CNN "Wolf" - Transcript: Syria

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome back. I'm Wolf Blitzer, reporting from Washington.

The Senate could vote later today on President Obama's plan to arm and train Syrian rebels in the fight against ISIS. It will be part of broader legislation to keep the government operating. The House approved a measure yesterday supporting the presidents a plan to arm and train the moderate Syrian rebels. Even though some Senators expect the plan to pass in the Democratic controlled Senate, the president could see some tough challenges, including some very tough challenges from within his own party.

In the House vote, Republican Congressman Trey Gowdy, of South Carolina, was among those opposing the Syrian amendment. He's joining us from Capitol Hill. He has a lot going on. He's also the chairman of the Select Committee investigating what happened in Benghazi two years ago.

We'll get to that in a moment, but tell our viewers, why did you vote against this legislation to help these moderate Syrian rebels fight the Syrian regime of Bashar al Assad and ISIS?

REP. TREY GOWDY, (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: Well, Wolf, thank you for having me on. I went to great lengths, frankly, to try to support the president and talked to lots of my colleagues who served in uniform and almost universally, they expressed skepticism. Then I did something else unusual. I listened to almost every word of the Senate testimony over the last three days, and I don't know who the moderates are in Syria. When you say "moderate," that doesn't mean you want to educate women. It doesn't mean women have the right to vote. "Moderate" means we're not going to cut your head off. I can't support funding and arming folks if I don't have any clear understanding of who they are.

BLITZER: You think that $500 million the president is seeking, a half a billion dollars, would simply be a waste of U.S. taxpayer dollars? Is that what you're saying?

GOWDY: I don't want to say that because there were people who looked at this issue seriously and they concluded by voting yes, including some of my closest friends and colleagues. This is a conscience vote. And whenever you vote for anything that remotely resembles war, you have to follow your conscience. I talked to my colleagues who served, some Republicans, some Democrats, will this strategy work, who are the moderates, are we going to be successful a year from now, two years from now, and I couldn't get solid answers to that. So I concluded that I should vote no.

BLITZER: Those are fair enough questions, indeed. Any lawmaker should be asking precisely those kinds of questions.

Let's talk about your other role. You're chairman of the Select Committee in the House investigating Benghazi, Libya. Almost exactly two years ago, four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador, were killed on that day. So far, in your preliminary investigation, hearings now under way, have you come up with a major new headline that we didn't know before?

GOWDY: I don't think so. We are still relatively early on. And frankly, Wolf, if I had a headline, I'm not sure I would share it because I take this responsibility very seriously. My job is not to generate ratings for the Republican Party. My job is not to impact politics. My job is to find out what happened. Even if we had a new revelation, I wouldn't necessarily share it at this time anyway. We are in the nasant stages of this investigation and I want to do it in a way that inspires the trust and confidence of your viewers.

BLITZER: I hope you do.

Listen to Elijah Cummings, I think, the ranking Democrat on your committee. Certainly a member of the committee. He said this, on CNN. I'm going to play a little clip.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ELIJAH CUMMINGS, (D), MARYLAND: Too often over the past two years, the congressional investigation into what happened in Benghazi has evolved into unseemly partisanship. We're better than that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: I want you to respond to him, Congressman.

GOWDY: We are better than that, which is why I said something similar, although not as eloquent as Mr. Cummings yesterday. These four were neither Republican or Democrat. I just know they were fellow Americans. We ought to have a process worthy of their memory.

You saw the hearing yesterday. There were no political shenanigans. There were very good questions asked on both sides of the aisle on a very important topic, which is what are we doing to provide safety and security for the existing diplomats we send into harm's way. There are things that can transcend politics. I don't mean to sound naive but there are things. If the death of our four fellow Americans can't transcend politics, then I'm in the wrong line of work.

BLITZER: I've been covering foreign policy for a long time. There have been other diplomats who have been killed in service, U.S. officials, civilians, certainly military personnel. And it's really important to learn from those mistakes that may have been made so they have not repeated down the road. And if new recommendations can be made to protect American diplomats serving in dangerous parts of the world, it will be worth it when all is said and done.

Congressman, thanks for joining us.

GOWDY: Yes, sir. Thank you for having me.

BLITZER: Good luck with the hearings.

GOWDY: Yes, sir.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source