Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Interview with Senator Inhofe; NFL's Tolerance to Domestic Violence Undermines Its Financial Well-Being

Aired September 16, 2014 - 16:30   ET

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

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome back to "THE LEAD." Staying with us, world lead, the top military men in the Obama administration earlier today went before the Senate Armed Services Committee to answer questions about the president's plan to degrade and destroy the terrorist group ISIS, repeatedly the administration has vowed, as you know, no U.S. combat troops, no boots on the ground, so to speak. But Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey at the hearing today appeared to leave the door open on that if the coalition is not effective.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN. MARTIN DEMPSEY, CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: My view at this point is that this coalition is the appropriate way forward. I believe that will prove true. But if it fails to be true and if there are threats to the United States, then I of course would go back to the president and make a recommendation that may include the use of U.S. military ground forces.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: And joining me now is Senator Jim Inhofe, Republican from Oklahoma and ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Senator, thanks for joining us. We appreciate it. Now, we've heard repeatedly from the Obama administration that there will be no boots on the ground, no U.S. combat troops in this operation, yet General Dempsey appeared to leave the door open to at the very least recommend ground troops, U.S. ground troops in the future. How did you interpret that moment?

SEN. JIM INHOFE, (R) ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: Well, first of all, the president is just flat not telling the truth. We already have boots on the ground there. He knows we are going to have to have boots on the ground. Let's just go ahead and face it. And admit we're in a war. And you just don't - don't win a war unless you are out there fighting. I did ask the question, and I hope that you took note of that, a lot of people did, and that is, if we have guys doing air missions over, and they're shot down, are we going to have troops down there to save these guys? And he said, yes, we will. So, I think he made it very clear that the president is just making that statement for political purposes.

TAPPER: You asked in another comment you made today in your opening statement, you asked what does a defeated or destroyed ISIL or ISIS look like? Did you get a satisfactory answer to that question?

INHOFE: No. I'm a little more blunt than most people. I would have preferred to say, just complete annihilation is what it would look like. And we didn't get that. It was left room for depending on - our - the other countries and their participation simply so - I didn't think that was as directed an answer as I would like. I have to say this, though. I think that Secretary Hagel did a better job this time. He always does a better job when John Kerry's not hanging around.

TAPPER: Well, speaking of Secretary Hagel. During the hearing he was asked what kind of message Congress would be sending if it does not ultimately approve the president's request for $500 million to train moderate Syrian rebels as well as to give the Defense Department permission to train them. Here's our Secretary Hagel responded?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHUCK HAGEL, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: That message would be very, very seriously misunderstood and misinterpreted by our allies, our friends, our partners around the world and our adversaries. If the Congress would not agree to that request, it would be a pretty devastating message that we send to the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Pretty devastating message. He said, I don't know if it would be a misunderstanding, quite frankly. I think the enemy and our allies would understand it quite perfectly that the U.S. Congress is not willing to put any of its skin in this game. What's your take?

INHOFE: Well, first of all, that's not the message. We have skin in the game already. I think every time the president makes a request for money, when you look at it real carefully, ends up he's got his other agenda in it. And I just don't trust him to come out and say, this specifically is what it's for. And that is what we're supposed to be doing on the Senate Armed Services Committee. So he was not specific as to what it would be spent for. So, we want to see a plan -- look, here's the problem with the president. He doesn't have a strategy. He's never had a strategy in the Middle East. He doesn't have a strategy on ISIS. And you've got to have a strategy as to what you're going to try to do. Well, of course, that's what the hearing was all about. But what took place today should have been in our committee hearing where we could look and see what is it going to take to defeat this war out there when we are threatened?

And by the way, I have to say this, I'm really proud of the American people who finally understand that ISIS is actually a threat to our homeland. And recently as you well know, there have been in the last week two polls that show that 70 percent of the people understand.

TAPPER: All right, Senator Jim Inhofe, Republican of Oklahoma, thank you so much for joining us.

INHOFE: Thank you, Jake. Coming up, they make up nearly half of the NFL's fan base and their

purchasing power makes them gridiron gold. But could the NFL's handling of domestic violence issues put it at risk of losing those caveated female fans? Plus, a British politician forced to duck out of side door after being chased down by a group of Scottish pro- independence protesters. It was just two days before a vote are the nays or yays winning.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Welcome back to "THE LEAD." Time now for the money lead. You want to talk money? How about $10 billion? $10 billion? That's what the NFL attracts with its millions of fans around the world. So it is no wonder that the NFL is now scrambling to recover from what's seen as an embarrassing and potentially even a costly start to the 2014 season thanks to back-to-back scandals involving two of the league's marquee players. We've now learned that Minnesota Vikings running back Adrian Peterson who was indicted last week for allegedly abusing his son has apparently been investigated for child abuse in the past, according to CNN affiliate KHOU. Peterson was investigated by child protective services last year for an incident involving another one of his sons who was just 4 years old at the time. No charges were filed. In an emotional statement released yesterday, Peterson denied he was a child abuser and said he only meant to discipline his kids. But many are wondering why, given the seriousness of the charges, Peterson will still be allowed to take the field again on Sunday? Particularly given how badly the league fumbled its handling of Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice. Rice, as you well know, was suspended for the season only after video came out that showed him viciously hitting his then-fiancee, now-wife. Fans, players and members of the media such ESPN's Hannah Storm questioned why the league was so slow to give Rice the stiff-arm.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HANNAH STORM, AUTHOR, "SPORTSCENTER": I spent this week answering seemingly impossible questions about the league's biggest stars. Mom, why did he do that? Why isn't he in jail? Why didn't he get fired? And yesterday, why don't they even have control of their own players? So here's a question, what does all of this mean for the future? What does it mean for female fans whose dollars are so coveted by the NFL who make up an estimated 45 percent of the NFL's fan base?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: So could these vivid images of violence and the NFL's reaction alienate female fans and ultimately hurt the league's bottom line? Joining me now is CNN money correspondent Christina Alesci. Christina, how important is the female fan base to the NFL?

CHRISTINA ALESCI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So important. In fact, Roger Goodell himself last year said in a report that women are critical to the NFL's future and just to put some numbers around this, you heard that 45 percent figure. But 33 percent of the viewing audience are women. And last year for the first time ever, Sunday night football, that won women in the 18 to 49 demo. That was a huge win for the NFL. Now it seems like that very precise market that the NFL was chasing has some -- is giving the NFL a really hard time, at least on social media we've seen the cover girl ad that advertises the NFL makeup line basically photoshopped with an image of the model with a black eye. And that's been tweeted thousands of times not to mention the fact that a women's group, Ultraviolet flew planes over games in New York and basically calling for Roger Goodell's head and the women, the fans that were in the seats, at least the women fans, they were retweeting that, too. So it does seem like at least there is some fallout on the social media end of things.

TAPPER: But do we know if whether all of this activity on social media is actually having any sort of impact?

ALESCI: That's an excellent question because if you actually look at the numbers, Thursday night football had reported fantastic numbers, the best since 2006. So it doesn't seem to be coming through in the numbers.

But what we really have to pay attention to is the sales of that merchandise that the NFL is marketing. In fact, if you look at the September issue of "Vogue," there's a full-page ad for merchandise that the NFL is selling, specifically to women.

So will women stop buying that specific merchandise? That's a big part of the revenue that the NFL generates. Look, the league is trying to respond to these concerns. They put together this social responsibility team. One of the members is a former prosecutor.

Some will question whether or not this is window dressing because for many people out there, there does seem to be a simple fix to this. But at the end of the day, the NFL has to address this very, very carefully and they've got another potential controversy on their hands.

Those are the cheerleaders out there that are suing teams for wage theft. And we'll have to see how the teams -- how the specific teams respond and how the NFL responds as well.

TAPPER: Cristina Alesci, thank you so much. The NFL, of course, does not have an image problem just with female fans, but also potentially with its sponsors. Anheuser-Busch, a company that spent $34 million on the Superbowl and just for the ads last year, they're taking the league to task.

A statement just posted on the company's website says, quote, "We are disappointed and increasingly concerned by the recent incidents that have overshadowed this NFL season. We are not yet satisfied with the league's handling of behaviors that so clearly go against our own company culture and moral code.

Yes, you heard that right, that's from Anheuser-Busch. Joining me now is sports columnist, Kevin Blackstone. Kevin, do you think the perception of the league and what many perceive to be a domestic violence problem is in tune with the reality of how widespread these issues are in the NFL? KEVIN BLACKSTONE, ESPN PANELIST ON "AROUND THE HORN": No. I just wrote about that the other day for the American Journalism Review. It's certainly not in line with the truth of the matter. But clearly that doesn't matter. Perception is reality in this case in the NFL. It should have a problem certainly for the way it's handled this.

If it is performance-enhancing drugs or illegal drug use, they have steps they go through in terms of discipline. But when it comes to personal conduct matters such as these, they don't really have those steps.

It showed with the handling of the Ray Rice situation where at one point he's suspended for two games, which is quite frankly what Roger Goodell has done in the past to players who have been involved in domestic violence situations.

The next thing you know, he's out of the league indefinitely. And in between, of course, they came out with a new domestic violence policy that said that first-time offenders would get suspended for six games. So clearly the NFL didn't have a handle on how to deal with these matters.

TAPPER: As I just mentioned, the beer company, Anheuser-Busch released a statement a few minutes ago bashing the NFL's handling of domestic violence issues. But here's an interesting response from Houston Texans running back, Aryan Foster.

He fired back, tweeting, domestic violence and alcohol damn near synonymous. He said it was an interesting high horse for Anheuser- Busch to be on. I guess, this is a risk for those who come out and try to be aggressive on this issue. You better make sure you have a clean house yourself.

BLACKSTONE: Exactly. I'm surprised that Aryan Foster was so on point with that comment, but he's absolutely right. We've all talked about the mixing of alcohol with high-intensity, emotional sports. And quite often the outcome is not very good. So, yes, he's absolutely right on that. That's somewhat disingenuous maybe from Anheuser- Busch.

TAPPER: The NFL announced that it hired four women to help shape its domestic violence policy. We're putting their pictures up right there. What do you make of that move?

BLACKSTONE: Clearly optics which is what this has all been about in terms of the NFL's reaction, the optic of the second part of the videotape of Ray Rice slugging Janay Rice sent this story to another level.

I think it's odd that Roger Goodell would find four white women and could not find any women of color or quite frankly any men, as if men are not a part of this entire problem, to handle this new front that he's going to have going on domestic violence.

Particularly in a league that is over two-thirds black and where the incidents of domestic violence with black women is 35 percent higher than white women, 22 percent higher than anyone else and where black men are 62 percent more likely to be involved in these sorts of things as well.

The important thing, I think at least that I've gotten out of talking to people who deal with domestic violence victims and are trying to get a handle on this entire problem, is not to kick people out.

Not to shun them, but to get them treatment and to find out why it is they abuse once and abuse again and abuse again. And so just simply to go through the rosters in your league and kick players out who have abused is not necessarily the best tactic.

TAPPER: Professor Kevin Blackstone, thank you so much. Appreciate your time.

Ahead, it's moved into the bargaining stage. British leaders making new promises to Scotland. Please don't leave, if voters choose to stay in the U.K. But in this super close race for Scottish, will these pledges work?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Welcome back to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper. Developing in national news, it was one of the trickiest issues when lawmakers were debating Obamacare. In the end, the Affordable Care Act squeaked through Congress after lawmakers crafted a delicate compromise about abortion coverage, customers who wanted to purchase a health plan that covers abortion services would be required to send a separate check to their insurers for that coverage.

That way, the theory went, no taxpayer money would be used to subsidize abortion. But a new study by the Government Accountability Office surveyed 18 insurers and the report said, quote, "all but three insurers indicated the benefit is not subject to any restrictions, limitations or exclusions."

Which means the federal government could have been subsidizing plans that pay for abortion, that compromise notwithstanding. The administration says it's done nothing wrong, but they will provide guidance in the coming days.

In world news, voters in Scotland go to the polls Thursday for an unprecedented vote whether to leave the United Kingdom. A yes vote would mark the end of more than 300 years of union and would lead to a host of questions about issues ranging from the use of the British pound to the basing of nuclear submarines there.

Opinion polls right now are split down the middle. And it's impossible to predict which way undecided voters will break. The tight race has drawn leading British politicians north of the border where they are offering perks into the Scots vote to stay.

CNN's Max Foster is in Scotland, Britain. What is the British government offering if the Scottish people agree to stay and vote no?

MAX FOSTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Not just the British government. That's the extraordinary thing. You have the leaders of all the political parties, including the opposition leader, in this pledge published on the front page of a newspaper promising an alternative to independence.

What they're offering is greater powers. Many government powers, shifting from London up to Edinburgh. Powers over spending, particularly powers over the National Health Service, which sounds random, but it's held in very high regard here.

And there's a great deal of concern about National Health Service. So what London politicians are saying is you will have control over that. This is really their last-ditch attempt at retaining the union because the yes campaign spearheaded by Alex Salmons is really appealing to people's hearts.

Saying, you're Scottish, you're Celtic, you should have the power of your own destiny and should be based here in Edinburgh, not in London. Now they are going to the polls after two years of campaigning, a huge moment in British history.

TAPPER: Apparently, a chilly reception today for the man who would be the British prime minister. Does that indicate, you think, the growing strength of this independence movement?

FOSTER: Well, yes, and it really sort of proves their case that the London politicians don't really care about Scotland and they're only coming up at the last minute. A shopping center just around the corner, was due to make a statement there, but was absolutely heckled by the yes campaigners and all his aides got quite frightened.

And they were quite shaken by the experience. But it was an absolute disaster, chaotic scenes. And they just don't want any of these London politicians here. But there are extreme elements of the yes campaign. For the last few years, it's been well-natured.

And the beauty of this whole effort has been this separatist movement has emerged not out of conflict but out of debate. That's why the rest of the world's been watching, journalists from all over the world from different countries, Canada, China, India, have all come here to see and gain inspiration for their separatist campaigns, if I can say that, from what's happening here in Scotland this week.

TAPPER: Fascinating. Max Foster, thank you so much. Follow me on Twitter. Check out our show page at cnn.com/thelead for video, blogs, extras. You can subscribe to our magazine on "Flipboard."

That's it for THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper. I turn you over to Wolf Blitzer who is right next door in "THE SITUATION ROOM" -- Wolf.