Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

ISIS Militants Gaining Ground; Thousands Flee Ramadi for Baghdad; Key Bridge Closed to Fleeing Refugees; Refugees Forced from Homes by ISIS; Obama Blamed for Fall of Ramadi; White House Calls Ramadi Loss a Setback; Iraqi Forces Make Slight Gains Against ISIS; Clock Ticks for NSA Surveillance Program; First Set Of Clinton E-mails Released; Patriot Act Showdown. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired May 22, 2015 - 13:00   ET

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

DANA BASH, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, I'm Dana Bash in for Wolf Blitzer. It's 1:00 p.m. here in Washington, 6:00 p.m. in Dublin and 8:00 p.m. in Baghdad. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks for joining us.

We start with new important advances by ISIS. One in Iraq and one in Syria. First, in Syria, where ISIS militants have taken control of a key border crossing. It was the last one held by Syrian government troops. Iraqi troops still hold their side of the border. And in Iraq, ISIS has captured a key city between Ramadi and Baghdad. Those ISIS fighters are moving closer to Habbaniya, a major military base for Iraqi security forces and Iranian backed Shiite militant.

Thousands of civilians have fled ISIS' advance in Ramadi but many are trapped at a key bridge unable to make the trek towards Baghdad. Our Senior International Correspondent Arwa Damon is live in Baghdad right now. And, Arwa, why are those refugees unable to get to Baghdad?

ARWA DAMON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, simply put, because today the government decided, for reasons that have not been fully disclosed to us, even though we have been asking about it, to close the bridge. This bridge was open yesterday for refugees but only those who have a sponsor in Baghdad province. This is a bridge that connects Baghdad Province to Anbar Province.

The hundreds that we saw there earlier today really trying to get by in what can simply be described as unbearable conditions. Not just because of the violence that they witnessed that forced them to flee, but because of this sand storm that was taking place that lasted for hours. It was the kind of sandstorm that causes the dirt to get stuck in your mouth, stick to the back of your throat, fill your lungs.

And we saw, in the middle of all of this, babies, the elderly, women and children, just trying to shelter themselves because there was little, if any, actual shelter that they could use to try to protect themselves from this horrific sandstorm that was unfolding. And they were so angry because they could not understand how it was that their government could allow them to languish like this. One man was so upset, so aggravated that he said, if I die, I do not want to be buried in Iraq because a country that treats us like this, I cannot call my own. BASH: Absolutely horrible and heartbreaking. And as you were

talking, Arwa, we were playing the pictures of that sandstorm and just how horrific the conditions are. What about those who actually make it across? Who is taking care of them?

DAMON: Well, so, to come across the bridge, you need to have a sponsor and, in fact, 10s of thousands of people have fled Anbar Province for Baghdad. Many of them have family, relatives. And also, what we have been seeing is that for those who don't, kind citizens are coming forward and saying, I will sponsor these people. In a number of mosques in the capital, they have been turned make-shift refugee shelters. A lot of the predominantly Sunni neighborhoods are also opening up vacated homes, partially built buildings as make-shift shelter for these various refugees.

But there does need to be better system and a better plan in place, as we saw earlier today, for those that aren't able to get themselves into this Baghdad sponsorship program system that has been de facto established because they cannot be left in the conditions that we saw them earlier.

And also, you have these calls from the United Nations for additional support when it comes to trying to help shelter these individuals. Because if the trend is as we have seen it over the next few days, ISIS is slowly making progress in Anbar Province. It did manage to take over another town that is to the east of Ramadi and it is trying to attack yet another area closer to the Habbaniya base where the Iraqi government is trying to beef up its presence.

And, yet, it seems, up until this point, unable to do so in a significant degree that would prevent ISIS from advancing -- Dana.

BASH: And all of those women and children and other refugee are just sitting ducks there.

Arwa, thank you for that report. I appreciate it.

And the fall of Ramadi is being blamed, by some, on the United States. Some say the Iraqi forces were ill equipped for the fight and others say U.S. commanders in Baghdad made Iraq's prime minister delay the deployment of Iranian-backed Shiite militia fighters.

And joining me now to discuss this retired Lieutenant Colonel James Reese. He's CNN Global Affairs Analyst and former Delta Force commander. And here with me in Washington is Phil Mudd, CNN's Counterterrorism Analyst and former CIA counterterrorism official. And also, Mubin Shaikh, he is a former jihadist and a former counterterrorism operative.

[13:05:00] And, Colonel Reese, let me start with you. Does the United States share the blame for Ramadi?

LT. COL. JAMES REESE, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, I don't know if we have to share the blame. We're always going to be blamed because when you're the big guy on the block, everyone's going to look to that person, the person who everyone looks to around the world. And we've said this, people expect the U.S. to inspire everyone around them. Right now, we're not inspiring.

And, you know, I'm not sure if I believe that we told the prime minister to hold up the militia. But I do know that during Tikrit, that the U.S. leadership over there was not happy about the Shia militia being up in Tikrit, who were very instrumental in the fight over there. So, it breaks my heart to watch. And this humanitarian crisis is going to get worse as we go on.

BASH: And it seems that way. And Mubin, you understand the culture of groups like ISIS. What do victories like Ramadi do for ISIS with regard to recruitment?

MUBIN SHAIKH, FORMER COUNTERTERRORISM OPERATIVE: Well, this is great for recruitment. You know, you'll see, already, videos coming out of, you know, parades in the open square, in full daylight, individuals very happy about it. People are tweeting about it. And you'll start to see these video clips embedded into some of their propaganda pieces that will come out.

BASH: And, Phil, we were talking earlier. Do you think there's actually too much of a focus on Ramadi and other specific cities that fall or battles? And we're not focusing enough on the broader war.

PHILIP MUDD, CNN COUNTERTERRORISM ANALYST: That's right. Look, I spent 25 years as an analyst at CIA and the FBI. Any time you're analyzing a complex problem, you've got to look at least a handful of characteristics. If you want to buy a car, it's not just price, there's a bunch of other things. If you want to assess an insurgency, it's not just space, it's not just towns.

It's things like, does the government maintain the will to fight? The answer so far is mixed. Does the government has foreign -- have foreign support in a counterinsurgency? The answer so far is yes. The Americans are sticking with them. What's the capability of the government to have the training and equipment to bring the fight to the enemy? Are the battle lines hardening? How capable is the enemy of using an ideology to effectively recruit people and doesn't just intimidate them? I would say ISIS has not graduated there.

So, we're focusing on what happened in the last day or two or week. The average insurgency is a decade or more. If you want to assess this in-depth, you've got to look at a bunch of characteristics, not just Ramadi.

BASH: But part of the issue also seems to be, Colonel Reese, is that -- is the Iraqi military. They're just, you know, not doing what they're supposed to be doing and there are lots of reasons for that, I guess. But the bottom line is ISIS now controls Ramadi and Fallujah to the east. They're now fighting Iraqi forces to connect the road between the two cities. If ISIS does end up controlling that whole corridor, and you see it there on the map, does it set up a possible advance on Baghdad which is just less than 50 miles away?

REESE: No, I don't think it does. And Phil and I talked about this this morning. And Phil's right. We can't walk look down a straw and make a determination about Iraq. Because, yes, Iraq has had some problems in Al Anbar Province because I believe that ISIS has shifted their main effort down to Anbar where they have a huge Sunni backing there and can do some recruiting. Where they try to get up in Mosul, Mosul is surrounded by -- you know, in three areas.

So, that's kind of the stale mate right now. They've lost in Baji (ph). They've lost in Tikrit. So, the Iraqi forces have done some good things in some places. They're not doing well in Anbar. But they have to try to get it together. But I do not think the Iraq -- that ISIS will make a push to Baghdad.

But I will tell you what, in the last week, and this is continuing in Baghdad, they had 26 IEDs and 10 vehicle born IEDs in Baghdad alone last week. So, the -- there are still things happening in Baghdad even though they have it locked down pretty well.

BASH: But to get it together, as Colonel Reese was just saying, you have the will to do so, right? You have to have the will to fight the enemy, which --

SHAIKH: That's right.

BASH: -- in this case is ISIS. Do you believe that there is the will there? I mean, I know it's kind of hard to tell. But knowing what you know about sort of the culture of this?

SHAIKH: Well, I think the will is there to fight. But, I mean, in certain places, there is a greater will than in other places. I mean, I think they -- the Iraqis are going to want to hold the territory they have. I mean, the strategy, right now, has been to deny ISIS, the so-called caliphate, --

BASH: Right.

SHAIKH: -- and to shrink their land and to make the argument that, you know, what point is their caliphate? You can't even hold the land. But now, ISIS is showing that it ca n-- even if it loses land elsewhere, it can gain land in other places. And that's their strategy.

BASH: And, Phil Mudd, on that issue, we've seen reports of the Iraqi soldiers, the military not being paid for six months.

MUDD: Yes.

BASH: And not having kind of the fire in the belly, if you will, --

MUDD: Yes.

BASH: -- to do it, whether or not it's their job or not. Like, that they're actually getting a paycheck. And that's a problem when you're fighting a group like ISIS which is all about ideology.

MUDD: That's right. This is one of the reasons you're seeing Shia militia move in.

[13:10:02] Remember, we've got a Shia-led government backed by the Iranians right across the border. We're thousands of miles away and we want the Iraqis to look at the world through our perspective.

They're closer to the Iranians. And the Iranians, including Iranian generals, are sitting in Baghdad saying, hey, bring it to the Sunnis. Don't trust them. And be careful about bringing them into the government. That is people like the Sunni tribes.

So, who are you're going to listen to if you're in Baghdad? Are you listening -- you're going to listen to the Iranians, your backers across the border, saying, bring the Shia militias into Ramadi?

BASH: Yes.

MUDD: Or are you going to listen to the Americans saying, hey, take the art of the long view and practice democracy. Make friends with your enemies. Tough scene.

BASH: It is because if they're all getting mixed messages, you don't know what to do.

MUDD: Yes.

BASH: Thank you all very much for that -- for that discussion.

And coming up, the Senate is heading towards what could be a weekend showdown over NSA surveillance of Americans. They're debating a bill that would continue, but limit, broad collection of phone records. But one former attorney general says even the current law should be broader.

Plus, moments ago, the State Department released hundreds of e-mails belonging to Hillary Clinton. CNN is going through them as we speak and we're going to bring you the latest, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I have said repeatedly, I want those e-mails out. Nobody has a bigger interest in getting them released than I do. I respect the State Department. They have their process that they do for everybody, not just for me. But anything that they might do to expedite that process, I heartily support.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: That was former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, on the campaign trail on Tuesday. And just a short time ago, the State Department released almost 300 of Clinton's e-mails on-line. They span a two-year period, concentrating on events before, during and after the Benghazi attacks.

[13:00:04] And CNN Investigative Correspondent Chris Frates joins me now. He's been going through the e-mails.

So far -- I know we got them within the last hour, any bombshells so far? CHRIS FRATES, CNN INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT: So, no bombshells,

Dana. And that's important because Democrats are pointing that out. They're saying, look, there's no stand down order here. There's no evidence that she ever ran any arms through Libya or Benghazi. And so this is just more evidence that this committee isn't doing its job.

Now, Republicans, on the other hand, say that these e-mails, in fact, raise more questions about the security on the ground. In fact, there's one e-mail from August 24, 2012, where a top aide, Jake Sullivan, to Hillary Clinton says that there are some warning signs of decreasing security situation there in Benghazi. Republicans want to know, well, what was done about that? So there are examples here where Republicans are saying, this opens up more questions for us to peruse them say, it's a dead end, we should move on.

But there's also some color here, Dana. I mean there's interesting e- mails. Here is one a few days before Christmas in 2012 where Hillary writes to her top aides who are going to testify on Capitol Hill and she says, you know, I'm sorry I can't be up there with you today. You know, I'll be nursing my cracked head and cheering you on as you remain calm and carry on. And so, you know -

BASH: You get a sense of her personality.

FRATES: You get a sense of her personality -

BASH: Yes.

FRATES: That she is in touch with her aides and to - we're also seeing some color here. A little peek behind the curtain for how she ran her State Department.

BASH: Well, in front of the curtain - I should mention that we're looking right now at live pictures of Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail at the Smuttynose Brewery in New Hampshire. And I just wanted to say that in part because I wanted to say Smuttynose Brewery on television.

But in all seriousness, you're talking about these e-mails that were released. There is, of course, skepticism that these e-mails that were released were the e-mails that they are OK with the public seeing and not necessarily all of the e-mails.

FRATES: Well, that's exactly right. And I think it's important to remember that Hillary Clinton kept all of these e-mails on her own private server. And last year she turned over about 30,000 of these e- mails that she said were the official record. And she turned those over to the State Department. The State Department has been going through those. Hillary Clinton has asked for those to be released. What we're getting is the first 300 of those e-mails today. So a very small portion of the total 30,000. And these only have to do with Benghazi and Libya.

And the reason we're getting them first is because the committee that's investigating Benghazi on The Hill already had these e-mails. So they had already kind of been vetted and so we're getting our first looks here. But lots more e-mails to come.

BASH: And very briefly you mentioned the investigation, the committee on Capitol Hill. What does this say about that investigation?

FRATES: Well, I think Republicans say it means we have lots more questions. Democrats say, you know, this puts an end to any crazy conspiracy theories Republicans have. This - these e-mails will not put an end to this debate. In fact, Republicans just today said, well, these are the self-selected e-mails of Hillary Clinton -

BASH: Exactly.

FRATES: And so, you know, we have to take them with a grain of salt essentially.

BASH: I think nothing that she does or says will put anything to an end for Republicans since she is now officially running for president. Chris Frates, thanks for going through that.

FRATES: Thank you.

BASH: I appreciate it.

And the Senate is preparing a possible showdown over surveillance programs that try to track potential terror suspects. The details, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:21:46] BASH: Two years after Edward Snowden blew the lid off the NSA's secret surveillance programs, Congress is tied in knots over whether and how to keep the programs going. The Senate is expected to vote as early as today on a bill already approved by the House which extends authority for the NSA to collect massive amounts of phone data, but with some fairly important changes. Changes some in the Senate say go way too far. And it wouldn't be Congress, of course, if this weren't all happening right up against the deadline. These programs expire on June 1st. And the House, well, they've left town. They're already on a holiday recess until that very day, June 1st. U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch is pleading with Congress for an extension.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LORETTA LYNCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL: Our biggest fear in - with the - with the expiration of not just that part of it, but also our ability to track the electronic communications of terrorists, as well as to obtain the records of terrorists, is that we will lose important eyes on people who have made it clear that their - that their mission is to harm American people here and abroad.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: So, should these charges make it through the Senate intact? I want to bring in Michael Mukasey. He was nominated to be attorney general in 2007 by President George W. Bush, almost - after almost 20 years as a district court judge for New York.

Thank you for joining me. I appreciate it.

Let's start with what you just heard from Loretta Lynch and talking about the fact that she and the administration want the House bill with the reforms to pass. You, I know, disagree. You believe the problem is that the NSA's surveillance program is actually too narrow, not too expansive. Why?

MICHAEL MUKASEY, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Correct. Well, the NSA surveillance program simply - it's not - properly speaking, it's not just - it's not a surveillance program, it's simply a data gathering program is what we're talking about. It gathers the - what's called metadata. The calling number, the called number, the date and the length of the call, that's all, not any content. That's done so that we can, if we get a suspicious number, we can run it against that database to find out whether a foreign terrorist has either called or been called by a number in the United States. There's no content of any kind involved. So it's not really surveillance. Now the trouble is that they don't get cell phone records. All they get is land lines. So I think they - it ought to be extended so cell phones and otherwise ought to stay in place. The House -

BASH: And - and -

MUKASEY: Go ahead.

BASH: That's exactly what I was going to ask you about the House bill. Why do you think that what they passed is bad? And just to be specific, so our viewers know, this is obviously, you know, kind of in the weeds, but it's important, what they have done is passed a bill that says that no longer should the government hold on to these records. It would actually be the companies that do so. But apparently there's not even a requirement for them. And is that the issue that you have?

MUKASEY: That's one issue, yes. There's no requirement that they keep the records. And it's, I think, in the company's interest, in their competitive interest, to get rid of them as fast as possible. They don't want this. So they're - we're really at the mercy of the companies.

Also, even under the best of circumstances, if they do keep the records, then the Justice Department has to go running around to each - each - or the NSA has to go running around to each telephone company and search their records. There are about 100 carriers. So it's - it's quite a cumbersome process.

[13:25:11] BASH: Now, you were on Capitol Hill this week. You went behind closed doors with Republican senators, I know, to brief them, and I'm guessing to give them these arguments because they are tied in knots right now about what to do. Broadly, what did you tell them and what kind of skepticism did you hear back?

MUKASEY: Well, broadly what I told them is, there's really no civil liberties issue involved here. They're not eavesdropping on anybody's conversations. They're not even getting the identity of the person making the call or the person receiving the call. It's only a list of numbers to find out whether a number has been called by or has called a suspected terrorist number.

What I got was some skepticism relating to that, I guess, and also relating to the question of whether the law under which this was done really authorizes it. And we went back and forth on that. I believe it does. And there may have been one or two who believes it didn't.

BASH: Talk about your own experience. I mean you've been in the trenches with these programs. Truly this helps you.

MUKASEY: My own experience -

BASH: This has helped you with going after terror suspects?

MUKASEY: Right. And the way it helps is not necessarily catching somebody right at the moment that they're about to set off an inferno device. This is not about, you know, the jump shot at the buzzer. This is about gathering intelligence, which is always an incremental process. It's a piece of the puzzle here and a piece of the puzzle there and you put them together and build a database. That's what intelligence gathering is all about. It's not about necessarily the game winner at any given moment.

BASH: Now, you mentioned -

MUKASEY: But it's enormously - it's enormously helpful.

BASH: And you mention civil liberties. As you well know, there are a fair number of Democrats and Republicans who say that it's just not worth it's. it's not worth infringing on what they believe are American civil liberties for even this kind of national security imperative that you talk about. One of the most outspoken members of Congress is Senator Rand Paul, and you have been very critical of him. You talked about the possibility that he could become president and you said it's a terrifying prospect. You said on Fox News, "he's completely off the wall. There's no way the Republican Party is going to nominate somebody like that. The question is how much damage he is going to do in the meantime." That's pretty tough stuff.

MUKASEY: It is and I, you know, it's - I was - I was - I was feeling caffeine at that point, I suppose. But I - I stand by it. I think that he - whatever - whatever the reason, the description that he's made of what this program does enormously misleading. He suggested that the government is eavesdropping on people's content, that it is data mining their records, that it's drawing profiles of them and so on and none of that is true.

BASH: And you say -- you're effectively saying that he's demagoguing. He's saying he's standing up for the rights of the American people.

MUKASEY: I think that sums it up neatly.

BASH: OK. Thank you very much. Appreciate your time. Thank you for that insight because you are one of the few people who has experience in - at the head of one of the agencies conducting this. Thank you very much.

And we're going to turn up next to officials in California who are preparing to update us on an oil spill near Santa Barbara. We're going to have the latest for you on the damage, up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)