have the power to do what he did.

BLITZER: But that presidential action is on hold anyhow because a federal judge in Texas --

MADDEN: And my third point which is it's not like -- it's not like they are going against some judicial decree. The judicial action that has taken place on this has actually been consistent with the -- with the Republicans position.

BLITZER: But why not let the judicial process work its way out --

BORGER: Well, that's a good question.

BLITZER: And, in the meantime, fund the Department of Homeland Security.

BORGER: That's a very good question.

MADDEN: That's where the -- I think that's where the three-week reprieve comes and then in the same effort to try and work out some of these differences in a conference.

BORGER: Well, let me -- let me also say one other thing. So, the -- they all look silly. That's just say that that's baseline.

MADDEN: Well, to your point, I --

BORGER: The question is, who's going to get what?

MADDEN: No, to your point. Washington loses here. I know that we always --

BORGER: Yes, OK.

MADDEN: -- try to figure out whether the Republicans are --

BORGER: OK.

MADDEN: -- losers or the Democrats are losers.

BORGER: OK. But I'm going to tell you the poll numbers.

MADDEN: Washington is an institution the American people get very frustrated with.

BORGER: OK. So, but if you -- you know, CNN, earlier this month, asked the question, who is more responsible if the Department of Homeland Security shuts down? And if you look at those poll numbers, 53 percent -- we've got it there. 53 percent would blame the Republicans, 30 percent President Obama.

Now, I know you're going to tell me that it didn't hurt them when they -- when the government got shut down, still won the Senate in the midterm elections. I still believe people understand that there are lots of national securities issues out there that they've got to worry about and they would blame them.

MADDEN: Just to show you I have -- there's an intellectual honesty here. Anytime you are the party --

BORGER: I would never doubt that.

MADDEN: Anytime you have a party of limited government and the government shuts down, you have a bigger bear -- you have a bigger price to bear. But, ultimately, remember, if we remember the shutdown, we -- you and I were up there, like, whatever it was, a year and a half ago.

BORGER: Oh, no. How could I forget?

MADDEN: Washington is going to pay for it. People are going to look at Washington and say, they can't get things done. And, again, that frustration level has had it, the whole entire institution of Washington. So, --

BLITZER: Yes, people are --

MADDEN: -- everybody gets caught in on this.

BLITZER: If the government, the Department of Homeland Security, at least partially shuts down at midnight tonight, that's when the money runs out, people are going to be angry at Washington. They're going to be frustrated.

BORGER: Of course.

BLITZER: They're going to say, why can't these people operate in a -- in a realistic manner?

BORGER: So, I had one Democrat -- a senior Democrat say to me yesterday that -- this Democrat does not believe that the Republicans would allow the Department of Homeland Security not to be funded when Bibi Netanyahu, who was coming to address the country.

MADDEN: Well, look, I think -- from every source I've talked to up on Capitol Hill, they feel confident that they're going to get this. I think Athena was right. That's why there in there right now, trying to make sure that they have the votes when they do move to the floor. And they do want to move onto this speech next week which they want that to be in the limelight, not this.

BLITZER: Kevin Madden, Gloria Borger, guys, thanks very much.

We're going to go back to the Hill. We'll see what's happening up there. They're in recess right now in the House of Representatives. There is lots at stake. Much more right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: A big part of the fight to protect the U.S. homeland is focused squarely on ISIS. The attorney general of the United States, Eric Holder, insists the United States is committed to bringing those terrorists to justice, including the ISIS fighter known as Jihadi John, the man seen in several of the terror group's beheading videos has now been identified as Mohammed Emwazi, a Kuwaiti-born, college- educated London man.

Here's what Eric Holder told CNN's Pamela Brown.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ERIC HOLDER, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: We have shown that it doesn't matter how long it takes. It doesn't matter where you are. We'll find you. We'll hunt you down. And we will hold you accountable.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: But in a war zone like Syria, can you really do that?

HOLDER: Whether it's through the use of our military, through the use of our law enforcement capacity, if you harm Americans, it is the sworn duty of every person in the executive branch to find you and hold you accountable.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: An intensive search is underway right now for at least four Canadian teenagers who may have flown to the Middle East to join ISIS. Canadian authorities are also investigating more young people who could have followed a similar path. And there has been a new arrest in the deadly shootings that terrorized Copenhagen, Denmark earlier this month. Police now say a young man has been charged with helping the suspected gunman. Two people were killed when the shooter opened fire on a free speech forum. And, once again, a few hours later, outside a synagogue in Copenhagen. The gunman was later shot and killed by local police.

Lots to discuss. Let's bring in your Law Enforcement Analyst, the former FBI assistant director, Tom Fuentes. And joining us from Colorado, our CNN Security and Intelligence Analyst, the former CIA operative, Bob Baer. Let's talk about, Tom, the hunt. The hunt for Jihadi John, as he's called. We're learning a lot more about this guy. And he doesn't necessarily fit the pattern of someone who was isolated, poor, didn't have a job. He was pretty sophisticated, highly educated, come from a relatively upper middle class background.

TOM FUENTES, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: No, I agree, Wolf. You know, I think there's been too much said by the administration and many people trying to create a profile of only the down and out, only the people that can't get jobs or are uneducated join ISIS or join the extremist terrorists around the world. And we've seen example after example of well-educated people joining who really believe that's the fundamental true religion that they're signing up for. Now, granted, many of them are garden variety psychopaths on top of that and enjoy the killing that they're doing. But there is a basis for that thinking as well. So, we can't pigeonhole that people have joined ISIS into just that -- the down trodden.

BLITZER: Bob Baer, you know, there's a lot of investigations underway now, a lot of soul searching in the U.K. over whether or not they made a major blunder in letting this guy get out of the country. He apparently had been watched for a long time by British surveillance and all of a sudden he slows up and he's beheading individuals on videotape.

BOB BAER, CNN SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Exactly, Wolf. I mean, as Tom said, we can't profile these people. And right now we're not even sure how he was recruited. Was it on the Internet? Was it related to the 2005 tube bombings? Why did he choose to pick the Somali conflict? Why, in his mind, was that a great act of injustice? And how that goes from the Islamic State? There's so much we don't know.

What's interesting for me is the British didn't, you know, do a full investigation from the beginning once they had identified him from voice analysis. They didn't go to neighbors. They didn't look into this. They had other operational considerations, which I understand. But only now are the details coming out. And once we start talking to the families and friends will we understand how this conversion happened.

But, again, I go back to - and Tom and I have talked about this before, you really can't blame the British for not arresting him. He hadn't committed a crime. And by the time he got away, it was too late for them to do anything.

BLITZER: Was there a misstep, you believe, based on what we know right now by British intelligence or law enforcement, the security personnel?

FUENTES: No, I don't think so. And when I was running international operations, we worked closely with MI5. And I remember as far back 10 years ago, when the bombings happened in the underground and on the bus in London, the head of MI5 then said, we can't follow everybody. We don't have the resources. And now you probably have 10 or 20 times as many people as need to be followed and I would gather that they have not had the significant increase in resources to do it. So this is going to happen over and over and over. It can happen in our country or Canada or anywhere in Europe. And it's just going to continue.

BLITZER: Yes. And I know, as you just heard Eric Holder saying, they're looking for this guy. They want to bring him to justice, this so-called "Jihadi John."

FUENTES: Right.

BLITZER: We'll see what happens. Guys, stand by.

There's other important news we're following, including this -- he was the stuff of science fiction legend. We have sad news to report from Los Angeles. The actor, Leonard Nimoy, has died. "The Los Angeles Times" and "The New York Times" confirmed the death by speaking with his family. Leonard Nimoy will, of course, be remembered around the world as Spock, the half human, half Vulcan character he portrayed on the "Star Trek" series and movies. The actor had chronic lung disease caused by years of smoking. Leonard Nimoy was 83 years old.

Up next, we're going to speak with one of his friends, the "Star Trek" cast member George Takei. You may know him as Mr. Sulu. Stay with us. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Let's get some more on the sad news we just reported, the death of the actor Leonard Nimoy, better known, of course, as Spock to all of the "Star Trek" fans out there. Let's talk a little bit about Leonard Nimoy and his legacy. Joining us on the phone right now is his fellow "Star Trek" actor, George Takei.

George, a sad moment. Give us your thoughts. What will he most be remembered for?

GEORGE TAKEI, ACTOR (via telephone): Leonard was a real leader. First of all, certainly he was a brilliant actor. But he also believed in working collaboratively. And when discussing a scene, he had a remarkable talent for analyzing the scene very quickly, in terms of its point, its drive. But he also was able to guide other actors. He was really a company actor.

He was also talented in so many ways. He directed three "Star Trek" films. And we enjoyed working with him as a director most. He was -- because he knew the members of the cast, he was able to talk in shorthand, rather than some directors who want to get into a deep and profound and gabby discussion about a scene or a character.

Leonard was also a very dear friend. One extraordinary thing about him I remember, when "Star Trek" was going to be done as an animated series, they cast Leonard, Bill Shatner, Majel Barrett and Jimmy Doohan only for the voice acting on that. And when he discovered that Nichelle Nichols and Walter Koenig and I were not cast because of budgetary considerations, he said, "Star Trek" is about diversity. And if the two people that represent diversity the most, Nichelle and George, then I'm not interested in doing it. He said, I will not do it without the point of "Star Trek," which was diversity. That was an extraordinary thing for an actor to give up a gig for other -- on behalf of other actors. And because Leonard was so necessary for the project, they cast Nichelle and me and offered Walter an opportunity to write a script.

He was really an amazing man. And a lovable man. A very thoughtful man. He was very supportive of my career personally. When -- Leonard did "Equus" on Broadway. And when I did the same role, "Equus," in Los Angeles, in a smaller theater, he was there to support me and came backstage. And when I said, well, how'd I do, Leonard, knowing that he was the man who did it on Broadway, he said, smilingly and obviously jokingly, but he said, you were better. And two years ago when I did a musical on the Old Globe (ph) stage in San Diego, he drove all the way down to see it and give me a good luck hug.

BLITZER: So you guys were friendly, what, for 50 years, is that right?

TAKEI: Just about, yes. "Star Trek" will be 50 years old next year. And I knew Leonard just the year before that. So, yes, it's just been about 50 years that I've known him.

BLITZER: George Takei, thank you so much for sharing a few thoughts. Sad news, Leonard Nimoy, unfortunately, passed away at the age of 83. He will be missed. What an amazing career, what an amazing man. George, thanks very much for joining us.

TAKEI: Thank you very much.

BLITZER: All right, we're going out to some other news right now. In about 15 minutes or so, Jeb Bush, the Florida -- former Florida governor, takes the stage at the Conservative Political Action Conference that's being held right now just outside Washington, D.C. It's a huge gathering of Republican activists, officials, party leaders, who want to hear from all the potential Republican presidential hopefuls out there. Today's speech could be especially important for the former Florida governor.

Let's discuss what's going on. Once again, our chief political analyst Gloria Borger is here and joining us from the CPAC conference, as it's called, out there in suburban Maryland, our national political reporter Peter Hamby.

This is the first time we're going to be seeing Jeb Bush in front of a very major activist base of his party. So what's the tone you expect him to strike, Peter?

PETER HAMBY, CNN NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER: Well, Jeb Bush advisers have told me, Wolf, that he plans to, you know, benefit from low expectations here. People in this crowd think Jeb Bush is a moderate. That he's an establishment guy who's not a conservative. But, Bush, I'm told, is going to lean into issues from his time as Florida governor, like taxes and spending, like abortion, like guns. He's going to talk about all of those things and try to connect with the crowd here.

This event is interesting for two different reasons, Wolf. One is like what we're talking about, that this is his first time confronting the conservative base head-on. But, secondly, all the events he's done to date have really been in sort of a controlled environment with screened questions. This has the potential to be a little volatile, a little different, definitely unscripted. So it's going to be real interesting to watch.

BLITZER: Gloria, how important is this speech for Jeb Bush and his ambition to become the next president of the United States?

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: I think he just is going to try and escape unscathed. He's under no illusions that this audience loves him. This is a young sort of Rand Paul, Scott Walker, more libertarian kind of audience than would naturally love him. I think he's going to try and tout, as Peter was just saying, his conservative credentials.

There's a danger here for him. Because if you'll recall, Mitt Romney spoke before this group when he was running for president and called himself severely conservative. We remember that. And I don't think Jeb Bush can make that mistake because then he loses some authenticity about who he is. So, yes, I'm conservative. I should be at least, bottom line, acceptable to you. But nobody who works for Jeb Bush expects him to get a standing ovation. Let's see.

BLITZER: Well, forget about a standing ovation. Peter, you're there. There was some suggestion there might be people walking out in protest. Have you heard that?

HAMBY: There are whispers about that here that some people are coming into the event just to sort of stage a walk-out. But I'm, you know, the other thing happening, interesting, Wolf, Jeb Bush supporters are bussing in people from "k" street (ph), from Georgetown, from Washington, D.C., to sort of stack the audience as well.

This is all theater, as Gloria points out. Like this isn't necessarily going to be make-or-break for Jeb Bush's campaign. It's just kind of an important moment for him because he's going to be road testing a conservative message in front of an audience that is very conservative. And he's going to have to start doing that again and again and again over the next year in Iowa, in South Carolina, in New Hampshire, Florida, D.C., wherever. He's got to learn how to talk to a modern conservative audience. Remember, he hasn't been in office since 2002. The Republican Party has changed a lot since then. The media environment has changed a lot. People are a little more combative now. So this is Jeb's chance to sort of become accustomed to that environment.

BLITZER: You know, there's another potential presidential hopeful, the Wisconsin governor, Scott Walker. He's also been over at the CPAC event. He got himself into a bit of hot water with comments he made about President Obama's strategy against ISIS. Let me play the clip.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. SCOTT WALKER (R), WISCONSIN: I want a commander in chief who will do everything in their power to ensure that the threat from radical Islamic terrorists do not wash up on American soil. We will have someone who leads and ultimately will send a message not only that we will protect American soil but do not - do not take this upon freedom- loving people anywhere else in the world. We need a leader with that kind of confidence. If I can take on 100,000 protesters, I can do the same across the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: He later backtracked a bit, clarifying those comments right here on CNN. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WALKER: No, it's - again, you all misconstrue things the way you see fit, but I think it's pretty clear that's the closest thing I have in terms of handling a difficult situation, not that there's any parallel between the two.

Thanks.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: That's just the latest apparent misstep that's raised some political eyebrows.