Return to Transcripts main page

WOLF

Obama About Face on Immigration Reform; Attacks in Synagogue in Israel; How Should U.S. Respond to Israel Attacks; Are Changes Needed in U.S. Terror Negotiation Policy; Missouri Declared State of Emergency; Mission of Russia Satellite a Mystery

Aired November 18, 2014 - 13:30   ET

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


WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Speaking of the president, another sensitive issue, immigration reform. The president saying if the Congress by the end of this year doesn't engage in significant reform, he's going to do it on his own, even though the Republicans say that would be a violation of the Constitution. He can't do it. He does not have legal authority. And now, read "The New York Times" story earlier today, several examples of the president himself in recent years saying he can't do this on his own, including this clip from back in 2011.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply, through executive order, ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: He was speaking on Univision, the Spanish television network, at the time, explaining why he can't do it on his own. Another occasion he said, I'm the president of the United States, I'm not the emperor of the United States. But now he says he's going to do --

(CROSSTALK)

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Now he's the emperor.

BLITZER: But he earlier said he shouldn't do it.

BORGER: He was against it before he was for it, Wolf. He used it to explain to Hispanic groups who were saying, why don't you do something by some kind of executive order, saying, no, no, no, I can't do it, because he wanted something to pass through the Congress. Now that he knows that nothing is going to pass through the Congress at this point -- don't forget the Senate passed a bill. In the House, the bill went nowhere -- he's decided he has 26 months left in his presidency that he's going to do exactly what he said he was not going to do.

And I think, again, if you look at the larger picture here, this is a president who is saying to a Republican Congress, OK, dare me, I'm going to do it. And it's going to create a situation in which Republicans are going to have to decide, as they run the House and the Senate, whether they can compartmentalize and actually work with the president on, say, tax reform and trade and not work with him on immigration or whether it's all going to blow up. And we just don't know at this point how it's going to play out.

BLITZER: It could play out by the end of this week, they say, if the president decides to do what he earlier said he shouldn't do.

BORGER: And you do have that "hell, no" caucus who would be saying to their leadership in the Republican Party, let's shut down the government.

BLITZER: I don't think they'll shut down the government.

BORGER: Stranger things have happened.

BLITZER: Let's see if it passes. I'd be surprised if they make that mistake again.

Gloria, thanks very much.

Still ahead, the National Guard called in, a state of emergency declared. Unease is growing in Ferguson, Missouri, ahead of the pending grand jury decision.

And we'll get back to our top story, that horrible terror attack in a synagogue in Jerusalem. We'll go live to bring you the update on what's going on.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: "The quiet holiness of a synagogue shattered by unholy terror," that's the headline in "The Jerusalem Post" describing today's horrific attack that left four people dead. Two Palestinians armed with axes, knives and a gun went on a rampage during morning prayers.

Pictures from inside the synagogue reveal the carnage that unfolded.

A word of caution to our viewers.

The images are very graphic. A trail of blood leading down a hallway, blood-soaked prayer shawls, a broken pair of glasses.

In the meantime, we're learning more about the victims. Three of the four who died were dual U.S.-Israeli citizens. The fourth, a British- Israeli citizen. All rabbis. The FBI says it will get involved in the investigation because of the American victims, the U.S. citizens.

Earlier we heard from the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, calling the attackers "animals."

And joining us on the phone from Tel Aviv is Barak Ravid, a correspondent for the Israeli newspaper, "Haaretz."

Barak, thanks very much for joining us.

Give us some reaction. How awful is this situation and where do we expect it to lead?

BARAK RAVID, CORRESPONDENT HAARETZ (voice-over): Well, I think that what you see today, we need to trace back to, let's say, three or four months ago, with the kidnapping of three Israeli teenagers in the West Bank and afterwards the kidnapping and murder of a Palestinian teenager, and then war in Gaza and the escalation in Temple Mount the last two weeks, and this horrendous massacre today. I think what we are seeing is the process that leads us to what we can already call today the third infatada. The third infatada is the Jerusalem infatada that we've seen. The West Bank is practically quite stable. Inside Israel, there are no terror attacks. But this is the center of the new and third infatada. I think many Israelis, inside and outside Jerusalem, see the situation and they're very worried and concerned that we might go back to the scenes that we've seen 10 years ago or 12 years ago, 2001, 2002, of bombings and attacks all over the country.

BLITZER: Because the prime minister of Israel in a statement -- we showed it to our viewers -- he said Israel will respond immediately by destroying the houses of those two Palestinian terrorists who went into the synagogue earlier today. That presumably is going to lead to an escalation in this situation. There's a fear that there will be revenge attacks, right?

RAVID: Well, I think that this is the main problem here. Prime Minister Netanyahu all along his political career was a person that ran under the slogan, "I will be strong with the Arabs, I will be strong against Hamas, I will be strong against Iran, I will bring you security." And in the last few months, I think what many Israelis are seeing is quite the opposite. The security situation is deteriorating, deteriorating and deteriorating more and more. And right now, the government, which is, by the way, it's a right wing government and doesn't have anyone to blame, he doesn't have any strategy or any solutions to the situation, doesn't have any answers. So what is left for them is, A, to blame President Abbas for the terror attacks and, B, to go for reactions like demolishing houses and treating the civilian population in east Jerusalem more harshly. And I agree with you that it's a self-defeating strategy that will only lead to more escalation of violence.

BLITZER: Here's the bottom-line question. Is the prime minister politically in trouble? Is his government in trouble? Could it fall?

RAVID: Well, I think that in the last few days, there was a lot of talk in this country about the possibility of early elections. This talk will be off the table for the next few days. But when you look at the big picture, I think that the current escalation, the current violation and the instability in the country will not work for Mr. Netanyahu's popularity because, again, many Israelis will say, OK, you said that you were strong against Hamas, you'll be strong against all the terrorists. What are you doing to change the situation? You're a right wing leader. It's not that you can blame those left liberals for not treating the terrorists the way they should treat them. So what are you doing? What are you doing to stop all this violence and all this terrorism? And Netanyahu doesn't have any answers. I think politically he's in a very difficult situation.

BLITZER: Barak Ravid, is a diplomatic correspondent for the Israeli newspaper, "Haaretz."

Barak, thanks very much for joining us.

Let's get U.S. perspective. Michael O'Hanlon is joining us right now, the director of research at the Brookings Institute here in Washington, and also the author of "Bending History," a book on President Obama's foreign policy.

What's going on right here from the United States perspective? How should the U.S., how should the United States be dealing with this escalating crisis in Jerusalem right now, Michael?

MICHAEL O'HANLON, DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION & AUTHOR: Hi, Wolf. I think, first of all, we have to always in this sort of a situation, stand by the country with innocent civilians. Even though, in a broader sense, that's true of Palestinians as well as Israelis, at the moment, we have to express our deep condolences for what began this. It's a very sad day for the Israeli public.

But it's a very sad period in general for these two peoples. And I think we have to emphatically say, as our second course of business, get back to the peace process. There's really no alternative but a two-state solution and there is no better time than now. Anyone who would challenge those two points, I believe we should disagree with. And I don't think we should be as apologetic about it as we sometimes seem to be.

BLITZER: Secretary Kerry worked for over a year to achieve something in that peace process. It led really nowhere. For all intents and purposes, it's dead right now. How can he revive it?

O'HANLON: Well, he can't without the Israelis and Palestinians themselves being willing to. So that's why I'm suggesting that the advice has to be given to them more than me giving it to my government. I don't know what more Secretary Kerry can be asked to do or like people at my colleague at Brookings and others working on the two-state solution, what more they can be asked to do. But we have to partly speak to the publics on both side and help with the political will. What's the alternative for Israel? To live in a Jewish minority state that someday has more Palestinians and other Arabs than Israelis? I don't think so. To have a system of two tiers of citizenship over the long term? That's not consistent with the Israeli ethics that I know. So there really is no alternative there. The Palestinians can't afford to stay in limbo for the rest of their history. I think we should be emphatic and speak directly to the publics perhaps to develop political consensus as much as we can. It's going to take time, though, for the reason you just mentioned.

BLITZER: Let's switch gears and talk about ISIS. The latest ISIS video showing the death of that American hostage. President Obama asking for a full-scale review of how the U.S. government should deal with the military, with families when it comes to Americans being held hostage by terror organizations. Are changes overdue in the U.S. policy?

O'HANLON: Well, one thing I've been thinking of -- and I hope you don't mind my saying so, it's not at CNN's expense here -- but I wonder if the media is giving too much visibility to these horrible, brutal, disgusting videos. Obviously, it's what ISIS wants us to do. That's why they release these. We're not going to be able to suppress it entirely. But one policy that I would want to ask people to think about changing is how much coverage we want to give to this because it acts in some ways as a propaganda tool for ISIS when they get so much footage out of these terrible atrocities.

But, back to your original question, I don't think we can fundamentally change our policy on hostages. I think we need a better policy towards ISIS. And the Obama administration is making serious progress and good progress in regard to Iraq, although there's a long ways to go.

But the policy on Syria doesn't even add up. We can't seem to speak clearly about whether we're working with President Assad or against him. We insist there's no formal communication or coordination, and yet we seem to have the same goals. President Obama wrote this secret letter to Iran a few weeks ago. There's no viable plan for building up a Syrian opposition that could seriously contest either Assad or ISIS. So the Syria policy needs a lot of work. I think that's where we should focus at a policy level. At an implementation level, there's, of course, a lot of work to do in Iraq. But at least the basic concept makes sense to me.

BLITZER: You think this new Iraqi government, which is obviously very closely aligned with Iran, really can get the job done? Because their military, even though there are hundreds of thousands of Iraqi soldiers who were trained, financed, armed by the United States for more than a decade, they simply ran away as a bunch of ISIS terrorists came in to Iraq, abandoning their posts, abandoning Mosul, a city of two million people, abandoning all the weapons the U.S. Left behind. You think the Iraqi military is really changing?

O'HANLON: Well, you raise a very valid point. So far, the progress has been slow. I think we had a pretty good summer in helping forge that new Iraqi government. But since that time, the key implementing legislation for some ideas that are designed to wrestle with the very paradoxes and tensions you mentioned have really been held up. For example, the creation of this new Iraqi national guard. It's a great way to get Sunni Arabs to be recruited and fight locally for their own communities. But the Iraqi central government is worried that these Sunnis are ultimately going to turn on Baghdad. And so it doesn't want this national guard to be created.

I think the United States has to get more engaged. We're moving in the right direction. But I think a longer-term commitment by the United States and a willingness to keep forces there for years, maybe even through an alliance, is actually the best way for us to help glue together these groups that are still so distrusting of each other.

BLITZER: Michael O'Hanlon, with the Brookings Institution, thanks very much for joining us. Also want to put up the book jacket, "Bending History," his new book

on President Obama's foreign policy. Check it out.

Still ahead, on the way, a grand jury still deciding whether Officer Darren Wilson will be indicted in the August shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. And the unease building. The Missouri National Guard being called in. A state of emergency already has been declared.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Missouri is under a state of emergency. Today, the governor of Missouri, Jay Nixon, making the declaration, calling in the National Guard as Ferguson and the country brace for the grand jury's decision on the shooting of Michael Brown.

Stephanie Elam has more on the growing unease.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(SHOUTING)

STEPHANIE ELAM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Protesters in St. Louis brave frigid temperatures taking to the streets ahead of Missouri's governor declaring a state of emergency.

Governor Jay Nixon anticipating expanded unrest if the grand jury decides not to indict Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson, who shot and killed unarmed teen, Michael Brown, on August 9th.

Governor Nixon activating the National Guard to assist the county police with securing Ferguson, bypassing the Ferguson Police Department. The mayor of St. Louis agreed with the decision.

FRANCIS SLAY, (D), MAYOR OF ST. LOUIS: We don't know what's going to happen or when it's going to happen or what the decision's going to be or what the reaction's going to be. I think we need to make sure that we are -- we are prepared.

BENJAMIN CRUMP, ATTORNEY FOR BROWN FAMILY: Michael Brown's parents have asked that everybody who supports them do so in a nonviolent, peaceful, constructive way.

(SHOUTING)

ELAM: For more than three months now, this entire area has been on edge.

(on camera): Are you worried about violence becoming an issue again?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm not really -- by civilians or by police?

ELAM: Whatever concerns you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, the biggest concern is that something very small will happen, like a water bottle, and that will lead to tear gas or gunfire.

ELAM (voice-over): Last week, a law enforcement source says the FBI issued a bulletin to police across the nation warning officers to be vigilant about possible violence related to Ferguson.

Over the past few months, community leaders have complained that outsiders have instigated much of the violence.

(on camera): So when the grand jury comes out with its decision, what do you think's going to happen?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I honestly can't say. I can just speak about what we're going to do is protest until we get what we deserve, which is justice.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ELAM: And more on that FBI bulletin. It does state that if there is any reason for there to be interaction that they should be vigilant as far as law enforcement is concerned. Let me read to you what part of the bulletin says. "The announcement of the grand jury's decision will likely be exploited by some individuals to justify threats and attacks against law enforcement and critical infrastructure."

So everyone here ready and on edge for whenever this decision comes out -- Wolf?

BLITZER: And we have no idea if it could be the next few days, week from now, two weeks from now. It's still a mystery, right?

ELAM: It's still a mystery at this point. And we're not supposed to know when it's happening. We're getting clues by the fact that the National Guard has been activated, by the fact there's a state of emergency. It leads one to believe that we may be getting closer to finding out the fate of Darren Wilson.

BLITZER: Stephanie Elam, we'll be in close touch with you. Thank you very much.

Up next, another mystery. This time, a mystery involving a Russian spacecraft, if it's conjuring up memories of the Cold War. What's the craft? What's its mission? We'll explore.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: It's up there orbiting in space right now. But that's the only thing we know for sure. What we don't know is the make-up or the mission of a swift-moving Russian spacecraft.

Chad Myers is joining us now.

Chad, this mystery is reigniting speculation of a Russian satellite. Some are suggesting from the battle Cold War days. What do we know? What can you tell us?

CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: We don't know much. What we know is that back in May, the Russians sent up a satellite rocket. And three satellites deployed, like expected. But one other piece of space junk came out. Well, now we don't think it was space junk. We don't think it was a rocket booster or anything like that, because it has been maneuvering around the atmosphere. There it is, right now over Antarctica, but about to come back over to the U.S. in a few hours. No nefariousness yet with it.

What it could be. It's 2014, 28-E or Norad 765. That's all we know about it. Those are the numbers. But what could it be doing? It has maneuvered a little bit closer to other Russian satellites. And there's a lot of junk up there. This is what space looks like right now. So this satellite has been maneuvering around. It could be refueling. It could be repairing. It also could be ready to take a shot at another satellite. I don't know why you have to do that, but obviously there are good things this could be doing and bad things that this could be up there doing. But the fact that it actually is maneuvering in space, close to other satellites tells us it's not just a piece of junk. It's up there to do something. And hopefully, it's up there to repair a satellite. Remember how we had to repair the Hubble every once in a while? We hope it's something like that. We'll keep watching, the Russians aren't saying much about it.

BLITZER: They haven't said much and didn't explain what the overall mission was to begin with, right?

MYERS: Correct. No explanation. We knew the other three satellites were going to come out. They did deploy. They deployed accurately. Now we're waiting for this next one.

BLITZER: All right, Chad, thanks very much. We'll watch that mystery unfold.

That's it for me. Thanks very much for watching. I'll be back 5:00 p.m. eastern in "The Situation Room."

For our international viewers, get ready, "Amanpour" is coming up next.

For our viewers in North America, "Newsroom" with Brooke Baldwin starts right now.