Return to Transcripts main page


Interview with Diane Foley; NFL on Defense; ESPN: Rice Told Goodell In June About Punch; New Video Of Brown Shooting Aftermath; Fight Against ISIS

Aired September 11, 2014 - 20:00   ET


ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, thanks for joining us.

Tonight our exclusive interview with Diane Foley, mother of murdered ISIS captive, Jim Foley. She talks to us on her first interview since the president's speech last night. She talks about her son's faith and humanity, and his passionate belief in his country, and her belief that his country let her son down.

Surprising revelations tonight about what happened behind the scenes while her son was in captivity and what she hopes his legacy will be.

Also tonight, breaking news, a new report throws even more doubt on the NFL commissioner's claim that he only learned the details of what Ray Rice did in that elevator when he saw the tape of it on TMZ on Monday. Now ESPN is reporting that Roger Goodell learned these ugly details when Ray Rice himself told him months ago.

We begin tonight with the mother of Jim Foley, a mother determined to keep her son's legacy alive. A mother who's revealing details of what she says happened behind the scenes while her son was held hostage.

When journalist Jim Foley was kidnapped in Syria by ISIS terrorists, Diane Foley, along with her husband John and the rest of the family, became tireless advocates for Jim's safe return. For the next 21 months they showed strength, they showed grace, they maintained both even as they and the world learned the very worst about what happened to Jim.

Last night the president mentioned Jim Foley and fellow captive Steven Sotloff.


BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: ISIL is a terrorist organization, pure and simple. And it has no vision other than the slaughter of all who stand in its way.

In a region that has known so much bloodshed, these terrorists are unique in their brutality. They execute captured prisoners. They kill children. They enslave, rape and force women into marriage. They threatened the religious minority with genocide. And in acts of barbarism they took the lives of two American journalist, Jim Foley and Steven Sotloff. (END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, tonight with U.S. aircraft mapping out ISIS targets in Syria, Diane Foley is speaking out. She's talking about the son she loves and about the newly formed James Foley Legacy Foundation which is being launched tomorrow. She's also speaking candidly about her belief that the U.S. government did not do enough to bring Jim home safely, and despite kind words, did not do a good job of working with her family during their long ordeal.

I spoke earlier today to her.


DIANE FOLEY, JAMES FOLEY'S MOTHER: Jim was very passionate about freedom, freedom of the press, freedom for disadvantaged children. For -- a chance for education. But I know had he survived this ordeal, he would have been very passionate about the need to make kidnapped citizens a priority, a priority for our country and internationally, to try to promote dialogue for some consensus and strategy.

COOPER: Because right now, there's not a consensus. I mean --

FOLEY: There is not.

COOPER: European nations pay for -- pay for their hostages.


COOPER: The U.S. says they -- they are unwilling to do that.

FOLEY: Exactly. And --

COOPER: You're saying the countries need to be on the same page?

FOLEY: Absolutely. And not only that, there needs to be international dialogue. The risk is becoming higher and higher. And I really feel that our country let Jim down. And --

COOPER: In what way?

FOLEY: Well, Anderson, I -- we met wonderful people within our government, who cared, who wanted to help. But the reality of the bureaucracy and really -- was such that we were not helped. We really weren't.

COOPER: You didn't feel like they were there for you, that they were really not? The U.S. government really was not?

FOLEY: Not at all. And yet we don't blame -- I don't want to blame people because that is not going to help.

COOPER: So did you feel that -- your family, that Jim was a priority for the government?

FOLEY: No. We really didn't. You know?

COOPER: And you saw that in what? In the resources that they had you interact with, the people they had you interact with? What -- how did you get that sense?

FOLEY: As an American I was embarrassed and appalled, you know. I think our efforts to get Jim freed were an annoyance. You know. And --

COOPER: An annoyance to the government.

FOLEY: Yes. Jim would have been saddened. Jim believed until the end that his country would come to their aid. We were, you know, asked to not go to the media. To just trust that it would be taken care of. We were told we could not raise ransom, that it was illegal. We might be prosecuted.

COOPER: You were told you would actually be prosecuted?


COOPER: If you raise a ransom.

FOLEY: Yes, that was a real possibility, told that many times. We were told that our government would not exchange prisoners, would not do a military action. So we were just told to trust that he would be freed somehow miraculously, and he wasn't, was he, you know?

So we, Americans, failed him. I -- it's nobody's fault, it's just the fault of a lack of discussion around it and understanding of the problem.

COOPER: Were you surprised when you were told that you could be prosecuted if you tried to raise money for your son's --

FOLEY: I was horrified, I was horrified. Because we had had legal counsel that had assured us that no family of a captive American had been prosecuted for trying to get their child freed.

COOPER: There was a rescue effort apparently made?

FOLEY: Yes. Late. Very late. Yes.

COOPER: You wish it would have been sooner?

FOLEY: We feel that the location -- their location was known for more than a year.

COOPER: It was?

FOLEY: Yes, they had been moved a couple of times, that's true when there was a movement of ISIS from Aleppo to Raqqah. There were several moves in that transition. But there was also two times when they were at a location that we were aware of for months.

COOPER: Did you know have that intelligence yourself? Did you know that what was happening to him?

FOLEY: Well, that's what --

COOPER: Where he was?

FOLEY: Anderson, to be honest, that part was rather frightening. We tended to know everything before the FBI or anyone else.

COOPER: How so?

FOLEY: Because we did everything we could. I went to Europe several times to interview the European freed hostages just so I could find out how Jim was, what's going on, where are they, what are the chances of this or that. It was a frightening thing. And the FBI was -- everyone was kind and supportive. But the FBI used us for information.

COOPER: Really? They came to you for information?

FOLEY: Absolutely.

COOPER: About his location, about how --

FOLEY: Absolutely, absolutely, oh, yes.

COOPER: How much communication did you have?

FOLEY: Only when I went -- when I asked for it. The enemy is ISIS. The terrorists. The enemy is not our government. I hope that through this legacy foundation that our government will be willing to dialogue with our family and other families so that we can make American citizens in captivity more of a priority. And that we can work together to live up to the best of what we should be as Americans.

Jim was killed in the most horrific way. He was sacrificed because of -- just a lack of coordination, a lack of communication. A lack of prioritization. As a family, we had to find our way through this on our own.

COOPER: As I was watching the president speak last night I was wondering if you were watching.

FOLEY: Oh, yes, I watched.

COOPER: And so what was going through your mind?

FOLEY: This is -- this whole strategy to, you know, eliminate ISIS, and the terror threat and -- is important, obviously. And so maybe part of -- perhaps part of the strategic way of doing it is to bomb them. You know? And to engage in force. But that only caused Jim's death, really.

You know, I guess all I'm trying to say is I feel that our government needs to be shrewder, smarter, willing to negotiate with these people who hate us so that we can find better ways to rid ourselves of terror. COOPER: For you, are you able to see Jim as he was in life or is that

image of him at the end something that is seared in your --

FOLEY: Anderson, what keeps us going is definitely the way Jim lived. Jim will live on. And that is our deepest desire, that this foundation make that happen. In the best sense that our government can have better response to American hostages and their families. That we can continue to promote freedom of speech and education in the world. That the best of America can be promoted.

That's our hope, Anderson.

COOPER: And that's his legacy?

FOLEY: That is his legacy.


COOPER: In a moment, National Security Adviser Susan Rice responds to some of what Diane Foley said.

And two experts in the field of whether all that could have been done was done to save Jim Foley's life, is negotiating with captors or paying ransom ever a good idea.

As we go to break, a look at the twin beams of light rising up from Lower Manhattan, symbolizing the twin towers of the World Trade Center which fell 13 years ago this morning. Leaving us the world we've been living in ever since.


COOPER: Before the break, you heard Diane Foley's criticism of how the Obama administration handled her son Jim's captivity. We invited the White House to provide us some comments on air. They declined. But late today during an interview with National Security Adviser Susan Rice, Wolf Blitzer asked her about it. Here's what she told him.


SUSAN RICE, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: Well, I have gotten to know Diane Foley well and she and I have met on a number of occasions when I was ambassador in New York and here in Washington, at the White House. She's an extraordinary woman. She did an amazing job on behalf of her family and with her husband and other children to do everything possible, leave no stone unturned, to try to bring Jim home safely.

We're all heartbroken that that was not possible. But I and others in the U.S. government worked very hard with Diane Foley and her family to try to be supportive, to try to provide what information we could, and of course as you know the president ordered a very daring and very well executed rescue operation when on the only occasion we had what we thought was fresh and we hoped actionable intelligence about the whereabouts of Jim Foley and the other hostages. Unfortunately, they were no longer there. But I think that effort,

which involved hundreds of American personnel and very sophisticated effort underscores the importance that we attached to doing everything we possibly can to bring Americans in captivity back home.


COOPER: Dig deeper now, with Dan O'Shea, former Navy SEAL and from 2004 through 2006 coordinator of the Hostage Working Group at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. Also former Islamist extremist Maajid Nawaz, author of "Radical: My Journey Out of Islamist Extremism." He's now a contributor at the "Daily Beast."

Dan, I'm just curious, you heard what Diane Foley had to say, what your thoughts were on her perspective.

DAN O'SHEA, V.P., GROM TECHNOLOGIES: Well, it's -- I've talked to many families after my tour. I came back and I met with many of the families that expressed very similar frustrations about what they perceive as the lack of an effort by the U.S. government to try and bring their loved ones home. And, you know, the reality is, you know, we spent two years in Iraq and we're hundred if not thousands of folks that worked on many cases, hundreds of kidnapping cases.

Many folks -- many of my peers included went on nightly missions and raids, hundreds of missions to try and find actual intelligence on just, say, one kidnapping. So it's a very complex environment, the family is not getting a lot of information from the government. It's very challenging and it just -- it brings back a lot of bad memories hearing her thoughts and concerns about her son.

COOPER: That's certainly -- that is certainly one of the things, Dan, I think that she hopes to be able to improve in the future is the flow of information or at least the relationship between the U.S. government and hostage families. That you know they feel very alone in this. They feel that they're kind of in unchartered territory. And she at least feels very much that they were kind of left to their own devices in many ways. Is there ways -- are there ways to improve that?

O'SHEA: Well, I can just tell you that unfortunately the U.S. government is not on the business of sharing information. The folks that called her and dealt with her, they're not going to give a lot of information out. They can't. Because of the fear that information they released to the family is going to end up in the media. And the reality is there are experts in the field that people can reach out to because it's really hard to navigate that relationship when your son or daughter is the subject of a -- you know, kidnapping mission that may or may not be in works.

So families -- there are resources out there for the families. But the U.S. government is not in the business of revealing information. So that's where Mrs. Foley and others in this situation feel like they're being left out in the cold.

COOPER: Maajid, is it possible to negotiate with a group like ISIS? Is it in any way wise? Because Mrs. Foley is not just talking about paying money, which is what the Western European governments do, but possibly prisoner exchanges or just opening up some sort of a dialogue. Do you think that's even possible?

MAAJID NAWAZ, DAILY BEAST CONTRIBUTOR: Well, there are two scenes here, Anderson. One is that currently I don't think it is possible because I don't think ISIS no longer needs financing. I think they're making enough money on their own. When this organization was akin to other terrorist franchises in certain parts of Africa where they need money they are willing to trade hostages for millions and millions of dollars. But ISIL is making that much every day anyway.

But secondly, even if it were possible, even if it was something that ISIL were prepared to do, and I highly doubt that they would be, they don't need the money, as I said, it compromises national security. As Jim Foley's mother correctly mentioned, there are countries in Europe that do exchange money for hostages. The United Kingdom where I'm speaking from absolutely never accepts that as a bargaining tool. But other countries choose to.

And what that does is it means that those citizens from those countries are then deliberately targeted by terrorists for further kidnappings. And what it tends to do is it ratchets up the kidnappings of people from there, and then the price goes up and the terrorists turn it into a business. And so that compromises the national security of those countries, and they're learning that the hard way now. And they're beginning to revise their policies.

Finally, what I would say is that ISIL, and you know, god forbid any of us are in their position, that Jim Foley's mother found herself in. If she wasn't upset about this whole situation, I'd worry because any -- which mother wouldn't be upset? So of course it's expected that she's going to be distraught about the situation.

And what we need to understand about ISIL is that this is an organization that scripturally, and its Medieval interpretation of my own religion, Islam, believes in terrorizing their enemy as an end in itself. And for them, this sort of action -- the horrible things that they have done to these journalists, both Foley and -- Mrs. Sotloff, these are an end to themselves to make us scared of them, to weaken us because they believe that is something to be achieved as a strategy of war. And so this is the theater around decapitations, the spectacle, the filming of it, the speeches around it.

All of that is carefully orchestrated to strike fear in our hearts as they -- as they believe that god has commanded them to do.

COOPER: Maajid Nawaz, appreciate you being on, always. Dan O'Shea, as well.

If you'd like to donate to the James W. Foley Legacy Foundation, you can find more information at We also have a link on our Web site.

And again, we'll have more from James Foley's mother, Diane, in the next hour, in the 9:00 hour. Just ahead, what the NFL is doing to answer serious lingering

questions about the way it handled the Ray Rice case.

Plus breaking news, more sources coming forward to suggest that Commissioner Roger Goodell knew more that what he's been letting on.


COOPER: Breaking news tonight on how the NFL handled the case of Ray Rice, former running back for the Baltimore Ravens, including a new report from ESPN that cast even more doubt on Commissioner Roger Goodell.

Four sources tell ESPN that Rice met with the commissioner back in June and told him that he punched his then fiancee in an elevator months before TMZ released surveillance video showing the knockout punch. Now just this week, Goodell told CBS that the meeting in June wasn't anywhere near as clear as these ESPN sources are now making it sound.

This all comes on top of the NFL's assertion that it didn't even see the tape until we all did, despite an Associated Press report that says the video was actually given to the league five months ago.

Now the NFL has hired a former FBI director to look into how the league handled the case. And it sounds like he's going to have plenty to investigate.

Miguel Marquez joins us now live with the latest.

So let's talk about this new information about Roger Goodell. What exactly is it?

MIGUEL MARQUEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: ESPN is reporting that on June 16th there was a meeting in Goodell's New York offices. There were several individuals there, Ray Rice, his wife, two reps from the player's union, Ozzie Newsome, the GM of the Ravens and also Dick Cass, the president of the Ravens. Four of the individuals in that meeting described to the ESPN reporter that this was -- that Rice said that he punched his then fiancee. One, so that he said the word slapped.

Here is how Roger Goodell said it to Norah O'Donnell earlier this week on CBS.


ROGER GOODELL, NFL COMMISSIONER: When we met with Ray Rice and his representatives, it was ambiguous about what actually happened.

NORAH O'DONNELL, CBS NEWS: But what was ambiguous about her laying unconscious on the floor, being dragged out by her feet?

GOODELL: There was nothing ambiguous about that. That was the result that we saw. We did not know what led up to that.



COOPER: How is it that this could be ambiguous?

MARQUEZ: Well, I think what he was saying is this was not a meeting where he was drilling down and trying to figure out, you know, if it was just him and Rice in a room. This was several people in that room. It was more of a conversation about how they get beyond this. And it was -- it really weren't trying to get to what actually happened in that elevator.

The alternative narrative, and keep in mind that some of those individuals in that room are friends of Rice or people who think that he is getting a raw deal in all of this, the alternative narrative of this was espoused really by the team owner, Steve Bisciotti, when he talked about the way he envisioned what happened in that elevator, prior to seeing the TMZ tape.


STEVE BISCIOTTI, BALTIMORE RAVENS OWNER: We love Ray, so we have a tendency to hear what we want to hear and see what we want to see. And so the -- the misdemeanor, the explanation that she hit him, he hit her with an open hand. The facts that she had -- was aggressive. I was picturing -- I was picturing her whaling on him and him smacking her.


COOPER: You know, it's interesting, I mean, there's now this investigation being headed by the former director of the FBI. Some people say it's not going to be impartial enough before it even gets under way.

MARQUEZ: Yes. Look, he is with a law firm, a very prestigious law firm in Washington, D.C. Several -- you know, Dick Cass, the president of the Ravens, worked for that law firm, WilmerHale, for 31 years, the law firm has worked on NFL deals, TV deals and had a lot of former employees. So there's a lot of concern about that. But, you know, Mueller has a gold standard of investigators and they believe that they can actually get this thing done. He says he is ready to start today.

COOPER: Miguel Marquez, appreciate the update.

Joining me now is CNN Sports' Rachel Nichols, host of "UNGUARDED," CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, and John Wertheim, executive editor and senior writer for Sports Illustrated.

Jeff, I saw you shaking your head. Do you believe the former director of the FBI can do an impartial investigation?


COOPER: Even if his law firm has all these ties to the NFL. TOOBIN: Yes, come on. I mean, these law firms are big law firms,

lots of people work there and have worked in other places. But look, Rob Mueller is one of the most distinguished public servants in the history of the United States. I mean this is a guy who spent almost all of his life in the public sector, not the private sector.

I don't have a shred of doubt that he will pursue this with integrity. As oppose to the NFL which looks more ridiculous every day. I mean, the idea that -- so many things were wrong with that interview with Norah O'Donnell. The idea that apparently Roger Goodell was the only person in America who found it ambiguous what was going on, what happened in that elevator. I mean, that's why you do need Bob Mueller to just sort out what happened.


COOPER: And Jeff --

RACHEL NICHOLS, CNN HOST, UNGUARDED WITH RACHEL NICHOLS: And it's interesting to note that Mueller is not going to have subpoena power. He is not -- nobody is going to be required to testify under oath to him, which what happens in these investigations, of course. But that then allows a lot of things to happen throughout the course of that. He might not be able to get to the truth. And what we have seen throughout all of this is they don't seem particularly giving out the truth.


COOPER: Ray Rice's attorney had the tape. So it doesn't seem like anybody's asked Roger Goodell about that. I'm not sure if CBS knew that at that time they actually sat down for the interview. But there is no explanation for why or even if they tried to get that tape from Ray Rice's attorneys.

JON WERTHEIM, EXECUTIVE EDITOR AND SENIOR WRITER, "SPORTS ILLUSTRATED": Yes, exactly. This has been absolutely bungled from the start in an absolutely best case scenario, the NFL's fact-finding was amazingly shoddy. I think this is the most buttoned-up organization you can imagine.

I mean, they do not make PR gaffes the way other leagues do. This is kind of kangaroo court stuff and from the start they have absolutely flubbed this.

COOPER: And now again you have another day of stories of what Roger Goodell knew and when he knew it.

NICHOLS: Well, it just suspects since this whole Ray Rice maybe didn't really tell us the truth defense. Only cropped up in this Nora O'Donnell interview two nights ago.

COOPER: Because the coach of the team said that --

NICHOLS: He told us everything and in fact, when he initially suspended Ray Rice for only two games and there was a huge backlash then because he is just that he is the one in America who thought something possibly innocent might happened in that elevator.

He then went forward and said I was wrong, we didn't get it right. At that point, he never said Ray Rice wasn't really truthful with me, this seems to be a new theory he just threw out there this week.

TOOBIN: And listen to that remarkable piece of sound from Bisciotti, this fantasy they have.

COOPER: He said they see what they want to see.

WERTHEIM: I mean, that is really what is remarkable. Ray Rice in his apology used the word domestic violence. So that is an admission right there. But materially, nothing has changed from a week ago.

COOPER: We saw it early on, the Ravens tweeted out that the fiancee was apologetic for her role in this.

WERTHEIM: And hosted the press conference.

NICHOLS: There was a new level of victim-blaming tonight. "The Wall Street Journal" did recently just published to its web site an quoting an unnamed NFL owner that said the reason that Roger Goodell gave such a light punishment was because Janay Rice gave such a compelling story in that initial meeting and asked him to, which is victim blaming to just an entirely new level.

Remember, Janay Rice is in that room, in that meeting, with her husband who has punched her unconscious, with four executives from the Baltimore Ravens hovering over her, as well as her husband's lawyer, so to force her to be in that position to begin with, to quote, "tell her story" is unbelievable.

But then to blame her and that story that she told under those conditions, is the reason Roger Goodell should now be let off the hook. I don't know who their anonymous NFL owner is, but he needs to back track.

COOPER: She is still very publicly supporting Ray Rice, that it is the media's fault that they are just doing this --

TOOBIN: This is why one of the things we have been talking about from the beginning is that, you know, women who are victims of domestic violence often stand by their man, and we can talk about the reasons for that. But domestic violence is a crime against the community as well as the victim.

COOPER: Explain that.

TOOBIN: Well, the idea is, when you hit someone, when you commit an assault it is not up to the victim to decide whether charges should be pressed. It is up to the community. It is up to the police and it is often the case that women don't want to press charges for a variety of reasons that again, we talk about.

But the modern view of domestic violence is that police should prosecute it even if the women don't want to because this is such a dangerous and pernicious crime that is often repeated and you know, just can't be tolerated.

WERTHEIM: Which is why it is in complete contradiction of any policy with domestic violence to have the victim testify --

COOPER: And according to Miguel it was not even a testimony kind of interview, sort of seeing how they can get beyond this.

NICHOLS: You have to remember the NFL didn't have a domestic violence policy until a couple of weeks ago, they just didn't have one.

TOOBIN: And as Rachel has reminded us many time over the course of this week, it is far from only Ray Rice in the NFL, who not only have been charged, but people have been convicted.

WERTHEIM: Well, 14 in the last two years.

COOPER: It is incredible. John, thank you very much for being with us. Rachel as well. Jeff Toobin.

Just ahead, the new video that we've exclusively obtained showing the immediate aftermath of Michael Brown shooting, a video that captures two eyewitnesses' reactions to the shooting. What the man who took that video is saying that.


COOPER: We have more tonight on the new video that CNN obtained exclusively showing two eyewitnesses reacting to the Michael Brown shooting. This is cell phone video showing two contractors who are working in the area when Brown was shot and killed by Police Officer Darren Wilson.

Now the man on the left says he saw Michael Brown staggering and he says Brown put his hands up and said OK, OK, OK. The witness told us the cop didn't say get on the ground. That is a quote. He just kept shooting.

The 360 spoke with the attorney for the man who shot that video. Randi Kaye was the first to show the exclusive video on the program last night. She joins me now live. So first of all, remind our viewers why this video might be so important.

RANDI KAYE, CNN INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Anderson, if you look at it is realtime reaction. It is really raw. It's not hours or days later somebody telling you what they saw.

You can see the shock and the horror that these guys are feeling right after seeing as they say Police Officer Darren Wilson chased down Michael Brown and fatally shoot him in front of them.

Let's play the video now. It's only about 15 seconds and our viewers can judge for themselves here what happened.

So as you heard right there and as you can see there are several different voices on that tape. One voice is that contractor in the pink t-shirt, you saw him put his hands up illustrating he saw Michael Brown with his hands up.

We spoke to him and his co-worker on the phone after we got the video. They didn't want to be identified, but the guy in the pink told us that they were close enough to see a really gruesome scene.

He said describing seeing Michael Brown's brains come out of his head. He also told us that Brown was staggering with his hands up describing him, Anderson, like a walking dead man.

COOPER: What have you been able to learn about the guy who took the video?

KAYE: Well, he is going by the name "Chris" although we know that is not his real name. His attorney told us that he actually knew Michael Brown. In fact, he's been talking to him right before the shooting.

And now when he heard the gun fire, this guy, "Chris" apparently run inside, grabbed his iPad, according to his attorney and started recording from his basement-level apartment.

But here is what is interesting, though, Chris' attorney said that her client tried to show this video, Anderson, to the police at the scene and they waved him off.

They didn't want any part of it. That attorney also said that she gave the FBI the contractor's names and that footage. But the timing of the video, Anderson, also could be key here, the attorney for this guy, "Chris," told us that he started videotaping just 40 seconds after he heard those gunshots. So this is realtime.

COOPER: All right, Randi, appreciate it. Back with me now is CNN senior legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin and Anthony Gray, an attorney for Michael Brown's family, Benjamin Crump's co-counsel. Jeff, you think this video is important?

TOOBIN: I think it is very important. Trials have become a much more high tech enterprise in recent years. And what you can see coming together here is a reconstruction that the prosecutors, if this case goes to trial, of all the different witnesses.

You could create a graphic of where all of the witnesses were standing and look at how they -- what they saw and when they saw it and pull it altogether, and so far it seems, the narratives are basically consistent.

Virtually all the witnesses who could see and have come forward that we know of say that Michael Brown was shot while his hands were in the air. If that is true, if all the witnesses say that Michael Brown was shot with his hands in the air this could be a very damaging case against Officer Wilson.

COOPER: Anthony, obviously, you're an attorney for the Brown family. What do you make of this video?

ANTHONY GRAY, ATTORNEY FOR BROWN FAMILY: The same thing, the significance of this video is huge and I want you to think about this. This is just how major it is in my mind. When we go to war in other countries and against foreign combatants and they throw their hands up in the air and you shoot that person, you could be charged with a war crime.

We think that the laws in our own country should be the same. If in fact, Mike Brown had his hands in the air moments before bullets were pumped into his body, it doesn't matter what happened at a video store. It doesn't matter what happened in his juvenile record.

It doesn't matter what happened at the door of the police car. Nothing matters, just like it wouldn't matter if we were to invade a country and the person who was just about to blow your brains out threw his hands up in the air.

What you are required to do is take that person into custody, peacefully which is what we're saying should have happened in Mike Brown Jr.'s case.

COOPER: Jeff, supporters of the police in this and other observers will say well, look, there is still a lot of information we don't know. There is no forensic evidence at all in the public domain.

TOOBIN: No, and frankly one of the things I'm confused about in the different stories, was Michael Brown actually shot in the front or in the back. And you know, several of the bullets, as far as I'm aware have not been found. Bullets that missed him altogether so it is true --

COOPER: It was according to the independent autopsy, the second autopsy done by Michael Badden. There was a shot that went back to front through one of the arms.

TOOBIN: One of the arms, but only when the clothes are examined. That is when you're really going to be able to say which direction and how close, especially how close Officer Wilson was when he fired the shots.

But you know, it is important as I have said several times here to keep an open mind about all the evidence that is out there including stuff undoubtedly we haven't heard yet. But this video and this contractor's story is certainly very incriminating.

COOPER: Anthony, is there any word on the schedule for the grand jury? I mean, weeks we were told that probably by -- sometime in October, is that still the timeline, your understanding or thinking about it?

GRAY: That is my understanding. That is the time line. We don't have a fixed time that we know that -- a date certain where they're going to make an announcement. It can happen at any moment prior to that October deadline we were given. We just don't know.

But can I just say this about the video? You know, we talk about other evidence coming in. I tell you this. If I have people that are saying the kind of things that we saw this guy saying on the video moments after the shooting, his hands were up when he was shot. I don't need anything else, what more do you need in a case like that? To me it is disingenuous to say you need more, there is nothing more for me to have to develop my belief and that is what I'm going on. That is why I'm latched in on this case and attacking it like a bow and arrow.

TOOBIN: If I can just say, October is fast, I know we're all impatient and we want everything resolved immediately. When you look at the number of witnesses and the amount of scientific tests that need to be done, October -- I would be surprised if they're done in October.

COOPER: We'll see, Anthony Gray, thank you. Jeff Toobin as well.

Just ahead, breaking news, how many fighters ISIS really has in its ranks. New numbers tonight from the CIA that will surprise you.

Plus, we'll dig deeper on the last night's heated debate between Senator John McCain and our new senior political commentator, former White House secretary, Jay Carney moments after the president's ISIS speech. If you missed it, it was quite something. They went over Mr. Obama's foreign policy, details ahead.


COOPER: We have more breaking news tonight, the CIA now says that ISIS can mobilize more than 20,000 fighters across Iraq and Syria, possibly as many as 31,500. That's two to three times more fighters than they had previously estimated.

That word came a day after President Obama laid out his plan to dismantle and ultimately destroy, his words, ISIS. His speech last night set off some pretty intense fireworks here on 360, Senator John McCain and CNN's new senior political commentator, Jay Carney, the former White House press secretary for President Obama who oversaw the policies of Iraq and Syria. Here is a recap.


SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I am astounded that -- Mr. Carney should say that the Free Syrian Army is now stronger. In fact, they have been --

JAY CARNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, that is not what I said, Senator, if I could, sir, what I said is that we know a great deal more about the make-up --

MCCAIN: Come on, Jay, we knew all about them then, you just didn't choose to know, I was there in Syria. We knew them. Come on, you guys -- it's your boss that when the entire national security team wanted to arm and train them that he turned them down, Mr. Carney --

CARNEY: Well, Senator --

MCCAIN: So the fact is --

CARNEY: I think we have to agree to disagree.

MCCAIN: No, facts are stubborn things. You, in your role as a spokesperson bragged about the fact that the last American combat troop had left Iraq. If we had left a residual force, the situation would not be what it is today and there would be a lot more --

CARNEY: Senator, I can posit with great respect for you that we disagree on that, that you --

MCCAIN: You don't have the facts, Mr. Carney. That is the problem.

CARNEY: Senator, I understand that you present the facts that you believe are true based on the argument that you've made for a long time that we should leave troops in Iraq in perpetuity.

MCCAIN: You have your facts wrong and distorted them.


COOPER: Today, Jay Carney's successor was asked about it at the White House press briefing.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You heard on CNN last night, your former boss get into it with Senator McCain. And even today on the Senate floor, we heard him saying that it was the Iraqis who wanted a residual force to stay there. And if you heard the back and forth, who is right?

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I heard a little bit of back and forth. I heard enough of the back and forth that I'm tempted to defer all the questions about Senator McCain and his criticism to my former colleague. He equated himself quite well I believe.


COOPER: Well, joining me now, chief political analyst, Gloria Borger and political commentator, Peter Beinart. Gloria, first of all, we should just point out to set the record straight that we did not plan to have that back and forth.

We were interviewing Senator McCain, Senator McCain lobbed something against Jay Carney, and Jay Carney who was there sort of stepped in and that's how it began.

But I mean, what do you make of it? I mean, it was remarkable because really you see people of that level and that level of influence, a sitting senator and key White House aide or former key White House aide duking it out on television like that.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, you know, now everyone is so savvy about who they want to be on TV with. And you this, Anderson, they're sort of like, OK, I want to be alone and I don't want to be with this person or that person.

And through this whole confluence of events last night, you had sort of a moving story and they actually engaged substantively, they disagreed. I spoke to somebody who is close to John McCain tonight who said that, you know, while the McCain folks didn't intend for this to happen, they were pretty happy with the way it went from their point of view.

I think we should see more of this on television because, you know, I think each of them had a point of view, particularly about whether if the U.S. forces had stayed whether we would be in this situation with ISIS or whether we could have done more to keep a residual force there. These are the arguments that are being played out in the Congress right now.

COOPER: Right, and Peter, they clearly see this completely different. John McCain makes the argument that the Iraqis actually wanted it and had President Obama really wanted it. They could have worked out some sort of agreement on the status of forces thing.

Jay Carney claims the president would have been fine with it. But it was the Iraqis who said no, and then there were others who say had the U.S. had a residual force there and the Iraqi military fell apart even if there was a U.S. military force.

Though some said that wouldn't have happened then the U.S. would have been in a position of having to try to rescue perhaps, you know, tens of thousands of U.S. military personnel.

PETER BEINART, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Right, these are the nature of counter-factual. I think what we can say is that public opinion in Iraq was hostile to the U.S. staying. Most Iraqi politicians knew that there were votes in getting the U.S. how.

The U.S. was very unpopular in Iraq. Now, it is certainly possible that there were key Iraqi leaders and politicians, who we might have been able to twist their arms to get them to go against the will of their people.

I think it is probably true in retrospect the Obama administration wishes it had tried harder. The truth is, which is hard for Americans to accept that Americans' military presence in Iraq by that point was very unpopular among the Iraqis.

COOPER: The other thing that was interesting about that discussion, the content of it, is one thing I actually pushed back on Jay, that then Senator McCain picked up on, which is Jay's belief or claim that the opposition on the ground is sort of in a better position than they were two or three years ago, that simply doesn't seem to be the case.

I mean, they have suffered huge losses on the battlefield, not just against the regime, but Al Nusra Front, against ISIS, and there have been huge defections of formerly, allegedly moderate military commanders who have gone over to Al-Nusra or ISIS or other groups.

BORGER: Yes, and McCain said, you know, you should know better than that because I've been on the ground in Syria and I know what the situation is now and I know what the situation was two or three years ago. And you don't have the facts on your side. But he is clearly arguing the president's case still. You know, he is the closest thing to a senior administration official that John McCain is going to get to argue with because he is just recently out.

And he is still making the president's points about this, which is he did not want to arm them.

COOPER: Peter, that is the most difficult part for the U.S. in terms of actually affecting change on the ground in Syria is, who will they actually deal with, they don't want to put U.S. personnel on the ground.

BEINART: Right, and you could see in President Obama's speech, they are much more confident they have a strategy in Iraq where they have the Peshmerga and they have some Iraqi security forces than in Syria.

And I think in retrospect, look, if we knew now what we knew then, no question that we should have been arming the Free Syrian Army, because they're the only potential ground ally that we can ally with in Syria. Of course we would want them to be stronger.

BORGER: But Jay was not going to say that. By the way, let me point out, the irony in all of this is that, of course, Senator McCain is supporting the extra money the president is asking for. And in fact, he wants more than that.

COOPER: Peter Beinart, Gloria Borger, thanks.

Coming up, on another live hour of 360, there are already calls for Commissioner Roger Goodell to resign over how he handled the Ray Rice case. Now there are new indications that Goodell may have known more about what happened than he's been saying. Details ahead.