Face the Nation Transcripts January 11, 2015: Holder, Miller, McCaul

The latest on the terror attacks in Paris
The latest on the terror attacks in Paris 47:00

(CBS News) -- Below is a transcript from the January 11, 2015 edition of Face the Nation. Guests include Elizabeth Palmer, Eric Holder, Mike Morell, John Miller, Michael McCaul, John Cornyn, Clarissa Ward, Farah Pandith, David Ignatius, Bob Orr, Ruth Marcus, Jim VandeHei and Peter Baker.

BOB SCHIEFFER, HOST: I'm Bob Schieffer. And today on FACE THE NATION: The world chooses Paris.

A million people have turned out on the streets of Paris, and they're being joined by leaders from around the world to show support for the victims of the deadly terror attacks.

We will talk to Attorney General Eric Holder, who is also in Paris, the chairman of the house Homeland Security Committee, Michael McCaul, Texas Senator John Cornyn, and our correspondents in France and Washington.

Good morning.

As the crowds gather today, a new video of one of the now dead terrorists pledging allegiance to ISIS has also surfaced.

We begin with CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer, who has been on this story from the start -- Liz.


Well, huge crowds are starting to gather. The organizers say as many as a million people may march today in defense of freedom of speech, along with politicians from the U.K., from France, from Germany, and also from Turkey, from Israel and from Palestine.

You mentioned the video that has just surfaced made by Amedy Coulibaly. He's the man who took the hostages Friday in the kosher supermarket. He pledges allegiance to ISIS, although there's no evidence he actually ever wanted to go and fight with them.

However, his girlfriend, Hayat Boumeddiene, who French police say is a suspect also in the terrorist attacks, does appear to have slipped away into ISIS territory. The Turkish authorities are saying that she crossed the border into Syria on the 2nd of January.

Another thing that Coulibaly underlines in the video is that he coordinated his attacks with the attacks of the Kouachi brothers, who are suspects in the killings of all the people at the satirical magazine "Charlie Hebdo."

French politicians have been calling for unity universally. France has the largest Muslim population in Europe and a very ethnically diverse society. And they are desperate to avoid a violent backlash. There is extra security everywhere, including paratroopers on the streets of Paris, but you can just imagine how stressed the French police must be today.

They just had a very violent and difficult week and now they have to ensure the security of as many as a million people walking in public along with celebrated and controversial politicians.

SCHIEFFER: And we turn now to Attorney General Eric Holder. He is also in Paris this morning. He has just finished a meeting with his law enforcement counterparts from around the world.

General Holder, thank you for joining us. Did you get any new information on this attack during these meetings there?

ERIC HOLDER, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well, the purpose of the meeting was obviously to express our condolences and then also to pledge our solidarity with the French people.

A pledge was made to make a -- do a better job of sharing information amongst the nations that were there. And I think we will in fact do that. The president has announced that on February the 18th, we will host a summit in Washington, D.C. -- I announced that at the meeting -- so that we can come up with a way in which we can deal with the root causes of this. Countering violent extremism is what we call it, that we can deal with the new causes of what it is that attracts these young men to these really negative ideological groups.

SCHIEFFER: General Holder, does this attack signal that the war on terror has entered kind of a new phase, where we're dealing with these homegrown terrorists who go to other places, get training, then come back to their home country and carry out these attacks?

HOLDER: Oh, I think we have been in that phase for some time, Bob.

I think the decimation of core al Qaeda has probably reduced, if not eliminated, the ability of al Qaeda to do the kind of thing that they did on September the 11th. On the other hand, al Qaeda affiliates like al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has moved what they do to smaller kinds of attacks. They have inspired people negatively around the world to engage in these really small attacks that involve only one or two people, small number of arms that can have devastating impact, as we have seen in France.

But we have been in this phase of the fight against terrorism for some time.

SCHIEFFER: Does this mean that the danger, the threat of attacks like this in this country is greater now in the United States?

HOLDER: I wouldn't say it is greater. But I certainly think that the possibility of such attacks exists in the United States. It is something that we worry about all the time. It's something that we meet about all the time.

It's something that frankly keeps me up at night worrying about the lone wolf, or a group of people, very small group of people who decide to get arms on their own and do what we saw in France this week. It's the kind of thing that our government is focused on doing all that we can in conjunction with our state and local counterparts to try to make sure it does not happen.

SCHIEFFER: Well, there are reports that the Algerians warned the French authorities that something like this might happen. Do you have any information on that?

HOLDER: Well, this is something that will have to be part of an analysis of the whole incident, as we do in the United States when something happens like that in our country or when we disrupt a plot.

We always look to see if there are ways in which we might have done something differently. And I'm sure that our French counterparts will be doing that as well, looking to see if there were things that they missed that might have prevented this from happening. And we will be sharing with them all the information that we have to help them in that analysis.

SCHIEFFER: How many of these so-called homegrown terrorists do we think are in the United States right now, General Holder? And are we monitoring all them? Are we confident we know who they are and where they are?

HOLDER: Well, I think that we are certainly doing, I think, a good job in monitoring those people.

And when I say monitoring, I mean monitoring in an appropriate way, using legitimate tools. We're not stereotyping anybody, but we're focused on those people who we have some reason to believe might engage in these kinds of activities. And I think that our FBI, in conjunction with our intelligence community, and in conjunction with our state and local partners, I think we do a good job in keeping abreast of what these people are talking about and potentially what it is that they are planning.

SCHIEFFER: General Holder, on another subject, "The New York Times" reported and we have confirmed through our own sources at the Justice Department that the FBI and federal prosecutors want to bring charges against former CIA Director David Petraeus for passing classified information to his then girlfriend.

We're told that you will make the final decision. Will you make that decision, or will you leave that to your predecessor?

HOLDER: Well, at this point, I don't want to comment on that which is an ongoing investigation.

The determination in any case is made at the time that all of the evidence has been acquired, all of the evidence has been reviewed, when it has been gone over with people who are the subjects of the investigation and with their lawyers. And so, at the appropriate time, the proper people within the Justice Department will make determinations as to what, if any action should occur.

SCHIEFFER: Well, would that proper person be you or will it be someone else?

HOLDER: Well, it's hard to say. In terms of timing, I will be in office until my successor is confirmed.

But I would expect that to the extent that there is a matter of this magnitude, that would be decided at the highest levels of the Justice Department.

SCHIEFFER: All right.

Well, General Holder, thank you for joining us this morning.

And for more on this now, we're joined by Mike Morell, the former deputy director of the CIA, now a CBS News senior security contributor, and John Miller, who used to be at CBS News and is now the deputy commissioner for intelligence and counterterrorism for the New York Police Department.

Gentlemen, thank you.

Mike, to you first.

Al Qaeda in Yemen is now claiming responsibility for the first of these attacks. What do you make of that?

MICHAEL MORELL, CBS NEWS SENIOR SECURITY CONTRIBUTOR: I can't remember a time, Bob, when al Qaeda in Yemen took responsibility for an attack, and that turned out to be wrong. So, I take the claim of responsibility, the claim that they directed this attack very seriously.

We don't know what direction means. It could simply be having told these two individuals who went to Yemen and trained to go back attack this particular media outlet. It could have been more than that. We will have to wait and see. But I do think al Qaeda was in part responsible for this.

I do think that says something very, very important about all this. We have been focused on ISIS for the last nine months to 12 months. This is a reminder that al Qaeda is still very dangerous and still a very significant threat to the West, Western Europe and the United States.

SCHIEFFER: John Miller, the attorney general touched on this, but what is it that is attracting people from these countries like France, some from the United States, other parts of Europe, to go to these Middle Eastern countries to get this training and then to come back with this sort of thing on their mind? What is this that's going on here?

JOHN MILLER, NYPD DEPUTY COMMISSIONER: You know, Bob, I think it's a couple of things.

One, it's over more than decade since 9/11 that the basic maturing of the ideology, but it's the delivery system that has made the real difference. They are putting out products on video, on Twitter, on Instagram, on Facebook, but, particularly, their videos, they're constructing messaging that rivals the ability of Madison Avenue in terms of in terms of packaging, in terms of being compelling, in terms of touching emotions, and, frankly, in terms of constructing the story, with a cleverly arranged set of facts that leaves out anything inconvenient.

But the core message is, come fight here with us. The second part of the message, which is a threat to places like Paris and London and New York, is, if you can't fight here in Syria, get what weapons you can get your hands on, don't reinvent the wheel, and fight there. SCHIEFFER: Well, what about the possibility that this attack in France makes it more likely that we may see some sort of an attack like this in the United States? What are you doing at the NYPD now?

MILLER: Well, we're on heightened security posture on a normal day compared to almost any other police department, with the amount of resources that we field in counterterrorism missions every day.

That's more than 1,000 police officers and civilian analysts who are pointed at the counterterrorism mission every day. But when we see an event like France, we look at that threat stream, we look at what they did, we look at how they did it, we look at the target selection. And that becomes part of the overlay.

So, that's part of day-to-day business. But I don't think that we are under any more threat, and I have to underline, as Mike would tell you, or any less threat than we were the day before. There is a piece of this. As when you see a school shooting or a workplace violence thing, it doesn't start somebody who wasn't thinking about doing something like this down the road of doing it.

But what it does is -- and I think we saw piece of this in Paris -- it takes that person who was already thinking about it, already planning it, and may accelerate them.

SCHIEFFER: One of the things that is sort of worrisome here, Mike, is that reports that the Algerians got some advance warning of this and passed it on to the French authorities.

MORELL: Bob, there is going to be a full investigation here into the performance of the French police and French intelligence.

I think one of the things that's really important to highlight are the resources that were available to French intelligence and the French police. Those resources were cut over the last several years. They had to make very difficult choices about who to focus on, who to surveil, and who they had to not surveil because they didn't have the resources.

Governments are going to have to fund their law enforcement and their intelligence services to meet this threat. And that includes the United States.

SCHIEFFER: John, I understand you got some disturbing new information last night on this front. Tell us about that.

MILLER: Well, ISIL issued another threat yesterday. It's a video that was posted on Twitter. And it calls on its followers to attack targets in the West. It specifically mentions the United States, Canada, Great Britain, France.

And it is a renewal of a call that they put out in mid-September before series of attacks in Canada and one in New York City against police officers that occurred in October. So, we're seeing that they are using the momentum from the Paris attacks in part of their messaging strategy to see, who can we get to follow this? It also specifically mentions as targets civilians, police officers, intelligence officials and military. So, it is something of concern. We put out a citywide notice to police officers last night advising them of the message and reminding them to take extra care and be extra vigilant.

SCHIEFFER: Well, gentlemen, thank you very much. This is disturbing news today, but we thank you for bringing it to our attention. Thank you.

And we turn now to the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee here in the United States, Congressman Mike McCaul of Texas.

You just heard Mike Morell saying the intelligence services in France have had their budgets cut, and then cut and cut some more. I understand that the homeland security budget is being cut, especially as far as the TSA, the people who are the people who guard our airports. Is that so? And are you satisfied, are you good with that?

REP. MICHAEL MCCAUL (R), TEXAS: Well, we're planning to vote on Tuesday on a measure that would actually increase spending within the department.

SCHIEFFER: But you're cutting TSA funds, right?

MCCAUL: My understanding is, there are plus-ups in many areas of the department.

And I think TSA, obviously, the overseas travel is very important. Look, this is a threat that happened in Paris that could happen anywhere. And I think we need to be focused on that threat. This is a different style attack, in the sense that you had foreign fighters that went to Yemen to train in the art of warfare and then bring that war back home to where they lived in France.

That could happen here in the United States. We have had thousands of these Western travelers that have become foreign fighters in Syria, Iraq and Yemen that pose a threat and a risk returning to where they came from, and to do the same thing that we saw in Paris.

In addition, you hear a lot about the homegrown violence, lone wolf, if you will. We have heard lot about that and radicalizing over the Internet, but it's this foreign fighter piece that disturbs me greatly, because we don't have a good handle, intelligence-wise, who is on the ground in Syria, in Iraq and Yemen to identify them, to put them on no-fly lists so they can't get into the country.

These individuals were actually on a no-fly list and still traveled to Yemen and back. We had the woman who -- the female terrorist, leave and go to Syria, and yet she's on a no-fly list. So, I think Europe has to strengthen and tighten its travel restrictions, but we need to look at protecting this country, because I see it as real threat.

SCHIEFFER: Well, what do we need to do that we're not doing here? MCCAUL: Again, I think a couple things.

I think our no-fly lists are working, I think, well, but you don't know what you don't know. We need to identify who has gone over there, traveled over there to fight this fight. And then how do we keep them off of airplanes and restrict their travel.

Western Europe, again, is more lenient in their travel restrictions. And we have a visa waiver, free system where they can fly into the United States without even having a visa. We need to look at all sorts of the things like that. But, mainly, it's driven by intelligence.

I'm launching an investigation on my committee to look at security and defense gaps that may exist as it pertains to foreign fighters. This is the most successful foreign fighter terrorist attack that we have seen to date.

SCHIEFFER: Well, how much of a threat does al Qaeda in Yemen pose now? Because we see now that they're taking credit for this attack. You heard Mike Morell say, when they say they take credit for it, it generally proves to be true.

MCCAUL: And they did in a video last night.

Remember, this is Awlaki, who inspired Major Hasan at Fort Hood.

They traveled -- these two brothers traveled to Yemen and trained under Awlaki in the art of warfare and took that back. I would argue -- you mentioned the war on terror to General Holder. And I think there's been a -- in this administration a tendency not call it that and to sort of have a false narrative that everything is OK, when, in fact, the threat, I believe, is not distinguishing. It's getting greater in Northern Africa, in the Middle East.

And as that threat becomes greater, so, too, does the threat to the United States. And that's what we have to be prepared for.

SCHIEFFER: So you think these are more dangerous times than before?

MCCAUL: I believe, with small-scale attacks -- I think the larger-scale, 9/11-style, more difficult to pull off, a bigger cell we can detect.

A small cell like this one, very difficult to detect, deter and disrupt, which is really our goal. And I think we're going to see more and more of these taking place, whether it be foreign fighters going to the warfare in return or whether it be someone who is getting on the Internet, as John Miller talked about, in this very sophisticated social media program, and then radicalizing over the Internet.

SCHIEFFER: Congressman McCaul, thank you for joining us.

MCCAUL: Thanks, Bob. SCHIEFFER: And we will be back in one minute with more on all this.


SCHIEFFER: And we're back now with the number two Republican in the Republican leadership in the Senate, John Cornyn of Texas.

Senator, we're always glad to have you.

Is the Senate going to actually reduce funding for the Transportation Security Agency at this particular time? I know that seems to be the plan that is circulating up on Capitol Hill. But would this be the time to do that?

SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R), TEXAS: Well, we are absolutely committed to the security of our homeland and we will do nothing on a bipartisan basis to erode those protections.

You have my commitment. And that is unequivocal. At the same time, the House now has passed a -- or will pass, I believe, a $40 billion Department of Homeland Security appropriation bill, which is not exactly chicken feed.

But we do need to make sure that the different functions of the Homeland Security Department are funded. The problem, as you know, Bob, is while many of us were heartened -- I believe you made some comments about this as well -- about the president's statement that he looked forward to working with the new majority in the United States Senate, divided government, his actions seem to defy that, and, indeed, his unconstitutional executive action is something that we're not going to take lying down.

It's a -- something I think we're obligated to respond to. So, a targeted way to try to address and defund that implementation of his unconstitutional executive action is something I think we need to do. But we're not going to take any chances with the homeland.

SCHIEFFER: Well, it sounds to me like you're saying that the new Congress is off to the same start kind of where it ended, that nobody can agree on everything and we're still in gridlock. Is that what you have come to tell us this morning?

CORNYN: Absolutely not.

I'm here to say that I'm optimistic. And I believe that there is a commitment -- I certainly will make that commitment -- that we're going to be productive. If there's one message I got back home in Texas, it was, people are tired of the dysfunction.

No matter how much people disagree about some things, based on principle, they want us to look to find the common ground. And I do believe there is something called the 80-20 rule or 75-25. We ought to look for those things we can agree on. Indeed, we did pass an important piece of legislation this week. SCHIEFFER: Do you think the administration is doing enough to combat terrorism right now? You just heard Mike McCaul say, well, they don't like to call the war on terrorism anymore. And I think they probably do use different words to describe it.

Do you think it's still a war on terror, and do you think it's greater or lesser a threat to the United States than it was?

CORNYN: Well, I agree with Congressman McCaul that the threats are certainly no less. And I do think they are arguably greater than they have been in the past.

And, certainly, they have morphed into something different. But I do think there is a tendency toward political correctness on the part of the administration. We know that, for example, when Major Nidal Hasan made his attack at Fort Hood, they called that workplace violence.

And they are calling the war on terror overseas contingency operations. We need to call it what it is, because that's the first step to actually dealing with it on a realistic basis.

SCHIEFFER: Let me ask you this.

On another subject, the House has passed the Keystone pipeline legislation. It now comes to the Senate. My sense of it is, the Senate, with the Republicans in the majority, are going to pass it. The president says he's going to veto. Do you at this point have the votes to override a presidential veto?

CORNYN: Well, we don't know exactly how the bill will come out of the Senate.

As you know, the new majority leader, Senator Mitch McConnell, has pledged an open process, where anybody with a good idea can offer that and get a vote on it in the Senate. But, right now, on the Keystone XL pipeline, we know there is a bipartisan group of roughly 63 senators who support that.

And we have to do our job. The president can't -- we can't take the bait. We can't be deterred. We can't be dissuaded from doing our job if the president is unwilling to do his job or engage with us to try to find a constructive outcome.

SCHIEFFER: But I would say, listening to your answer here, at this point, you don't have the votes to override. You still have to find enough votes to override it, if it comes to that.

CORNYN: I think that's correct.

We -- and that could well happen by different amendments that get offered in the Senate. And, of course, we have been so stuck on dysfunction, that we haven't even engaged in the normal legislative process for a long time, including conference committees between the House and the Senate. I think there's a way forward.

SCHIEFFER: Do you think there's a way forward on, say, immigration, for example?


The president has made this harder, not easier. I was with a group of leaders after the election where the president said he was going to issue his executive action. And Speaker Boehner, Majority Leader McConnell and others said, you're going to poison the well and make it harder for us to do -- or to find consensus on some elements of the immigration problem.

I do think that...


SCHIEFFER: We are going to have to stop it right there. I'm very sorry, Senator.

CORNYN: That's fine.

SCHIEFFER: I hope you will come back to see us soon.

CORNYN: I will be happy too.

SCHIEFFER: All right.

And we will be right back.


SCHIEFFER: We will have more on the Paris terror attacks coming up, including a report from CBS News correspondent Clarissa Ward on the rise of Islamist extremists, and my commentary on the world's reaction to the Paris terror attack.

Stay with us.


SCHIEFFER: Some of our stations are leaving us now.

But, for most of you, we will be right back with a lot more FACE THE NATION. So, stay with us.


SCHIEFFER: And welcome back now to FACE THE NATION.

It is hard for those of us in the West to understand the motivation of the radical jihadists, so we asked CBS news correspondent Clarissa Ward, who has covered the rise of radical Islam and the war on terror around the world, to give us her thoughts on that. She filed this report from Paris.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) CLARISSA WARD, CBS NEWS CORRESPONDENT: More and more men and women in the West like this week's attackers are being drawn to radical Islam, often not for religious reasons. Many feel disempowered and marginalized in their own societies and extremism can provide them with a sense of purpose and belonging.

YILMATZ (PH), JIHADIST: I will fight anybody.

WARD (voice-over): A few months ago I traveled to Syria and met Yilmatz (ph) a 26-year-old jihadi from Holland. He once was a soldier in the Dutch army but is now focused on fighting those he considers to be enemies of Islam -- among them, the West.

YILMATZ (PH): This fight never ends, never ends. This is our religion. This is our faith. This is what we believe in.

WARD (voice-over): Yilmatz (ph) is one of an estimated 3,000 Westerners who have gone to Syria and Iraq to join the jihad. Said and Cherif Kouachi, the brothers responsible for Wednesday's massacre at a satirical magazine, both spent time in Yemen.

So why are more and more young Western men traveling to conflicts far from their homes?

France, with its colonial ties to North Africa, has the largest Muslim population in Europe, much of it is concentrated in the banlieus, the four suburbs that surround Paris and other major cities.

Known for high crime, high unemployment and core integration, they have been the sites of periodic rioting, making them fertile recruiting ground for radical Islamists.

Lukman Mergad (ph) is a social worker in one of Paris' larger North African communities.

"A lot of people try to say this is a religious issue when it isn't. If the societal problems were improved," he told me, "I think the situation would be better. But misery only begets misery."

While the world's eyes are on France right now, the U.S. could also be vulnerable to an attack. In Syria I met an American fighter from the Midwest.

WARD: Would you support a terrorist attack on the United States?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I wouldn't consider it a terrorist attack.

WARD: Even if innocent women and children were killed?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What I consider terrorist attack is these Tomahawk bombs being shot from wherever they are being shot from, and killing innocent people. There's no tears being shed for me if something happened in America.

WARD: Jihadis who have traveled to Syria and Iraq are not the only threat. In powerful propaganda videos, ISIS has urged all Muslims at home in the West to take whatever they have at their disposal, a gun, a knife, a car, and use it to go out and kill. And while the politicians here are searching for answers, many people fear that these types of attacks will become more common.


SCHIEFFER: That is our Clarissa Ward reporting from Paris. For more on this we're joined by Farah Pandith, who was the first-ever State Department special representative to Muslim communities; she's now on the Council on Foreign Relations.

David Ignatius, our friend and columnist for "The Washington Post" and CBS news Justice and homeland security correspondent Bob Orr also with us.

Farah, this was a very disturbing report to me that we just heard from Clarissa. She's quoting one person, saying, well, it's not necessarily about religion.

But how do we come to grips with this and what can we do to turn this situation around?

FARAH PANDITH, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: For sure, this is an issue of our time. This is the issue of our time. When you think about the pool from which the bad guys are recruiting, you look at the numbers. One-fourth of the planet is Muslim, 1.6 billion people; 62 percent of have number is under the age of 30. That's the pool from which they recruit.

I'd make two points about this issue of recruiting. The terrible tragedy in Paris this last week turned the world's attention back on how are people getting recruited, how are the bad guys building their armies.

And in fact this is the war of ideas, and that's where we have to be looking. So there are two points here.

One is, that the vast majority of people who get recruited is a solvable problem, we can stop the recruitment from happening with the vast majority of people. The other is the solutions are affordable and they are available.

SCHIEFFER: Bob Orr, we're talking about surveilling these people; we heard that Algerians apparently tipped the French police off that this attack was coming, but they seemed to be saying, we just didn't have the resources to track all of these people.

What is the situation here in this country? Should we expect an attack?

BOB ORR, CBS NEWS HOMELAND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: I think, unfortunately, it's very possible, Bob, we can see something like this. There are a number of people in this country, and I don't have the exact number, who are like-minded, radicals, who are being influenced by ISIS and Al Qaeda and associated groups, being called in this clarion call to come join us. We're the hot group now. If you want some adventure in your life, come to Syria and fight with ISIS.

That's a message, as crazy as it sounds, it resonates with certain people, some who are disenfranchised, some who are just kind of casting about, looking for their lot in life. The FBI is doing pretty good job, you heard Eric Holder say, of monitoring the threats we know about.

It's the unknowns that concern us and I think it's the kind of problem where you'll never have enough resources to address all of those potentials.

SCHIEFFER: There is still war on terror; that seems to be the message here this morning.

Where are we in this, David?

DAVID IGNATIUS, "THE WASHINGTON POST": I talked, Bob, over the weekend to officials from different parts of the U.S. government to ask precisely that question. And here is what I learned.

First, people have recognized that the U.S. has limited credibility in telling the Muslim world what a good Muslim is. That's really not something the United States can do effectively. It has to work with others who do have credibility, Muslim, religious leaders, leaders of governments in the region, a range of public and private groups.

Secondly, the things that work in countering this fire that is raging on the Internet tend to come up from the bottom. There are things that police, local law enforcement pick up around the United States.

Attorney General Holder said to you that the White House is sponsoring a conference in February to talk about countering violent extremism. That will be an important conference. And one of the things I know they will do there is take the example of Boston, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, three cities where there have been very effective grassroots programs to deal with.

So we'll have to focus on those.

And then the third thing that people talk about is creating a network of networks. You have all these networks -- Farah Pandith knows better than anybody in the U.S. how this thing works. But gather them together, don't try to coordinate it from the top.

In that sense it's not a war with a general; it's a network of networks dispersed that can deal with the social media phenomenon that we're seeing. And we've never seen anything quite like it before.

SCHIEFFER: So how do we get to these people?


PANDITH: We know how kids get recruited. We understand that. In the 13 years since 9/11 we have perfected the art of understanding how that happens.

What we haven't done is to be able to mobilize out of government efforts, whether it is a hip-hop artist or a graffiti artist or social entrepreneurs or activists. We have to get them out so that they're blasting the marketplace with alternative narratives to the narrative on extremists.

Now in both the Bush and Obama administrations we have built some of those kinds of networks.

But as David said, government can be the convener and the facilitator and the intellectual partner where the ideas that we hear on the ground. In order for us to defeat this we have to make sure that those outside of government get the kind of resources they need to take the ideas from the grassroots, from Argentina to Zanzibar and push them forward.

And what policy makers have a really hard time doing is being comfortable with this idea of a crisis of identity that youth are having around the world, that a phenomenon of these young Muslims that are growing up in a post-9/11 world who are navigating waters that we as government folks, let's say, can't feel so comfortable about, but in fact listening at the very local level to what communities are saying about what will help prevent them from sliding into a place where they are seduced by the extremists is exactly where we need to be.

You look at some of the businesses in this world, the innovators who have helped put money into these kinds of global networks. You look at the feed programs of the U.S. government has put on the ground Thursday our embassies and if we scale them up, if we moved them forward, you will have an all-day, every-day drumbeat that can begin to compete with the bad guys who have resources, who have tactics, who have sophistication and savvy.

SCHIEFFER: Mike Morell was saying earlier this is reminder that Al Qaeda is still out there. It's not just ISIS anymore, that they're still there, Bob.

ORR: That's exactly right. All three of these guys in the attacks in Paris were connected to a degree to different terrorist groups, the Kouachi brothers had some tentacles down to Yemen, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula; Amedy Coulibaly, the guy who took hostages at the grocery, he self-identified with ISIS. We don't know if ISIS knew about him or not.

But these groups will leverage the success of these attacks and they'll use it in their propaganda campaign. One of the things that we can do to help counter this, I think is to tell people what an empty future this jihad can be.

There's an example of a guy from Alabama, Omar Hammami; this is a kid who became radicalized. He went to Somalia to join Al-Shabaab. He put out videos, he was a rap artist, he was a high-profile guy.

In the end he ran afoul with the leadership -- they put out a contract on this kid. He was hunted down and killed. That's not a successful ending. That is the kind of story we can use as a lesson.

SCHIEFFER: Farah, you know, what do -- does the Muslim community in general, how does this affect them?

What do they think about it?

PANDITH: So you're seeing all kinds of voices since September 11th talk about this issue, but it's very -- on a very micro level. And there are two pieces to this.

One is what governments need to hear around the world, they want to hear the clerics and the university leaders and the so-called right Muslims speak up. And that's important and is symbolic. And they certainly did that here in the Paris attacks.

But what you don't hear are those that are the nuanced voices, the hip-hop artists, the people that we don't generally look at and say they count, but actually, they do count.

Do you know any 16-year-old kid who's listening to their parents about what should happen?

No. They're listening to their peers. And it's the peers that matter. And what we have to do is talent scout around the world and lift up the voices that are actually making a difference for these kids.

You know, the communicators are putting a message out, but it's the audience that's absorbing the narrative of the extremists that have to be cut off and we have to be more creative about how we do it.

A network that we know about that you talked about in terms of the formers, the Against Violent Extremism Network, which is a really powerful network of former extremists of all kinds talking in a credible way about why they did what they did and how they came back.

What would happen if you amplify them in a gigantic way?

SCHIEFFER: David, do you think the government and the Congress will see this as a serious threat or will Congress just fall back into this dysfunction that we've become so accustomed to?

IGNATIUS: Well, it's clear listening to Congressman McCaul, listening to Senator Cornyn, listening to any political voice, I think there's a recognition this is a big problem.

I think as we look back 14 years to our experience after 9/11, we do need to think, how do we respond to it without overreacting, without doing things that make the problem worse?

And I think the kinds of things that Farah is talking about that I mentioned earlier were it's not the U.S. blaring that it's a war on terror, which is read in the Muslim world as a war on Muslims, it's subtler and it's trying to work out through the -- these soft power things that are pervasive, global, you know, trying to do it in a smarter way this time around. So I -- I hope that Congress, as it gets mobilized, doesn't make the problem worse by adding things that turn this into a megaphone as opposed to something more subtle.

SCHIEFFER: All right, well, thanks to all three of you this morning.

Very enlightening.

And we'll be back to talk about some of the other news of the week, and there actually was some, in just a moment.


SCHIEFFER: and to talk now about some of the other news of the week, we're joined by Ruth Marcus, columnist for "The Washington Post," Jim VandeHei, the president and CEO of Politico, and Peter Baker, who covers the White House for "The New York Times."

Ruth, does this change events here in Washington, what we saw happening in Paris this week?

RUTH MARCUS, "THE WASHINGTON POST": I think it renews the realization of something that we've known all along, which is we are, as you were asking, entering a new phase in the war on terror, which I thought there is a constant threat not of 9/11 type incidents, but of smaller incidents. And honestly, we've been lucky that they have been relatively few so far.

And just need to be constantly vigilant.

In the very short-term, you saw it in the conversation you were having with Senator Cornyn and Congressman McCaul. There is a tension between Washington's desire to show it can get something done and specifically with attending funding of Homeland -- the Department of Homeland Security and its desire to express -- Republicans' desire to express their displeasure with the president.

I think this particular episode really ramps up the pressure to make sure there is no funding shortfall.

SCHIEFFER: Let me just bring up something that nobody has talked about much, and that is on this whole journalism front.

I mean I personally am not one for making fun of anybody's religion.


SCHIEFFER: I mean I just don't think those kinds of things are funny.

But I think it is so important to separate satire and say, well, I don't like that, from the question of well, they certainly have a right to express their opinion. And that's part of the, you know, foundation of -- of our Western values and stuff. Is this a problem for journalism, Jim?

JIM VANDEHEI, PRESIDENT & CEO, POLITICO: I mean I think -- listen, when we're talking about free speech, it's always a problem. And there's things that you have to tolerate, nasty stuff. I mean it's not that those cartoons weren't just nasty toward Muslims, they were nasty toward Jews and Christians...


VANDEHEI: -- as well.

So all of us would probably be offended by some of them.

But at the end of the day, we're all in this business because we believe fully in -- in freedom of speech.

To -- to Ruth's point, I think one of the things that's getting lost in all of this, and maybe it's a good transition to 2016, is all these debates still seem small.

Are we going to have more TSA funding?

Are we going to have better coordination with other countries on the watch lists?

Like, ultimately, the reality is, this is us forever. We're always going to be under this threat of attack. And you almost have to have a new debate about how do you set up laws and how do you set up international relationships to deal with the fact that technology makes it so much easier for people to kill us and then to broadcast it in very spectacular ways.

And we saw it with the Sony hack. You can use technology to do it that way. You can behead somebody and throw it up on Twitter and have millions of people watch nasty, awful, brutal things.

So how do you combat that?

And it feels like we're at the very early stages of this.

SCHIEFFER: You know, I think, though, that one of the most heartening things is this morning, to turn on the television and see a million people had turned out on the streets of Paris. What about messaging, that seemed to be a pretty powerful message.

PETER BAKER, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": Well, it's a very powerful message and it reminds you of the moment after 9/11 when the French were so supportive of us and what we had gone through. They said in their headline in the "Le Monde" editorial, "We're all Americans today."

And that sort of solidarity does send a message, you don't get Abbas and Netanyahu on the same square block, much less, you know, the same protest, very often -- or demonstration very often. I think -- and expanding on what Ruth and Jim just said, the other thing about this in that -- our context, is it comes at a moment where we're already debating what is too far, right?

This comes right after the torture report from the Senate. It comes right in the middle of a continuing debate about the NSA, how far should we be going toward combating terrorism?

This reminds us that the threat is real.

How do you find the right calibration?

And we're -- we're 14 years in and still trying to figure out that right balance.

SCHIEFFER: Let's talk -- go ahead, Ruth.

MARCUS: No, no. Well, I mean we're having two debates about what is too far.

Was it too far in terms of surveillance?

And I guarantee you that in six months or a year, we'll have stories about infiltration of mosques and Muslim groups and we'll be agonizing about that, but we'd be agonizing the other way.

There's also a very important journalistic debate that you brought up about what is too far in terms of the interview, what is too far in terms of these cartoons, which are offensive.

Our newspapers, none of them would have run them on their own. We made different choices in the different newspapers to run them afterward.

I personally watched "The Interview," which I never would have done absent the -- absent the controversy over it and...

SCHIEFFER: How was it, by the way?

MARCUS: -- and I think I should withhold judgment...

SCHIEFFER: All right.

MARCUS: -- but you watch for yourself.

But I think it's very important, it goes to the million people out in the streets in Paris, when people are killed for expressing free speech, we have a responsibility to rally and err on the side of supporting that free speech, even when it's offensive.

SCHIEFFER: You said just a minute ago, Jim, this may be a lead- in to talk about 2016 and people already talking about 2016.

I guess the big news of the week is it now looks pretty certain that Jeb Bush is going to run, but it's now looking more and more like Mitt Romney is going to run. VANDEHEI: Yes.

SCHIEFFER: And I remember when I was the only person in America that was talking...

MARCUS: We heard you first.

SCHIEFFER: -- that Mitt Romney might try it for a third time.


SCHIEFFER: -- things?

VANDEHEI: Politics in a moment like this seem small, but I do think it was an important week in politics in that you have Jeb Bush and for all the criticism you could give him, he's been pretty clever, getting in earlier than people thought. He's been savvy on social media, doing things in a bilingual way and sticking to this idea that I'm going to take on my own party on some of the tough issues.

Mitt Romney seems jealous, so he starts calling people and saying, hey, I might run, too, and it looks like he might actually do it. But you have Scott Walker hiring up. He's about to go to Iowa. You have Rand Paul is definitely getting -- going to get in. You have Chris Christie who is going to be able to raise money and probably to jump in.

This is a formidable group of people.

On the Christie thing, I do hope that he leaves Wisconsin today with his buddy Jerry Jones both frozen and depressed, though, because we want the Packers.

SCHIEFFER: Well, you know, I'm feeling so strong after predicting that Mitt Romney would run, I'm beginning to think Elizabeth Warren is going to run on the Democratic side. What do you think, Peter?

BAKER: Well, you know, the problem is she doesn't have the moment a viable path to the nomination, at least clear ahead of her. She is, though, affecting that nomination process whether she runs or not, right. She is already pulling Hillary Clinton a little bit to the left the way a challenger would. In some ways it doesn't really matter if she runs as long as she's out there getting voice to the ideas that her part of the party wants to hear voiced.

MARCUS: And Bob, I'm going to take incredible risk of maybe disagreeing with you on both fronts. I don't think Elizabeth Warren is going to run for the reasons that Peter said. She is an enormously powerful voice in the Democratic Party. She's going to use that for all it's worth for all the hassle it's going to cause to the president over next few years.

I am not so sure that Mitt Romney is going to run. I do think that his comments this week really frees the field, Bush is in, Romney might be in. I think the one it has actually the worst impact on this week is Chris Christie in the short-term because with a Romney and a Bush in there that really occupies the field of potential 2016 donors and causes Christie additional problems.

If Romney stays in, Bush, Romney that is a really interesting conundrum for Jeb Bush because that makes him look like the leftward person in the field. And that is not the easiest path to a primary win for him.

SCHIEFFER: Certainly we'll all stay tuned. Thank you all. It's been fun to talk to you on a pretty grim day it's fun to have a little fun as it were. We'll be back in a moment with personal thoughts.


SCHIEFFER: If the motives of the killers who launched the attacks in Paris was to get the world's attention, they succeeded but perhaps not in the way they had wished. Support and solidarity for their victims spread immediately across lands. We're not afraid, the people said, they held up pencils and pens, the weapons the terrorist had tried to disarm.

Within hours, demonstration of support had spread around the world, across Europe, to Union Square in New York, from Russia to Mexico and even Kathmandu in Nepal, people wrote words on their arms in Brazil and carved sand sculptures in India to show their support.

Civilized people understood that this was not an attack on a small newspaper but an attack on the values that are the foundation of our way of life. It was an attack on us all.

This was a tragedy but the terrorists did not advance their cause as those powerful pictures affirmed they hurt it in every corner of the world.

Back in a minute.


SCHIEFFER: That is it for us today. Be sure to tune in tonight to the CBS evening news and CBS This Morning tomorrow for more on the rally in Paris, which is where we leave you now. Thank you for watching.