Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S. Officials Still Concerned About Threats From Iranian Proxies; Democrats Lash Out At Sophomoric Rationale For Killing Soleimani; Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired January 08, 2020 - 14:00   ET

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

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: ... of use of military force, which had to do with post 9/11 matters. And that is it for me. Our special coverage will continue just a head with Brooke Baldwin, right now.

[14:00:14]

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN HOST: Brianna, we will take it from here. Thank you. Hi there. I'm Brooke Baldwin, you're watching CNN. Thank you for being with me.

Back from the brink or just a temporary pause? Just one critical question after Iran makes good on the threat to retaliate against the United States for killing its top military General.

More than two dozen ballistic missiles raining down last night on the al-Asad air base that's home to U.S. troops in Western Iraq, as well as an airbase and other locations in and around the northern city of Erbil.

Now, this strike coming notably after Iran gave a heads up to Iraq that it was about to take place, a warning that was then passed on to the United States, allowing those in the immediate past to take precautions. No American or Iraqi casualties have been reported.

Earlier, we heard from President Trump, there he was at the White House flanked by his top military chiefs once again, defended his decision to kill General Soleimani while revealing new sanctions on Iran, but he also sent a message directly to those living in the country.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Iran appears to be standing now, which is a good thing for all parties concerned and a very good thing for the world.

As we continue to evaluate options in response to Iranian aggression, the United States will immediately impose additional punishing economic sanctions on the Iranian regime. These powerful sanctions will remain until Iran changes its behavior.

To the people and leaders of Iran, we want you to have a future, and a great future, one that you deserve, one of prosperity at home and harmony with the nations of the world.

The United States is ready to embrace peace with all who seek it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Julia Hirschfeld Davis is a CNN political analyst and congressional editor for "The New York Times." Julie, thank you for being with me.

You know, just in the last couple of hours, we've heard a lot of people say that Iran's action gives President Trump an off ramp, right, a way to deescalate tensions, especially given that no Americans were killed. Thank goodness.

Based upon what you heard from the President today, do you think he will take it?

JULIA HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, it sounds as if at least for now, he is signaling that he wants to take it and I think a lot of people listening to the President and both the political parties were relieved to hear that, given the nature of the attack, given that there were no casualties among Americans or Iraqis that he did not ratchet things up, that he did not make any aggressive statements that would further escalate what is already a very volatile situation.

I think we have to wait and see. Obviously, these sanctions are one thing. We don't know whether Iran is done with its response and we don't know what the American response to that would be.

But it does seem from what the President said publicly and certainly what he said privately to some of the Members of Congress he has spoken with that he is inclined to pull back a bit here and leave room for de-escalation.

BALDWIN: On the Iran piece of this, sources are telling me -- and CNN -- that some of the Trump administration believe that Iran intentionally missed areas with Americans. One State Department official describing the message as, quote, "We could have done it and we did it." Will that be a factor for the Trump White House when it comes to future Iran strategy?

DAVIS: I think it will be. I mean, I think they're sort of taking -- they are cleaning the messages that you're talking about from this attack and what they did and what they did not do.

And I and I do think that, you know, some of the President's allies are now arguing that this is a vindication of his decision to target General Soleimani that they say this was intended from the start to be a de-escalation, which seemed pretty puzzling when it happened.

But in fact, the fact that Iran has responded in this way gives them at least a leg to stand on to argue that it actually worked. And this is -- we are now pulling back rather than ratcheting up, as I said, I think that remains to be seen. BALDWIN: We just heard from one Democratic congressman who just left

the briefing by the Trump administration saying that he was none too pleased, not at all impressed by the Intelligence he has heard on the strike that killed General Soleimani, calling it sophomoric and utterly unconvincing.

So where does Washington go from here?

DAVIS: Well, I think there's really a divide coming out of that briefing about what is being said. You have Democrats saying that the Intelligence and the rationale that's being offered for having targeted Soleimani was nowhere near what the administration has said it was. It wasn't an imminent threat and it wasn't an action that shouldn't have been taken. You're hearing Republicans saying they did exactly the right thing.

I don't think we know and frankly, I'm not sure that in a setting that large there they were inclined -- the briefers were inclined to give specificity that I think members would need to really assess what went on here.

[14:05:05]

DAVIS: But what I think we're about to see is a big debate on Capitol Hill about the President's war powers, regardless of what happened last night and whether he should have gone forward with this targeted assassination or killing and what happens next in the escalation if there is one.

BALDWIN: We'll talk to -- I'll talk to a Member of Congress and also a veteran and get his take on precisely what you just hit on. Julie Hirschfeld Davis. Thank you so much.

CNN has also obtained these pictures from the Al-Asad Airbase. This is where it appears four of the buildings as well as the runway were hit. You see this.

A U.S. defense official says no major damage was sustained at either base during the attack. CNN's senior international correspondent, Sam Kiley is there for us in Baghdad, and Sam, tell me more about this Al- Asad facility.

SAM KILEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It was a vast base that's been used across the region now for many, many years. The main operational -- Air Force operational base for the United States, a lot of Iraqis, too. It's also a location transited through by Special Forces in significant numbers.

So it's a very high profile location to hit, and very interesting indeed, I think, Brooke, that the Iraqis were able to demonstrate a level of missile technology that was capable of deliberately missing human beings, to rain some 17 missiles down on that location and not kill anybody is a sign of a highly effective targeting system.

They did the same up in Northern Iraq in Erbil and around Erbil, firing five missiles, there again, not killing anybody but clearly signaling a capability that has sent shockwaves I think across the Middle East.

If you think of how close Saudi Arabia, the Gulf allies of the United States, the Emirates, Qatar and others are too Iranian territory, it does signal that they're capable of penetrating areas heavily protected by the United States with their modern missile technology.

But the reaction here in Iraq has been one of condemnation from the government of this Iranian abuse of their sovereignty on the one hand, but simultaneously, Brooke, and very importantly, two of the main Iranian-backed Shia militias here have said that they will continue their campaign to drive the United States Forces out of their country, a position adopted by the mainly Shia elements within the Iraqi Parliament that voted to do just that, to request the United States to leave.

And the signals we're getting here from the Shia militia community, including the Banner Brigade, which is one that did not fight the United States back during the occupation here is that there is a danger that very soon, the American presence here will be seen to be a rerun of the occupation in the past, and we all saw the level of violence the Shia militia were capable of unleashing against the coalition forces just a few years ago -- Brooke.

BALDWIN: No, it's a huge, huge question in all of this is what happens with U.S. troop presence there in Iraq. Sam, thank you and from Iraq to Iran. The Ayatollah Khamenei is praising the missile strike, quoting him, "as a slap in the face to America."

As Iran's Foreign Minister says, his country does not want war. But he adds what happens next is up to the U.S.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MOHAMMAD JAVAD ZARIF, IRANIAN PRIME MINISTER: We did not start this process of escalation, the United States waged an economic war against Iran. The United States has to come to its senses.

Europe can play a useful role by informing the United States of the serious error in their analysis, that they should stop listening to clowns, that they should base their policy based on realities and not some illusions of some clowns who have ambitions elsewhere.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Stop listening to clowns, he says. Let's go straight to Tehran to my colleague, our CNN senior international correspondent, Fred Pleitgen, and Fred, the Ayatollah said he wanted Iran's military directly involved. They were.

U.S. officials are still worried about Iran's proxies taking action in the future. Tell us more about that and who they are?

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Iran certainly controls a lot of proxy forces all around the greater Middle Eastern Region. And you know, Brooke, before these ballistic missile strikes took

place that the Iranians conducted, the Revolutionary Guard conducted, a lot of people were thinking that if Iran was going to threaten the United States, anywhere in the Middle East, they would probably use some of those proxy forces in places like Iraq, in places like Syria, and in places like Lebanon, for instance, as well.

It's been very interesting, Brooke, because over the past, really years since the Trump administration left the nuclear agreement, you've had these big tensions between the U.S. and Iran.

Commanders here in Iran have been telling me look the U.S. needs to understand one thing, next to every American military installation that there is in this region, there is some sort of proxy force that's controlled by the Iranians and that's loyal to Iran.

[14:10:07]

PLEITGEN: So that threat has always been there, but I think, the strikes that you saw, the ballistic missile strikes, I think it was very, very important. As you stated, for the Supreme Leader of this country for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and also for the Revolutionary Guard itself to conduct those with Iranian forces, for the Revolutionary Guard to do that, because that was the force that Qasem Soleimani was a part of, and to show that they could strike from Iranian territory to targets very far away.

They've been talking a lot about their ballistic missile program, talking about how they've upgraded it. Now, they've shown that this ballistic missile program really works. And I want to share with you, Brooke, because I just saw one of these Iranian outlets -- Iranian state outlets. The first headline that were basically seen as a reaction to President Trump's speech earlier today, saying -- this is the headline, "Trump's big retreat from the threat of the Islamic Republic of Iran missile strikes."

So they're definitely putting that out there saying that their missiles and their missile capabilities might have been one of the reasons why President Trump chose to take that off ramp that of course, the Iranians were offering because one of the things that they had been telling us before these strikes took place, they said, look, we are going to strike back. We're going to strike back at military targets. But we want it to end there.

The U.S. had starting back, they said that all of this could have very quickly descended into something much worse. However, Brooke, I think the one thing that the Iranians are also watching for today, and that's going to be a big problem for them is that the President has announced more sanctions because that's really been one of the underlying things that has sort of fueled these tensions that you've been seeing ever since President Trump took office, and ever since he left the nuclear agreement.

The Iranians, they say, they consider that to be economic warfare, and if you look at the sort of the curve of escalation that we've seen, if you go back and look at that, these attacks on tankers in the Persian Gulf, the Iranians shooting down a drone, Qasem Soleimani getting killed, and now the Iranians hitting back with their missiles.

You can see how that's been escalating since President Trump left the nuclear agreement. And the Foreign Minister of Iran actually told me yesterday that he believes that that is the root cause of these big tensions that are there between Iran and the U.S.

And right now, there really doesn't seem too much of a way that anybody sees out of that, despite the fact that the President did come out and did say that he liked negotiations with the Iranians, and that he even said that they could work on things where they had mutual interests together, for instance, in the fight against ISIS -- Brooke.

BALDWIN: I'm still back on your headline. I jotted down the three words, Trump's big retreat, so says one of these headlines out of Iran. It is so special to have you and the team there in Teheran, just for that side of the story. Fred, thank you so much.

Moments ago back here at home, the White House finished briefing Members of the House on the strike that killed General Soleimani and lawmakers are split on whether it was justified.

Also, did President Trump's erratic style work in this particular scenario? Former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper joins me live. Lots of questions for him.

And were they shooting to miss? What we're learning about the precision of Iran's missile arsenal. I'm Brooke Baldwin. You're watching CNN's special live coverage. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:17:35]

BALDWIN: We're back. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. And in a matter of minutes, the full Senate is to receive its briefing on Iran from the President's top National Security officials, including the C.I.A. Director and the Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff.

These same Intelligence leaders just finished briefing the entire U.S. House of Representatives and moments ago, one Democrat gave this quite blunt response about what he learned in why President Trump authorized the deadly drone strike on Iran's top general.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. GERRY CONNOLLY (D-VA): Without commenting on content, my reaction to this briefing was it was sophomoric and utterly unconvincing.

And I believe more than ever, the Congress needs to act to protect the constitutional provisions about war and peace.

I was, well, utterly unpersuaded about any evidence about the imminence of a threat that was new or compelling.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BALDWIN: Let's go to Lauren Fox. She is there on Capitol Hill. We

heard from you know, Congressman Connolly, a Democrat, obviously, he is unconvinced. I want to know about Republicans. What are you hearing from them?

LAUREN FOX, CNN POLITICS U.S. CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER: Well, they're feeling quite the opposite, Brooke. They're coming out of this briefing very supportive of the Trump administration and the fact that they believe there was enough evidence that there was an imminent attack being planned.

That's what we heard from Mark Meadows, a Republican who of course is a close ally of President Trump's, also Representative Chris Stewart, a Republican from Utah said before he left for the Christmas Holiday, he had a feeling that this is where the relationship between the U.S. and Iran was building to. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. CHRIS STEWART (R-UT): Many of us drew the conclusion before we went home for Christmas that something like this was inevitable, as they've accelerated and they've expanded their aggressive behavior there, as they continue to attack facilities, like the Baghdad International Hotel, or I'm sorry, Airport where there are hundreds of Americans.

You can't attack those facilities and not eventually kill American soldiers and American contractors, and the President has sent this sign to them very clearly, since the nefarious activity last fall, if you kill Americans, that changes things for us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOX: And of course, Brooke, as we move forward with this Senate briefing expected in just a few minutes to begin, I talked to senator John Thune, one of the top Republicans in the Senate and what he argued earlier was this briefing is important not to just understand what happened last week, but to understand what the administration's strategy is moving forward.

[14:20:07]

FOX: He said that that's where he hopes senators are going to be posing their questions to. He said that what happens next is almost more important than what happened last week -- Brooke.

BALDWIN: I'll talk to a Member of Congress coming up, too, and see if he was persuaded by the evidence presented. Lauren. Thank you.

But now I get to talk to James Clapper, CNN national security analyst. He served as Director of National Intelligence under former President Obama. Director Clapper, it is always a pleasure.

You watched the President and his address from the White House today. What did you make of what he said? JAMES CLAPPER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well Brooke, to be

honest, I was a bit disappointed because I thought there was an opportunity lost to kind of reset the relationship. The Iranians, in my mind, were deliberately messaging not only the United States, but their own people as well as the Iraqis with the nature of their attack, and I put it in air quotes, because if they had wanted to, they could have done a lot more damage.

BALDWIN: So, you think that what they did was on purpose that they missed.

CLAPPER: Oh absolutely. Absolutely.

BALDWIN: Why would they do that?

CLAPPER: Well, I think they wanted to convey restraint. That, you know, with all the doom and gloom projections about what they could do, and of course, this sequence may not, and probably isn't over by any stretch.

But I do believe they were conveying a message of restraint, and perhaps willingness to dialogue. And I think right now, that would be a really good thing to do, and they had to do something to play to their home audience given their own rhetoric, and the fervor, the emotional fervor about General Soleimani was something of an iconic figure in Iran.

And so, to me, that was just too much chest beating, I'll put it that way, and too much complaining about President Obama who hasn't been President for three years.

BALDWIN: I mean, he is blaming --

CLAPPER: And bragging about ourselves and himself --

BALDWIN: If I may jump in on that, if I may jump in on that Director Clapper, I mean, the fact that he is blaming, you know, the previous administration under which you worked for providing the money for the missiles that headed toward our men and women in uniform? Your response to that.

CLAPPER: Well, I think the actual evidence doesn't make that case. And it is not as though we provided taxpayer money to the Iranians. What we did was, the administration did was unfreeze assets that were actually the Iranians.

The weapons security systems funding for weapons systems that we were providing the Iraqis way back when. So we freed that up and the actual evidence -- Intelligence evidence -- that I saw before I left, it didn't indicate they used much of that for supporting their nefarious activities, which they're going to do in any event, regardless. So that's kind of to me, a specious allegation.

BALDWIN: Let me go back to something else you -- go ahead, sir.

CLAPPER: Well, no. The other point I'd make is, you know, complaining about the JCPOA, the nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action well, which I think personally, is a mistake to withdraw from it.

Yes, it had its flaws, but it also had some major strengths and importantly, it was effective in preventing the acquisition by the Iranians of nuclear weapons capability.

And the question I always pose to people is, which would you rather have? A state-sponsored terrorism with a nuclear weapons capability or a state sponsored terrorism without? And now, we find the irony of President Trump complaining because the Iranians are threatening or there is the jeopardy that they will in fact acquire a nuclear weapons capability. So that, I find that ironic.

BALDWIN: Yes. Beyond the irony, Director Clapper, you said a second ago that you don't think that this sequence is over. Can you expand on that?

CLAPPER: Well, I think we're actually involved -- to borrow from Jim Sciutto's book, a slow motion shadow war. I hope you heard that. A slow motion shadow war, and I'd like to think that, you know, we took a very bad guy, make that point off the battlefield was a good thing to do and the Iranians responded to me more symbolically than substantively, and one would hope that both countries would take advantage of that opportunity.

But that's, I think --

[14:25:03]

BALDWIN: Do you not think Iran will?

CLAPPER: Well, I think, over time, particularly given the President's insistence that we're going to continue to impose even more -- at least, I took away from his statement, more sanctions on the Iranians, that that is actually going to induce more reaction and retaliation by the Iranians.

It just, it may not play out in the next day or week or month. So as I say, I think we're in a slow motion process here and we're not done yet.

BALDWIN: I think that's a key point. I don't think we've heard that enough. Also, Director Clapper, just coming into us here at CNN, Evan Perez, our chief justice correspondent, our senior justice correspondent. He is reporting that the Feds are now warning of the terror threats Iran poses to the U.S. in a Joint Intelligence bulletin that the agencies are saying in part that Iran could take steps in the intermediate term to attack the U.S. in terms of cyber, which they are from my understanding more than capable of dealing. What's your read on that?

CLAPPER: Well, I think that's a prudent statement to make, because I think what Iran will do or consider doing is those things which are attributable, but deniable. And this is the nature of what they've done in the past, and I don't

see any reason for that to change. So they've attacked us before via the cyber realm and I think if the sanctions continue in worse, increased, that it's unlikely the Iranians are just going to sit still.

BALDWIN: We will end it with those words. James Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence, thank you very much.

CLAPPER: Thanks, Brooke.

BALDWIN: Thank you. Iran's barrage of missiles directly targeted military bases housing U.S. troops. Thank goodness no one was hurt. But we'll talk about the weapons use and just how precise they can be.

And the impact of killing another country's military leader. Did President Trump attack -- his attack -- actually help Iran's government by uniting its people?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:30:00]