CNN Late Edition - Transcript

CNN Late Edition - Transcript
Sunday, January 22, 2006

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: Thanks very much, Fred.

Earlier this week, a taped message from Osama bin Laden was released, threatening more terror attacks inside the United States, but also seemed to offer what's been described as a truce of sorts. With us to discuss this and much more, two guests.

In Washington, Republican Senator George Allen of Virginia. With me here in New York, Democratic Senator Charles Schumer of New York. Gentlemen, welcome back to "Late Edition."

Let me play a couple excerpts, and I'll start with you, Senator Allen. Listen to the threat that Osama bin Laden made in this audiotape.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OSAMA BIN LADEN (through translator): I would also like to say that the war against America and its allies will not be confined to Iraq. As for similar operations taking place in America, it's only a matter of time. They're in the planning stages. And you will see them in the heart of your land as soon as the planning is complete.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Senator Allen, how concerned should the U.S. be?

SEN. GEORGE ALLEN (R) VIRGINIA: Well, we ought to be concerned. There may be signaling of terror cells that may be here or eels elsewhere around the world. It shows he's still alive. At least he was from all indications a month or so ago. And it shows he still aims to disrupt and kill in this country.

And so it's important that we keep our guard up and we do everything practical and possible to disrupt them, to also, of course, not negotiate with them or have a truce with such scorpions. But in fact, we have to win this war on terror. And they are a force that cannot be reasoned with and can only be defeated.

BLITZER: What about that, Senator Schumer? New York City was attacked, as you well know, on 9/11. You heard this chilling audiotape from Osama bin Laden, and you've had a chance to digest it over the past few days. What's your assessment?

SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER (D) NEW YORK: I agree with George completely. We cannot negotiate with terrorists. This man has the blood of over 2,700 Americans, many of them, the majority, in fact, New Yorkers and, you know, he is -- these feints and moves and all of that, they can't divert us.

We have to do two things. We have to continue to go after bin Laden and find him and capture him or kill him, and we have to on homeland security be as strong as we can to protect our homeland.

You know, terrorism is a worldwide phenomenon. Bin Laden is the one who's practiced it the most. But there are going to be others, as well. This war on terror is going to be with us for a while.

BLITZER: So, Senator Allen, when we hear him talk of a truce, some call it an olive branch or whatever. Listen to this other excerpt from the Osama bin Laden tape.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OSAMA BIN LADEN (THROUGH TRANSLATOR): We do not mind offering a long-term truce based on just conditions that we will stick to. We are a nation that God banned from lying and stabbing others in the back. Hence both parties of the truce will enjoy security and stability to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, which were destroyed by war.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Do you see any opening there for a dialogue, if you will, with Osama bin Laden?

ALLEN: I know about 3,000 families from the United States would like to meet with him someplace and probably come out feet first from whatever building he was in, and we might want to send some drones in there. No, I don't see any opening there whatsoever, and whatever his conditions are, they're foolish.

He would want us out of the Middle East. He would want Israel exterminated. This is not something that you negotiate with. This is talking about, they don't stab people in the back. No, they commandeer airplanes and fly them into the Pentagon and into the World Trade Center. They've hit the USS Cole. They hit our embassy in Nairobi.

This is not someone you negotiate with. This is simply a ploy. And I think it should make us all here understand how long it's going to take to win this war on terror. I'm glad to see that Chuck said he agrees with me because we need to get this country unified. And recognizing the resolve and perseverance it will take for us to win this war on terror, it's going to take the same perseverance as there was to eradicate fascism in World War II. The same perseverance to win the Cold War.

And Americans, while we'll have differences on a variety of issues, there should be no question that every American, regardless of party, recognizes that this country is facing an intolerant, vile, hate-filled terror organization, and we are going to prevail.

BLITZER: Listen, Senator Schumer, to the White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan and his reacting to this audiotape. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCCLELLAN: We do not negotiate with terrorists. We put them out of business. The terrorists started this war, and the president made it clear that we will end it at a time and place of our choosing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHUMER: I don't disagree. I agree with him.

BLITZER: Do you also agree that it's OK for the U.S. to go out and target, these targeted killings, whether it's Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, or other top Al Qaeda operatives, just go out and kill them?

SCHUMER: I do. They are planning, as bin Laden and others said, they're planning to do more damage, whether it's in Europe or the Middle East or here in the United States. And what we learned is that you can't just play defense. You need a good offense and a good defense. I have no problem with doing it. I think we should.

BLITZER: On that point, though, raises this issue, the extraordinary steps the president of the United States has taken in this war on terror to authorize these warrant-less wiretaps, part of the National Security Agency's effort to try to prevent terrorism, presumably. Listen to how the vice president, Dick Cheney, phrased it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RICHARD B. CHENEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Our message to the American people is clear and straightforward. These actions are within the president's authority and responsibility under the constitution and laws, and these actions are vital to our security.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Do you want to react to that?

SCHUMER: Well, that's the great debate. First, let me say this. We do have to be strong in the war on terror, and no one -- Democrats aren't going to take a back seat to anybody on that. But here is the fundamental beauty of America. We can be both strong and have the rule of law. And a large number of people, not just Democrats, Republicans like John McCain, Sam Brownback, Arlen Specter have said they have real doubts about whether what the president did conformed to the law.

BLITZER: But does Osama bin Laden's audiotape give the president ammunition in justifying these extraordinary measures?

SCHUMER: It gives him ammunition to go after bin Laden, to get the tools he needs, but to pursue it through the system, rule of law, and checks and balances that we've had here. Tomorrow if the president were to decide that he felt that he had to search Americans' homes without a warrant, to just go do it on his own and say, I need that power, no.

To go to Congress and say, here are the problems, here's the changes in the law that have to be made, there would be a debate, and it would usually work out. It always has in the past where the president is given the tools he needs, but with certain checks in place to prevent excesses. That's how it ought to be.

BLITZER: Why doesn't the president, Senator Allen, simply go to the Congress and say, you know what, this FISA, this Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court, that was created in the '70s when everybody had sort of a single hard-line telephone before this communications revolution, this technology breakthrough that's occurred in recent years, and go to the Congress and say, I need this new authority, can you give me that authority?

Why not go that route, as opposed to unilaterally just coming up with a legal opinion and saying, I have that authority built in?

ALLEN: All right.

Several points here, Wolf: Number one, he does have the authority. An argument can be made that the president by virtue of his office and his role and responsibility is to prevent attacks on the United States. That's just, generally.

The more specific authority he has right now was the Congress authorized the use of military force. And, in that use of military force, it was to wage war against those who have declared war on us, specifically Al Qaeda.

And to do that, of course, you need military action, but also you need intelligence...

BLITZER: Senator, Senator, let me interrupt you. On that point, when you voted for that resolution, did anyone say to you that you were authorizing warrant-less wiretaps of American citizens?

ALLEN: No, nor did a lot of tactical decisions that were made in the midst of this war on terror; neither did I know what sort of intercepts or communications of financial assistance or other things that I don't know about and none of us should know about because it would tip off our opponents or our enemy.

The point of the matter is that this is what you would expect. Wouldn't you want us to know what the enemies are plotting against us? This is focused. These intercepts are focused on calls from phones that are related to Al Qaeda that may come into this country.

We have an enemy that is now possibly -- of course, it did hit on our ground here in the homeland, but they also would like to do it again. And so, in my view, Congress authorized it.

I find nothing wrong, though, with having a hearing. This maybe ought to be something that you would ratify -- yes, the president has this authority. But we had a case just recently, Hamdi v. Rumsfeld which I think was dispositive on the legal justification. But there's nothing wrong with having an investigation or understanding what's going on so long as we don't tip off our enemies, our opponents, as to what we're doing as far as our methods.

BLITZER: Senator, we're going to take a quick break, but I want to let Senator Schumer respond before we do.

SCHUMER: You know, this idea that some have that strength and the ability to defend ourselves is in contraposition against rule of law, the kinds of checks and balances we've had in America that's the hallmark of our system, is false.

You can have both. Now, the CRS, not partisan -- it's not Democrat or Republican.

BLITZER: The Congressional Research Service?

SCHUMER: The Congressional Research Service, thank you.

BLITZER: That's part of the Library of Congress?

SCHUMER: Part of the Library of Congress. These are a bunch of, you know, nonpartisan people.

They studied this and said the president didn't have the authority. Maybe George is right. Maybe they do. Maybe he's wrong. I tend to think that they didn't.

But to bring this before Congress and suggest that the law has to be changed, there is nothing wrong with that and the attacks on doing that -- you know what they do, Wolf? They divide America. And we have to be united in this war on terror to win it.

BLITZER: Well, we're going to get to that because there were some controversial remarks from Karl Rove, the president's chief political adviser, the deputy chief of staff.

We're going to have lots more on this, much more coming up -- "Late Edition." We'll be right back.

We'll also, by the way, discuss the confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito. Will he face a filibuster on the Senate floor? Is that still realistic?

Plus, the dangers of a nuclear-armed North Korea: The South Korean foreign minister will weigh in.

And later, the former U.S. civilian administrator in Iraq, Ambassador Paul Bremer: Why is he telling a different story now about conditions in Iraq than he was telling when he was there?

"Late Edition" continues after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KARL ROVE, WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF: The United States faces a ruthless enemy. And we need a commander in chief and a Congress who understand the nature of the threat and the gravity of the moment America finds itself in.

President Bush and the Republican Party do. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for many Democrats.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Karl Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff, the president's top political adviser, speaking out earlier in the week.

Once again we're joined by our guests, Republican Senator George Allen -- he is in our Washington bureau -- and Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer. He's here in New York with me.

"Unfortunately," Karl Rove says, "the same cannot be said for many Democrats" in this war on terrorism. I suspect he's referring in part to you.

SCHUMER: Well, who knows -- but, you know, it's -- no one is going to take a back seat to Democrats on fighting a tough war on terror. But what Karl Rove is doing is trying to divert attention.

Everyone is focused on, basically, the incompetence of this administration. Bin Laden was in Tora Bora. They relied on the Pakistanis to get him right after 9/11 and it failed.

The Iraq war -- we're having trouble with Iraqization. In other words, in the last reports, only about a thousand Iraqi soldiers can fight alone.

Here at home -- Katrina; everyone is talking about the prescription drug bill that was the administration's domestic centerpiece. And it's a total mess.

And so what Karl Rove is doing is trying to change the subject away from the incompetence of this administration at home and abroad.

Most Americans feel that the country's moving in the wrong direction internationally and domestically. And Democrats are strong on the war on terror.

But this is a cheap shot, trying to change the subject from the incompetence and the corruption in the Republican administration and trying to bring it back to this.

BLITZER: Well, let's let Senator Allen weigh in. A lot of people think, Senator Allen, you might be a possible Republican presidential candidate yourself.

Go ahead and react to the charge that this is simply a cheap shot by Karl Rove. ALLEN: Oh, it's Karl Rove, who I admire a great deal. And he is a good friend. And it's his view of things.

And I believe that the three things people care most about from and expect out of their federal government -- number one is security in this war on terror. It's very important.

Secondly, they want to make sure this is a land of opportunity, a more competitive country for investment and jobs and opportunities for all. And they also do care about the values, foundational values.

And in this war on terror, I think the American people recognize that President Bush has been a resolved, steady, strong leader. Can improvements be made? Of course, but Chuck seems to forget the success in Afghanistan, which I think is a success.

I actually think that Iraq is on the right track. They went through three elections last year. They're standing up a free and just society.

Hopefully, they'll be able to have one that they have a government where all people, regardless of whether they're Kurds or Sunnis or Shiites or whatever their religion or ethnicity or their gender, have an opportunity, and that's positive.

Lebanon is a positive; so is Libya.

ALLEN: And we need to get the world united, especially against Iran.

And Chuck and the Democrats are for raising taxes. We think we ought to have lower taxes for more investment.

BLITZER: Let me cut you off for a second, Senator Allen, because there's a couple other issues we have to get to before we're all out of time, including Samuel Alito, the justice nominee.

The vote is going to come up in your committee, the Judiciary Committee Tuesday. And then it'll go before the full Senate.

SCHUMER: Starting Wednesday.

BLITZER: Is it still realistic that the Democrats might filibuster?

SCHUMER: Well, I'm going to just make one other point about Rove. If Karl Rove wanted to win the war on terror he'd want to unite America. He'd want everybody, Republicans, Democrats, fighting this war together.

Comments like that, baldly political, divide us and hurt the war on terror. It shows you that Karl Rove is doing what he does as a trademark, putting politics above what's good for the country.

In answer to your Alito question, we are still weighing -- nothing is off the table. We're still weighing all of the issues. Karl Rove had to answer a whole lot of written questions. We have just gotten those back.

BLITZER: You mean Samuel Alito?

SCHUMER: Samuel Alito -- sorry -- has had to answer a whole lot of questions. We've just gotten those back. We're analyzing them.

And, look, a filibuster is a very large thing to do. It's a very -- it's not done very often. And so you've got to give it a lot of thought. And I don't think right yet, Democrats have come to a conclusion on that issue.

There is no question many are disappointed in some of the answers that Samuel Alito gave.

But to vote against him is one thing and to filibuster requires what I think is a much higher standard: Do you believe that the nominee is so far out of the mainstream that he will use the enormous power he gets on the Supreme Court to impose his views on the country?

BLITZER: I'll give you the last word, Senator Allen, on Samuel Alito. Go ahead.

ALLEN: Karl Rove is trying to unite this country in this effort, by the way.

And as far as Judge Alito, that's a values issue.

We see judges who ignore the will of the people in a variety of ways, everything from striking the Pledge of Allegiance from schools because of the words "under God;" you see them striking down parental notification bills, just last week.

Last year, you saw them amend the Bill of Rights by judicial decree, allowing commissars in New London, Connecticut to take people's homes, the American dream, not for a road or a school but because they wanted to derive more revenue off of it.

Judge Alito has an outstanding record. He had the unanimous highest recommendation from the ABA. He's 15 years as a Circuit Court judge. I think he's going to be an outstanding Supreme Court justice, respecting the will of the people in our representative democracy.

And if the Democrats want to filibuster, let them. We'll pull the constitutional trigger. And as far as I'm concerned, it's not too much to ask a senator to get off his or her cushy seat and show some backbone and spine and vote yes or vote no, but vote.

BLITZER: OK, we'll leave it right there.

Senator Allen, Senator Schumer, a good discussion. We'll continue this discussion -- see what happens in the Judiciary Committee this week, then on the Senate floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/22/le.01.html