Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Interview With New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez; President Obama Requests Authority for War on ISIS; North Carolina Murders; Intel: Mueller Possibly Given to ISIS Fighter; Ukraine Fighting Intensifies Ahead of Talks

Aired February 11, 2015 - 16:00   ET

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

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Is this new authorization enough to stop ISIS?

I'm Jake Tapper. This is THE LEAD.

The world lead. President Obama says there will not be an invasion, there will not be an occupying force. But with 20,000 foreign fighters now flocking to fight with ISIS -- with ISIS -- is this new authorization enough?

And she died in captivity, held hostage by fanatical terrorists, now harrowing details that Kayla Mueller may have been given to an ISIS commander and forced to be his wife.

The national lead. She danced at her wedding just a month ago. And now this woman, her husband and her sister, all of them are gone, shot in the head in North Carolina. Her father says the gunman killed them because they were Muslims.

Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper.

You have just been listening to President Obama making possibly one of the most important speeches of his presidency. He just spelled out his case to Congress for using military force in the war against ISIS. This is the first time since the Iraq War that the full Congress will vote on a commander in chief's request for the authorization to deploy military force.

The president seeking Congress' go-ahead, it's mostly will getting buy-in, investment from Congress and the American people. After all, U.S. jets have been bombing ISIS fighters for six months or so. The president says he can continue to do so even if Congress shoots down his proposal. He also made clear that the campaign is working.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Make no mistake, this is a difficult mission and it will remain difficult for some time. It's going to take time to dislodge these terrorists, especially from urban areas.

But our coalition is on the offensive. ISIL is on the defensive and ISIL is going to lose.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: This authorization further defines the mission, detailing what U.S. forces can and cannot do. It would formally give the president the power to keep bombing ISIS, as well as associated persons or forces.

The request will rule out enduring offensive ground combat operations, but that does not mean boots will not be literally on the ground. First of all, they already are to some extent, training Iraqi security forces, serving as observers. This new language would additionally allow rescue missions and special ops raids.

The new authorization expires in three years' time, and then Congress can revisit it.

Let's go right to CNN senior White House correspondent Jim Acosta. He's live on the North Lawn.

Jim, Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, said today that the authorization is intentionally fuzzy. And then the president made clear three years is not necessarily a timeline on military operations, just on this authorization.

JIM ACOSTA, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Jake. I think the president is finding out why there has not been a war authorization vote in this Congress in 13 years, because it is this difficult and he's taking heat from all sides.

The president trying to explain to the American people that he does take the threat posed by ISIS seriously. He said at one point during his remarks that the coalition is on the offense, ISIS is on the defense and ISIS is going to lose, but the president wants the flexibility. And that's why Josh Earnest said earlier today that this language is intentionally fuzzy. The president wants the flexibility to conduct operations in Iraq, and in Syria, that are short of a full- blown invasion.

But the president, trying to allay the concerns of nervous Democrats, also said in the language of this authorization is a three-year timeline. Here's how the president talked about that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: So this resolution will give our armed forces and our coalition the continuity we need for the next three years. It is not a timetable. It is not announcing that the mission is completed at any given period.

What it is saying is that Congress should revisit the issue at the beginning of the next president's term.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ACOSTA: So in some sense, Jake, this is tying the hands somewhat of the next president of the United States. This president, whoever follows Barack Obama into this White House, is going to have to deal with all of this.

And when I asked White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest earlier today whether or not this is mission creep and whether more ground forces might be committed in the future, he said not at the moment -- Jake.

TAPPER: Jim Acosta at the White House, thank you so much.

Let's go right to CNN chief congressional correspondent Dana Bash. She is on Capitol Hill.

Dana, the president called this document a comprehensive and sustained strategy, but some members of his own party are taking issue. They're saying that this authorization is too open-ended, Republicans saying it's too -- it hems him in too much.

DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Reminds you of Goldilocks that you read to your kids. Republicans think it's too cold, Democrats think it's too hot. The question is can they find something that's just right?

Jim talked about the fact that the White House wanted this to be intentionally fuzzy, but the problem that he has is that for many Democrats here, fuzzy equals blank checks when it comes to troops, which is something that Democrats say they are just simply not going to do.

Let me just give you an example. Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, I spoke to him earlier. He sits on the Foreign Relations Committee.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: What you have to vote on isn't tighter when it comes to authority for troops. Will you vote for it?

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D), CONNECTICUT: It is going to be hard for me to vote for anything that allows for us to repeat the mistakes of the past. And I worry that the language as exists today is going to allow, not for this president, but for the next president, to put major combat troops back into the Middle East.

That's likely something that I'm going to a very hard time supporting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Jake, let me give you another example of the problem that the president has with Democrats.

A veteran Democrat, Ted Lieu of California, just came out and outright opposed the president's AUMF, saying that based on his experience he does not want to vote for anything that even suggests that they are approving unlimited troops. That's the issue you have on the Democratic side. And of course, Republicans, you have people like John McCain who say that what they are doing is allowing 535 commanders in chief, instead of allowing the commander in chief to have his understanding of how things should go, which is, if you think about it, that Republicans who have been saying that he's the imperial president now want to give him more authority is kind of ironic.

TAPPER: Dana Bash on Capitol Hill, thanks so much.

The preamble to the use of force authorization, it names the American hostages who have been killed by ISIS, James Foley, Steven Sotloff, Abdul-Rahman Peter Kassig, plus of course Kayla Mueller, the aid worker confirmed dead just yesterday.

Let's bring in CNN chief security national correspondent Jim Sciutto.

Jim, we heard from the president, we heard from some in Congress, but what is this authorization going to look like on the ground in the battlefield?

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Bottom line, no major invasion like Iraq and Afghanistan, but leaving leeway for further ground operations in some way, which we have already seen evolve over time.

Remember, this all started with no boots on the ground whatsoever. The fact is there are boots on the ground. Now they moved out of the city centers of Baghdad and Irbil. They are out further afield, even in Anbar province. There is talk of them being involved in an assault on Mosul and, in fact, they have been involved in two unfortunately failed rescue operations, very risky, to pick up James Foley and Kayla Mueller.

And he leaves some leeway for that going forward, saying no enduring offensive ground combat operations, which means you could have some, but they wouldn't be enduring, they may not be offensive, et cetera. That leaves leeway going forward. The other place there is leeway is this, geographically, because ISIS, though it started in Iraq and Syria, now has affiliates and supporters in other countries, Yemen, Libya.

This could expand this war beyond where it is now.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO (voice-over): ISIS fighters parade through conquered territory with dozens of vehicles in tow, but this isn't Iraq or Syria. It is Libya. As the ISIS flag waves over parts of more and more countries, the new military authorization could give President Obama and his successor the freedom to fight the militants wherever they carve out a safe haven.

There are already concerns about overreach.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D), CALIFORNIA: The resolution that says that we can go after ISIL any time anywhere, using any level of ground force, as long as it's not an enduring offensive, that pretty much is carte blanche.

SCIUTTO: ISIS is expanding its presence beyond Iraq and Syria to Libya. The terror group claimed responsibility for an attack to a hotel in January that killed at least 10, including an American, to the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt, where dozens were killed when is launched a series of suicide attacks on army and police positions. ISIS claims these photos show the explosions.

And on to Yemen, where ISIS has gained some support among fighters for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Still, on the Republican side of the aisle, there is the opposite concern about tying the hands of future presidents to fight terror groups wherever and however they decide.

REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: The president's point is that he wants to dismantle and destroy ISIS. I haven't seen a strategy yet that I think will accomplish that.

SCIUTTO: And there are growing fears that the problem could land in the U.S.

REP. MICHAEL MCCAUL (R), TEXAS: They are barbarians. I think the barbarians are at the gate. We want to keep them outside the gate of the United States. I'm concerned that some have already returned.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: The president also said today the coalition is winning against ISIS, in particular saying it has stopped is momentum particularly in Iraq.

But one place where they are still remarkably resilient is in getting foreign fighters in to join their ranks, the numbers up to more than 20,000 foreign fighters, not just for ISIS, but all the other groups there.

And that's despite the coalition air campaign and despite enormous efforts to try to stop that pipeline of recruits from all around the world into those war zones.

TAPPER: Recruiting and propaganda, the two areas that they are still struggling to fight ISIS.

ACOSTA: And they two go hand in hand.

TAPPER: Absolutely. Jim Sciutto, thank you so much.

Let's bring in the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Bob Menendez of the great state of New Jersey.

Sir, thanks for being here. One of the reasons why I keep saying that this is the first time Congress will vote on an authorization of use of military force is because President Obama did introduce one, as you well know, in 2013. You got it out of committee. But then it looked like it was going to fail, at least in the House.

This is going to be brought before the entire Congress. Is it going to pass?

SEN. ROBERT MENENDEZ (D), NEW JERSEY: Well, I think it can pass, but certainly not in its present form. This authorization that the president has suggested has many elements

of what in the last Congress, as the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, we passed on a partisan line vote, which ultimately, yes, gives the president authorization to fight ISIL, yes, has a three-year limitation, yes, didn't have geographic limitations, but didn't have the language that the president has sent here, which is about enduring offensive combat troops.

And so what that means is going to be very consequential to many members in terms of how they vote.

TAPPER: You're saying right now that you don't think it can pass in its present form as long as it restrains whether or not the president can introduce enduring combat forces?

MENENDEZ: I'm saying that work has to be done. Look, there's a tough needle to thread here. From the Democratic side, there are many who are concerned that after endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the last thing they want to do is vote for something that gives an endless opportunity.

And even though there's a three-year time frame here, which is a check to some degree, by the same token, if you end up having tens of thousands of troops at the end of those three years, how easy is it to not vote to continue?

And, secondly, the other side of the coin will say, well, we don't want any checks and balances on the commander in chief in order to degrade and defeat ISIL. The sweet spot is somewhere between those two. I think this is a good foundation that the White House has put out, but we are going to have to refine it in order to get that broad bipartisan support that we want.

TAPPER: What do you think you need to do to pass it? What's the language need to be?

MENENDEZ: I think we need to refine what enduring offensive combat troops means.

Even if the president puts some sense of numbers behind that, some sense of time frame, some sense -- what does that mean as it relates to defensive troops vs. offensive troops? Does that mean you could have an endless participation of defensive troops?

So there's -- of course, hearings will help mold this. And I know that Chairman Corker and the Foreign Relations Committee is going to be pursuing those hearings. These are all parts of working towards a goal. But I think that the good news here is that there is a common desire to stand up as a country and make a very clear declaration that we are out there to defeat ISIL.

And Democrats and Republicans want to join in that. How we get there is going to be the critical process, which is what legislating is all about.

TAPPER: The authorization would expire in three years. The House Democratic leader, Nancy Pelosi, says that she hopes three years is longer than is required to defeat ISIS. But that's kind of dreaming, isn't it?

MENENDEZ: Listen, it's aspirational.

But, you know, at the end of the day, one of the reasons that I put in my original authorization that we passed out of the committee three years is because it got you past this presidency, gave enough time for the next president to be looking at what they were engaged in, where we were at in the fight against ISIL, and make a determination.

And so I think that it's a reasonable time frame to call the question, to have an accountability at that time of understanding where we are in the campaign against ISIL. If we defeated them, well, that would be great. If we have not fully defeated them, what will it take to finalize the job?

TAPPER: The House Homeland Security Committee held a hearing today on the ongoing terror threat. I want you to listen to Republican Congressman Jeff Duncan from South Carolina.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JEFF DUNCAN (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: Al Qaeda and all of its elements, AQAP (INAUDIBLE) Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, Abu Sayyaf, all these terrorist groups are still active, right?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, sir.

DUNCAN: So, we shouldn't take our eye off the ball with just focusing on ISIS and think of this globally and not get hung up on the 50 shades of terrorism. Talk about terrorism about terrorism, that these groups are a threat all over the globe.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Senator, what do you make of that argument, that this is focused too much on ISIS and not on the threat writ large?

MENENDEZ: Well, there are many threats in terrorism, but they all have gradations as to the nature of the threat, the risk to our allies, the risk to the national security of the United States.

In the case of ISIS, they have proven to be the most effective and also well-funded terrorist organization right now in the world. And what we need to do is to degrade and defeat them before they have the operational capacity to try to create an attack here on the homeland in the United States.

And so, I do believe in differentiating. That doesn't mean we aren't going to continue a fight against terrorism in other parts of the world, but you -- I don't know that you put every terrorist in the same exact standing. Yes, they are terrorists but some have greater abilities, greater effect, more consequential at a given time. You have to look at all of the elements to decide how do you best pursue your national security and how do you best fight them. TAPPER: Senator Bob Menendez from the great state of New Jersey,

thank you. Appreciate it as always.

MENENDEZ: Thank you, Jake.

TAPPER: Just when you thought ISIS could not sicken you any more, we are getting new information about the horrible final days of American hostage Kayla Mueller. Why U.S. intelligence now believes that she may have been given to an ISIS terrorist as something, some sick version of a bride. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Welcome back to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper.

We're going to continue with our world lead right now and a new disturbing report about the captivity of American hostage Kayla Mueller.

Intelligence sources telling CNN that Mueller may have been forced into a relationship, to be charitable, with an ISIS terrorist and even more warped sort of forced marriage. President Obama also revealing in an interview that the U.S. tried to rescue Kayla Mueller but, unfortunately, that operation failed.

Kayla was captured in northern Syria in 2013, as you know. She had just left a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Aleppo where she worked with humanitarian groups. Now, we are learning about the nothing short of torture, really, that this young woman possibly went through while in ISIS captivity.

CNN justice correspondent Pamela Brown has been in touch with her intelligence sources all day on this story -- Pamela.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, I want to make sure we point this out, that it is challenging to have a full picture and know definitively what life in captivity was like for Kayla because intelligence officials have repeatedly told us it's very difficult to discern what's going on there. But the bits and pieces that we are learning about paints a picture of an incredible young woman trying to survive.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN (voice-over): Intelligence suggests 26-year-old Kayla Mueller was given to a male ISIS fighter, possibly as a bride, after she was kidnapped in Syria in 2013, according to U.S. government officials. Officials say there are also indications Mueller converted to Islam, a practice seen in the past by hostages in the Middle East.

AKI PERITZ, FORMER CIA ANALYST: These hostages are under severe duress for a very long time, and they're threatened with death and so forth. And for them to say we are going to convert to the religion of our hostage-takers suggests that maybe they can curry favor that way.

BROWN: CNN has learned the pictures sent privately to Mueller's family from ISIS helped confirm her death. According to a U.S. official, pictures included Mueller wearing Muslim garb and a picture of her wrapped in a burial shroud -- a stark contrast from the brutal beheadings of other male hostages. Former FBI hostage negotiator Chris Voss says it's clear ISIS treated Mueller differently.

CHRIS VOSS, FORMER SENIOR FBI HOSTAGE NEGOTIATOR: Because she was remarkably decent human being and because she was a woman, that it wouldn't be surprising for them to treat her with more respect in life and in death. If they covered her and wrapped her properly, those are respectful actions.

BROWN: How she died remains a mystery but the U.S. military says there is no evidence backing up the ISIS claim that Mueller was killed in a Jordanian air strike.

Arizona Congressman Paul Gosar says there were several foiled rescue attempts to save Mueller and one attempt, a man claimed to be Mueller's husband from her hometown of Prescott, Arizona, and demanded her release at a Syrian terrorist camp but was turned away after Mueller denied being anyone's wife.

REP. PAUL GOSAR (R), ARIZONA: She said she wasn't married and she didn't lie to her captors that she was married. And so, that foiled that plan.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: And Kayla's college professor spoke to "NEW DAY" and said there were teams of people quietly networking for her release because her captors made it clear an absolute demand that she would be executed if her name ended up in the media. So, that is part of the reason why we didn't really hear about her until recently.

TAPPER: No, and we should hope that these intelligence community theories are wrong, obviously. Just theories but obviously, gleaned from intelligence.

Pamela, thank you so much.

BROWN: Thank you.

TAPPER: It is a stare-down, an old school Cold War stare-down of sorts between Vladimir Putin and the rest of Europe. Will he accept a peace plan to stop the carnage in Ukraine and keep it from spreading?

Plus, the murder of three Muslim Americans in North Carolina, three students, is fueling outrage after police suggest they were killed over a parking dispute. The family insists this was a hate crime.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)