CNN "The Lead With Jake Tapper" - Transcript: Interview with Sen. Rand Paul and Sen. Robert Menendez

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Manu Raju, thanks so much. Joining me now are two senators who just got out of that briefing, Republican Senator Rand Paul and Democratic Senator Tom Udall. They're here to talk about a separate world affairs issue. But before we get to that, Senator Paul, from what you learned in the briefing, would you recommend that there be a third summit without Kim Jong-un having committed to a step for denuclearization?

SEN. RAND PAUL (R), KENTUCKY: You know, I think discussion and diplomacy is always good and I think the President has been brave to have an opening to a discussion when many people said that he shouldn't talk to Kim at all. I've always been a little bit wary and in disbelief that Kim would actually negotiate away his nuclear weapons. That is the ultimate goal and I think discussion is good. So if it meant another summit, yes, I would continue to have talks but I have my doubts as to whether or not Kim will give up his nuclear weapons.

TAPPER: All right, let's talk about the reason while you're here. Senator Udall, you and Senator Paul are introducing new legislation which would effectively end the U.S. war in Afghanistan. It would among other matters declare victory, withdraw troops, U.S. troops from Afghanistan within a year. It suggests the payment to service members who fought a $2,500 bonus. Senator Udall, do you think Democrats are going to come on board this bill and if so how many?

SEN. TOM UDALL (D), NEW MEXICO: Well, I've heard many Democrats that feel this way about Afghanistan. They believe the AUMF has been in place too long. It should be reviewed and they believe we should be moving in the direction of pulling our troops out and we think this is a really orderly way to do it. And so I'm going to work hard live with Senator Paul to make sure we try to round up a coalition to move in that direction.

TAPPER: Senator Paul, just two weeks ago a U.S. intelligence official told CNN that ISIS's Afghanistan based affiliate is now able to carry out direct attacks on the United States. They're capable of doing it, they haven't done it, but they're capable of doing it. You're going to hear from your fellow Republicans that your bill would allow ISIS's affiliate to strengthen, to become an even bigger threat. You're going to hear all sorts of arguments, what will your response be?

PAUL: I think if we're going to wait for a time when the Middle East is completely peaceful and there is no jihadist philosophy and no radicals there, we'll wait forever. But I do think we should also ask the question, what is the vital national security interest of the United States now there and what is our military mission.

If you ask Republican, Democrat, or Independent, you can't find anybody -- you can't find a general period who will tell you that we have a military solution in Afghanistan. We have completed our mission. We won we've killed or taken capture of everybody that anything to do with 9/11. There's no one left. I asked all the time. Name me somebody left who we need to kill or capture and I'm for it. The mission is over. We need to come home.

TAPPER: Senator Udall, as you know, Democrats have largely been supportive of the war in Afghanistan as well and the argument is we have to kill them over there so that they don't kill us over here. How would you respond to that Senator Udall?

UDALL: Well, I would say that we have gone into Afghanistan under an AUMF and with objectives that have all been accomplished. What we've had to happen is mission creep and we accomplished everything long ago. We should have pulled back and allowed Afghanistan and the parties in Afghanistan to work with each other and support them to try to find a peaceful solution.

TAPPER: Senator Paul, I asked the President's National Security Adviser John Bolton about Afghanistan this weekend. Take a listen to what he told me.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JOHN BOLTON, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER, UNITED STATES: What the President has decided is that it's going to be important to try and keep a counterterrorism presence in Afghanistan.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Would you be OK with most of the U.S. troops leaving but some counterterrorism forces, Navy SEALs, Green Berets, etcetera staying in Afghanistan?

PAUL: I think when you leave small contingents of forces whether it's in Syria or in Afghanistan they become basically a target and a tripwire for a disaster. So no. If you want to leave 200 troops in Syria and 500 troops in Afghanistan, I think it's a terrible military judgment because you're setting them up for possible massacre, and then all of a sudden we're back involved. You know, they become sort of a target at that point. So no, I think it's a bad idea.

I think we need to reassess the war. We now have soldiers that are born after 9/11 being sent to fight over there so there's a real problem. And Congress hasn't approved this war in 17 years. Really the constitutional point is Congress needs to be involved. We can't just let presidents of either party keep fighting these wars forever.

[16:50:33] TAPPER: Senator Paul, before you go. You're an ally of the President's but you are going to vote to block his declaration of a national emergency to get those border funds. How many Republicans do you think are going to join you and have you heard from the President on this?

PAUL: This is kind of interesting because this is something Senator Udall and I are in agreement on also that the money that is spent under the Constitution it's very specific is spent by Congress. In fact, the Constitution says only Congress can make a law and only by law can you take money out of the Treasury and appropriation to an act of Congress.

I think there'll be probably ten Republicans, at least six beyond the four that are going to vote for it have told me they will, and it could be -- it could be higher than that. What I keep telling them is if we can get to a high enough number, maybe someone could run over to the White House and say hey, this could be worse. This could be 65, this could be 67.

And I know that's very optimistic. It might only be 57 to 60 but that's still a lot of dissent and in a rebuke that could be avoided if the President would simply rescind the emergency part.

UDALL: From the Republicans I talked to I think his -- the accuracy of his prediction is pretty good that were we're at about ten but I think we can grow.

TAPPER: All right, Senators Paul and Udall, thank you so much. Good to see people working in a bipartisan way. Thanks for being with us.

UDALL: Thank you. PAUL: Thank you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source