CNN Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer - Transcript

CNN LATE EDITION WITH WOLF BLITZER - Transcript

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: President Bush commenting this past week on the death of Iraq's most wanted man. Welcome back to "Late Edition." I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington. Joining us here in Washington to talk about that and much more are Republican Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. He's the chair of the Senate judiciary committee. And joining us from Des Moines, Iowa, Democratic Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island. He serves on the Senate armed services committee.

Senators, welcome to "Late Edition." And senator reed, let me start with you and get your quick reaction to what we've just heard from the Iraqi national security adviser, Mowaffak al Rubaie, that by the end of this year he suggests there will be fewer than 100,000 coalition troops in Iraq.

Right now close to 150,000, 135,000 of whom are U.S. troops. By the end of next year, almost all of them would be gone, virtually a complete withdrawal by the middle, he says, of 2008. Is that realistic?

SEN. JACK REED (D), RHODE ISLAND: Well, I hope it is realistic, Wolf. It's encouraging if they're planning to do that. I advocate along with others that we have to make it clear to the Iraqis that we are involved in a rapid redeployment. We have to get our forces out because they're ultimately the forces, the Iraqis, that is, that will win the day. And that our forces are under tremendous wear and tear.

So I think that's encouraging news. I think we should make it clear that our policy is to complement their efforts with our efforts to withdraw as rapidly as possible. The first criteria, of course, is protecting our troops and making sure that there's a stable situation that follows.

BLITZER: Senator Specter, what do you think about that timetable put out by the Iraqi national security adviser?

SPECTER: I think we ought to do everything we can, Wolf, to hold them to it. We really ought to be out of Iraq at the earliest time. Of course, that depends on when the Iraqi national forces can protect themselves. But that's an authoritative statement. Now let's see him do it.

BLITZER: Are you confident, though, that the new Iraqi government, the permanent government, can get the military and police in place so that U.S. forces can leave?

SPECTER: Well, when you ask if they can, the answer is yes. When you say will they do it, that remains to be seen. But they have the capacity to do it. They are engaging in a lot of squabbling now. If they would come to terms on some of the basic outstanding issues, and now with the death of Zarqawi there's a good chance to unify the Iraqi government and to enable us to withdraw our troops. And those targets are very, very desirable.

BLITZER: You're a graduate, Senator Reed, of West Point. You've spent a lot of time watching the U.S. military. You were in Iraq with me last year when we both went with General Abizaid. Do you believe that this killing of Abu Musab al Zarqawi, when all is said and done, is really going to change much on the ground?

REED: Well, I think first, his death is good news. He was a ruthless terrorist who inflicted great pain and violence on so many people. Symbolically, I think it's important after so many months of tracking him down that our military forces were able to take him down. But the reality in Iraq is that the jihaddists are just a small portion of the instability.

There is ethnic tension, sectarian differences. There is the instability of a government that's just coming online. So I think we have to be very careful not to overemphasize the long-term effect of Zarqawi's death. But it was, I think, an important and significant blow last week that was struck against terror in Iraq.

BLITZER: Senator Specter, what do you think?

SPECTER: I think it depends largely, Wolf, on our follow-up. I think this is a real opening. The security forces and our intelligence are to be commended what they did here, and now let's see if we can follow up. It is a real blow. It's going to take them some time to regroup. And while they're in that stage, if we follow up I think we can -- if we make the most of it, I think we can expand this significantly.

BLITZER: Because as you mow, in the past couple hours, even as we're speaking, al Qaida in Iraq posted a new threat on the Internet saying they're going to launch major operations inside Iraq, presumably against U.S. forces.

SPECTER: Well, I think you would expect them to say that. They have been stung and stung badly. And part of how hard they have been stung is reflected in their response. But we don't really have them on the run, but we've taken a significant step in that direction. So we ought to strike while the iron is hot and make the most of it.

BLITZER: Senator Reed, I know you've taken a close look at allegations of military misconduct at Haditha, Hamandiya, other assorted places inside Iraq. This is a painful subject for the United States military and for the American public. What's the latest information you're getting at what may have happened at Haditha, the allegation being that U.S. Marines killed 24 innocent Iraqi civilians?

REED: Well, there's strong evidence suggesting that an incident of that nature did take place. Of course, the military, the Marine Corps, and Central Command are looking closely, and they're also being careful to protect the rights of those who might potentially be accused. But there's more and more evidence accumulating that something very unusual and something very unmilitary took place.

And so I think it's appropriate that they're taking these very strong steps. This is also, I think, an example of the pressure that our troops are under. This is a very difficult type of conflict to fight. One moment you're talking to Iraqi civilians trying to establish rapport. The next there's an explosion and you think they might be implicated.

It's not an excuse for conduct of this nature. In fact, if these allegations are true, this is incidents that dishonor the uniform and bring great pressure to bear on our mission in Iraq. But it's serious, and I think unfortunately there's probably some credibility to the allegations.

BLITZER: I'm going to be speaking live, senators, at the top of the next hour with an attorney who represents the staff sergeant who led that squad into Haditha. He's got a very different perspective, obviously, on what happened. That's coming up. Are you worried, though, Senator Specter, that these Marines have virtually, at least in public opinion, have already been convicted?

SPECTER: Well, I don't think they have been convicted. I think we need to hear their side of the story. And while there has to be a military investigation, I'm glad to say that Senator Warner, the chairman of the armed services committee, has said there will be hearings.

We have seen in the past in Abu Ghraib and other places that the military investigations have not been sufficient. And this activates Congressional oversight. And I believe that those hearings ought to be held sooner rather than later.

BLITZER: Even before the investigation is completed?

SPECTER: Yes. Absolutely. When you run an investigation -- and I've had a fair amount of experience with that in the judiciary committee and when I was district attorney of Philadelphia -- do it soon. Do it early. Do it before people have a chance to shift their testimony. When you talk to people immediately after the incident, you're much more likely to get the facts.

BLITZER: Well, let me ask Senator Reed. He's a member of the armed services committee. Should your chairman, Senator Warner, call for hearings even before the investigation by the U.S. military into the Haditha incident is completed?

REED: Well, I think timely hearings are important. I think the precise timing in terms of whether there's an initial report or charges is something that I'll let Senator Warner decide upon. But I think there's another aspect to the hearings that we will undertake, and that's not so much the initial incident but whether or not these incidents were covered up, whether there was some type of criminal activity in the chain of command.

That is a much more -- as serious, I should point out, as the allegations against the individual Marines. Because one of the corrosive aspects of this type of situation is the fact that others above might have looked the other way. I think that is something that we could do and should do very quickly in terms of the armed services committee.

BLITZER: All right. Let me let Senator Specter weigh in. Go ahead, Senator.

SPECTER: Well, Wolf, when you talk about cover-up, that amplifies the need for promptness. You have the basic incident. Then if you have any indication of cover-up, that's really the time when you ought to bring in somebody from the outside. That's precisely what Congressional oversight should undertake.

Now, it is true that if there's evidence of cover-up, the military ought to investigate that as well. But the sooner we get into that, the better off we are in finding what the facts are and assuring the public that it's objective.

BLITZER: We're going to take a quick break, but we have a lot more to talk about, including the three suicides in recent days at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. Also, domestic surveillance in the United States. Has a legal line been crossed? That coming up. But first, this.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: General Michael Hagee. What's his story? the commandant of the United States Marine Corps spoke out this week about the investigation into allegation that's Marines killed unarmed civilians in the Iraqi towns of Haditha and Hamandiya. Hagee promised full cooperation with the investigations and said any Marine found to have engaged in misconduct will be held accountable. As the former commander of the First Marine Expeditionary Force, General Hagee was a key strategist in the leadup to the Iraq war.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BLITZER: Welcome back to "Late Edition." We're talking with the Republican chairman of the Senate judiciary committee, Arlen Specter, and Democratic Senator Jack Reed, a key member of the Senate armed services committee. Listen, Senators, to what the president said on Friday about the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo bay, where terror suspects have been held almost since 9/11. This the day before we learned that three of those terror suspects committed suicide. Listen to the president.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: We would like to end the Guantanamo. We'd like it to be empty. And we're now in the process of working with countries to repatriate people. But there are some that if put out on the streets would create grave harm to American citizens and other citizens of the world, and therefore, I believe they ought to be tried in courts here in the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Senator Specter, about 460 detainees currently at Guantanamo Bay. Are you satisfied that the U.S. is doing enough to prevent these kinds of suicides? There have been more than 40 suicide attempts. Now three of these detainees actually did kill themselves. And people are asking, how is this possible? Given the history of so many attempts, why wasn't more done to make sure they couldn't wrap up these bed sheets and kill themselves?

SPECTER: Well, what has to be done, Wolf, is that those people have to be tried. When the president just said, as I heard him, brought to the United States and tried, they're not going to be brought to the United States. There are tribunals established, and they ought to be tried. Where we have evidence they ought to be tried, and if convicted they ought to be sentenced.

BLITZER: Because these individuals have not been charged formally with anything. They've been held without charge.

SPECTER: Well, that is the grave problem. There is the overtone that quite a number of them will be tried, that there is tangible evidence. As to a great many others, there is not evidence which could be brought into a court of law. When they are rounded up, there are efforts made to determine which ones are enemy combatants and which ones are dangerous, and then they're brought to Guantanamo, but it is the flimsiest sort of hearsay.

And efforts to really get to the bottom of it have been stymied. I went to Guantanamo last August, and I went down there with the expectation of having a hearing and of bringing people in and finding out exactly what went on. And when I got there, I was stonewalled. I couldn't have a hearing.

And what has happened, through a series of events, we have waited for the courts to act. The courts came down, Supreme Court with three decisions in June of 2004. And now we're waiting for the court to come down with another decision. But in the interim, they're just out there in limbo, and that creates a very difficult situation.

BLITZER: Senator Reed, should the U.S. shut down that detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and deal in some other way with these detainees?

REED: Well, they should as quickly as possible try to close the facility. But the reality, as the president suggested, is there are some very ruthless, very fanatical terrorists that are in our custody, and we just can't turn them loose. I think Senator Specter, though, has hit on the right sort of point here. There has to be a good procedure that balances the need to keep these people off the street with the need to find out who in fact is a terrorist.

That hasn't been done yet by the administration. And I think also, too, we recognize, or should recognize that as long as Guantanamo exists it's a source of international attention and concern, and that these types of incidents, these suicides, not only will provoke further condemnation around the world.

BLITZER: Senator Specter, you had a nasty little exchange of letters with the vice president of the United States this past week. Among other things, you wrote to him and said, "There is no doubt that the NSA, National Security Agency, program violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which sets forth the exclusive procedure for domestic wiretaps, which requires the approval of the FISA Court."

He wrote back to you the next day, the vice president, saying, "The administration will listen to the ideas of legislators about terror surveillance legislation and work with them in good faith." Have you and the vice president come to an agreement now on what you should do in terms of subpoenaing witnesses and holding a formal hearing on domestic surveillance?

SPECTER: The vice president called me, Wolf, on Thursday afternoon. But that wasn't a nasty exchange of letters. That may turn out to be a constructive exchange of letters. That's the first time I've heard from the administration. And it's the first time that the vice president or any ranking official has said that they're prepared to legislate.

Up until the present time, they've said they don't need any legislation at all. I'm searching for a way of bringing this matter to a head. And I was pressing on the telephone company records and was looking to have a hearing.

And after the vice president talked to a number of the Republican members of the committee, it was clear to me that I didn't have the votes to proceed in any constructive way.

And Senator Hatch said that he believed the administration would accept my legislation. And if they would do that, it would answer the problem. We'd have a judicial determination on constitutionality.

Now, we're working on it. We've taken a small step. And if we don't get some results, I'm prepared to go back to demand hearings and issue subpoenas if necessary.

BLITZER: Are you, as the Washington Post reported, ready to give what they call blanket amnesty to anyone who authorized these wiretaps?

SPECTER: Absolutely not. That was an erroneous report. If anybody has violated the law, they'll be held accountable, both as to criminal conduct and as to civil conduct.

And in no way did I promise amnesty or immunity or letting anybody off the hook. Take a look at my bill, Wolf. It just doesn't say that.

BLITZER: Senator Reed, did this administration break the law by authorizing these warrantless wiretaps?

REED: Well, look, first I want to commend Senator Specter for his leadership on this important issue. And I think the answer is we just don't know quite yet.

There's strong suspicion that they did because we really don't know the full dimension of this program, what precisely are we doing, how it might conflict with FISA. But my instincts are the same as Arlen Specter's, that this appears to be undercutting the law, not using the FISA court as it was intended to be. And I would hope that we would accomplish the facts first so that whatever legislation is proposed would be based upon the technology and based upon the practices that they are using.

BLITZER: Senator Specter, we only have a few seconds, but when will you hold these hearings?

SPECTER: Well, as soon as I find out whether they are necessary, as soon as we work through the process for now.

Listen, Wolf, let's make one thing plain. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act provides the exclusive remedy for domestic wiretapping. There's no doubt that law has been violated.

Whether the president has inherent Article Two power, constitutionally, which supersedes or trumps the statute, remains to be seen.

And it was a step forward when the vice president responded, really, within about 14 hours when he got my letter that he made the call. And we're talking.

But if the talks aren't productive, I'm prepared to go back to the hearings and I'm prepared to go back to the subpoenas if necessary. But I've got to get the votes, Wolf. And I don't control the situation all by myself.

BLITZER: Senator Specter, we've got to leave it right there. Thanks for coming in on this Sunday.

Senator reed, thanks for joining us from Iowa. The words Senator Reed and Iowa -- you know there's going to be buzz right away. Are you testing the waters, Senator?

REED: No, I'm with my wife and her family for a reunion.

BLITZER: Senator Jack Reed, joining us from Iowa. Thanks very much. Enjoy the reunion in Iowa.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/11/le.01.html