In this episode of “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” hosted by Margaret Brennan:
- Secretary of State Marco Rubio
- Kevin Hassett, Director of the National Economic Council
- Rep. Dan Crenshaw, Republican from Texas
- Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, Democrat from New Hampshire
- Rep. Jamie Raskin, Democrat from Maryland
Click here to read full transcripts from 2025 of “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”
MARGARET BRENNAN: I’m Margaret Brennan in Washington.
And this week on Face the Nation: President Trump’s national security team expands his MAGA movement into Europe. We will speak with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, making his first Sunday show appearance since taking office.
Newly confirmed officials from the Trump administration took the president’s shock-and-awe tour abroad last week. In Munich, the Vice President criticized some of America’s closest allies regarding their approaches to democracy.
(Begin Video)
J.D. VANCE (Vice President of the United States): The greatest threat facing Europe is not from Russia or China; my primary concern is the threat from within.
(End Video)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Also on the agenda is urging those same allies to enhance their efforts to safeguard Ukraine, as the administration announces it will initiate direct conversations with Russia to resolve the conflict.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio joins us from Israel, as negotiations with Hamas to conclude the conflict reach a critical juncture.
Meanwhile, back at home, more federal employees receive layoff notices, intensifying scrutiny on Elon Musk’s influence as a lead figure in the agency’s cuts.
With inflation on the rise, we will chat with the president’s chief economic adviser about actions the administration can take to mitigate it.
Stay tuned for more on Face the Nation.
Good morning, and welcome to “Face the Nation.”
We begin today with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, currently in Jerusalem during the second part of his European and Middle Eastern trip.
Mr. Secretary, I know it’s late there, and you have had a demanding day. Thank you for your time amidst your busy schedule.
You met with Prime Minister Netanyahu earlier, who indicated strong alignment with the Trump administration but stated he couldn’t provide specifics on – quote – “when the gates of hell will open if all our hostages are not released.”
Did he indicate a desire to continue discussions to advance to the second phase of the hostage deal?
MARCO RUBIO (U.S. Secretary of State): Our unified objective is to secure the release of every hostage.
Indeed, as the president has pointed out, our goal is to see them return as soon as feasible. The world has seen these heartbreaking images, and it’s impossible to forget that some have endured captivity for nearly two years. It’s a devastating situation.
We are coordinating closely with them, united in the goal that every hostage must come home, every last one, without delay. Naturally, the specifics of our methods and coordination are not for public discussion, as we need to protect the hostages and the ongoing process.
However, if it were solely up to us, every single hostage would be back with their families today, and we are committed to making that happen as swiftly as possible.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood. So, does the agreement remain intact?
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: We are committed to ensuring every hostage returns home in the shortest timeframe.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Alright.
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: Our aim is to see them all return. Some are expected to be released next weekend as outlined in the deal. We anticipate this will occur, but we prefer not to wait weeks for this to happen.
This timeline may be a part of the existing agreement, yet our desire is to have all hostages released as quickly as possible, and we will continue our coordination on this front.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: Who wouldn’t want all hostages to be at home with their families?
MARGARET BRENNAN: Absolutely.
I want to address Iran as well. President Trump is seeking a diplomatic resolution with Iran. Are you initiating any outreach? Additionally, does the U.S. support a preemptive strike by Israel aimed at dismantling Iran’s nuclear capabilities?
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: Firstly, Israel must always operate based on what they deem necessary for their national interest and security.
I won’t discuss their strategies on this or any other subject. What I can say is that we have not undertaken any outreach to Iran, as we have witnessed no signs of it. Historically, Iran’s diplomatic efforts have focused only on delaying tactics while they continue enriching uranium and sponsoring terrorism, alongside developing long-range weaponry and fueling instability in the region.
To clarify, we have received zero outreach or interest from Iran so far regarding any potential agreement. Ideally, I’d love to wake up to the news that Iran has opted not to pursue nuclear weapons, ceases sponsorship of terrorism, and reintegrates into the global community as a standard government.
Regrettably, we have not seen any indications of that in the last 30 years.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So, your next stop is Saudi Arabia. I know your focus will include Gaza, but we’ve learned that Saudi Arabia is attempting to facilitate diplomacy with Russia concerning Ukraine.
Which Russian officials do you anticipate meeting with? What will the discussions center around? Do you genuinely believe Vladimir Putin is prepared to negotiate and make compromises?
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: Here’s what I know.
President Trump spoke with Vladimir Putin last week. During that exchange, Putin expressed an interest in peace, and the president communicated his aim to bring an enduring conclusion to this conflict that upholds Ukrainian sovereignty, along with ensuring there won’t be another invasion in a few years.
This was an encouraging conversation. However, actions must follow up on this to determine its seriousness. One conversation alone is not enough to achieve peace; resolving a war as complex as this will take extensive effort.
I can affirm that Donald Trump is the sole world leader who may be able to initiate this process. Other leaders have tried and failed. During his campaign and presidency, Trump promised to work towards a lasting and fair conclusion to this conflict.
While this might be the first step, we have an extensive journey ahead. One call won’t suffice; one meeting certainly won’t resolve this. There is much work to complete. But let’s remember, even the longest journey starts with a first step.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Who are you planning to meet with?
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: Nothing has been confirmed yet. I had already planned a visit to Saudi Arabia.
We scheduled this trip over a week ago. So, if the opportunity arises to advance the work that President Trump initiated last week to open a broader dialogue about ending the conflict, involving Ukraine, and engaging our allies around the globe, particularly in Europe, we will explore it.
This morning, I don’t have any specifics to share, other than to emphasize our readiness to follow the president’s lead on this and examine opportunities for advancing peace if they present themselves.
However, it’s essential to note that a move toward peace cannot happen in just one meeting. This war has persisted for some time.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: The issue is intricate, has entailed significant violence, and has incurred heavy costs. Consequently, realizing an end to this conflict will not be straightforward.
Moreover, we cannot ignore the other entities involved that hold varying viewpoints. The European Union has imposed sanctions, and the Ukrainians are, understandably, directly engaged in this war as it impacts their nation. This situation will require collaborative negotiations.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Indeed.
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: It’s essential to reiterate the president’s clear intent to conclude this war. If opportunities for progress arise, we will pursue them. We hope to see developments in the coming days.
MARGARET BRENNAN: To clarify, Keith Kellogg, the appointed envoy for these negotiations, mentioned these will be parallel discussions, meaning Ukrainians and Russians aren’t in dialogue as of yet.
When you meet with your Russian counterpart, will you present Ukraine’s perspective?
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: Presently, we must recognize that no formal process exists.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood.
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: Currently, all we have is the conversation between Putin and President Trump, in which both parties expressed an interest in ending this conflict.
I anticipate there will be further discussions to establish a framework for what these negotiations could look like. At that point, we might be able to share further details. It’s somewhat premature to elaborate, given there’s been no serious dialogue until now.
However, let me reiterate my earlier point: President Trump has been clear about his desire for this war to conclude. If a genuine opportunity arises to fulfill that goal, whether or not it materializes, we’re committed to pursuing it.
Eventually, if real negotiations unfold, Ukraine will need to be a part of that given they were the ones invaded. European nations will also need to be involved as they enforce sanctions on Putin and Russia and have contributed significantly to this effort.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: We’re simply not at that point yet, but I hope we will be soon, as we all desire the end of this conflict.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Certainly.
In the previous administration, there were contacts through intelligence agencies with Russia, yet they found no evidence suggesting that Putin was interested in negotiations. You are aware of Putin’s history, particularly his tendency to use diplomacy as a smokescreen while pursuing military objectives.
Do you trust that this situation is different?
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: In geopolitics, trust is not a luxury one can afford. Such matters must be substantively validated through actions.
I stated previously that peace isn’t merely a noun; it’s a verb. It entails taking deliberate actions toward achieving it. I can assure you, no one negotiates better on behalf of American interests than President Trump.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Absolutely.
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: I believe President Trump will quickly discern whether this situation is genuine or merely a tactic to gain time.
However, I want to avoid making premature assessments. It’s crucial to keep opportunities for ending a conflict that has already caused unimaginable suffering open.
We should celebrate that we have a president who is seeking to promote peace globally rather than instigating wars; his focus is on crafting lasting resolutions.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Indeed.
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: That is a cause for optimism, regardless of its ultimate viability, and we are prepared to engage in pursuing it.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You did mention a conversation with Russia’s top diplomat, Sergey Lavrov. The Russian side claimed you discussed reinstating trade, which hinted at easing sanctions, diplomatic repositioning, and potential meetings between high-level leaders.
Is the Trump administration actively considering lifting sanctions on Russia?
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: The purpose of the call was to establish communication channels consistent with the discussion President Trump had with Vladimir Putin last week. If there is genuine potential for progress toward peace, dialogues with the Russians will be necessary.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You are emphasizing the potential lifting of sanctions, however?
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: We did not delve into specifics.
Simply put, we initiated a dialogue to pave the way for future interaction. It was noteworthy, as it was my first conversation with Mr. Lavrov. This meeting allowed us to open that line of communication critical for peace discussions.
Importantly, I addressed the operational challenges our embassy in Moscow faces. Engaging Russia in any discussion requires a functional embassy. Mr. Lavrov raised similar concerns regarding his diplomatic staff’s conditions in the U.S.
At a fundamental level, if we are to explore possibilities for peace through engagement with Russia, we must ensure our embassies function effectively in both Moscow and Washington, D.C. This is a standard topic for diplomatic discussions.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want your thoughts on the Munich Security Conference.
The Vice President gave a speech, declaring that the primary threat to the U.S. and its allies is not Russia or China, but rather a threat from within. He focused on censorship, largely advocating for increased representation from the right.
He also met with the leader of the far-right party, AfD, which is under investigation by German intelligence due to extremist ties. What do you believe this achieved, aside from upsetting our allies?
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: Why would our allies or anyone else be annoyed by free speech or someone articulating their perspective?
At the end of the day, we are democracies. The Munich Security Conference primarily comprises democratic nations, where we greatly value the ability to voice differing opinions openly.
So if anyone is offended by his statements, they do not necessarily need to agree but should recognize that being upset proves his argument. I viewed it as a momentous speech. Regardless of personal opinions, the valid points he made regarding concerns over shared democratic values, such as free speech, should raise alarm.
It’s essential to remind ourselves that we have a common history uniting us with Europe, which includes victories in two World Wars and the defeat of Soviet communism.
These are the foundational values that bond us together. When we see erosion of these values and voice our alarms, it’s a legitimate issue.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Absolutely.
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: We can’t dictate to them how to govern, yet he merely expressed his perspective, one that many hold. I believe there were many necessary truths spoken in that address. Honestly, it’s unclear why anyone would feel disturbed by it.
Take note that the U.S. has faced harsh criticism from many European leaders, yet we have never reacted with outrage.
MARGARET BRENNAN: However, he delivered that speech in a nation where free speech fueled a genocide.
Additionally, by meeting with the leader of a political party with extremist ties, it shifted the perception somewhat. You’re aware the context changes the tone substantively. The criticism was primarily about right-wing censorship.
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: I must disagree with you on this one. Free speech was not the vehicle for genocide; instead, it was presented by an authoritarian regime—specifically the Nazis—who had a systematic hatred for Jews and other minorities.
There was no allowance for free speech under the Nazi regime; it was a single-party state, and opposition was entirely suppressed. Thus, it is an inaccurate historical representation.
Moreover, I maintain that the crux of his message revolved around the alarming decline in free speech and the growing intolerance for diverse opinions across Europe. This remains significant, as erosion of these values undermines the moral cohesion of the transatlantic alliance that we have built over the last eight decades.
It’s reasonable for allies and partners who have collaborated for generations to engage in open, candid discussions without being offended or enraged.
I had conversations with several foreign ministers from different European nations. While they may not have completely agreed with his speech, many still chose to engage constructively on a range of issues.
Ultimately, such forums ought to accommodate diverse viewpoints from leaders, not merely echo a single narrative. These discussions among democracies often manifest diverse perspectives, as leaders are entitled to voice their thoughts transparently.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Mr. Secretary, our time is nearly up. We have much more to cover with you, and we appreciate your participation today.
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO: Yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We’ll return shortly with more.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Now, let’s transition to discussions on the economy and inflation, which experienced a roughly 3 percent uptick compared to last January.
Kevin Hassett, Director of the National Economic Council, joins us now. Morning, Director.
KEVIN HASSETT (Director, National Economic Council): Good morning, Margaret.
MARGARET BRENNAN: As you know, egg prices in grocery stores have surged, reaching record highs due in part to a bird flu outbreak and rising labor costs, impacting overall food prices.
When can we expect the administration to gain control over that outbreak?
KEVIN HASSETT: Precisely.
The reality is, as you know, we are confronted with significant inflation. The latest Consumer Price Index reveals that the stagflation triggered by President Biden’s policies is far worse than previously estimated.
Over the past three months, the average inflation rate has been 4.6 percent across all goods, notably including eggs, well above the target, and accelerating toward the end of Biden’s term.
This concern is not only ours; notable economic advisers to President Biden, like Jason Furman and Larry Summers, continually warned that excessive spending would result in substantial inflation. In fact, Furman’s recent piece in “Foreign Affairs” critiques the Biden economic record as tragic.
These concerns are theirs, not ours.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You are referring to fiscal spending.
KEVIN HASSETT: Yes, indeed.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Your remarks point to fiscal spending, but…
KEVIN HASSETT: So, where does inflation originate? We currently have a comprehensive plan to address it.
I’ll summarize quickly, focusing on our response to egg prices. Our strategy includes broad macroeconomic reforms incorporating supply-side tax cuts to increase supply and reduce government spending through actions from both DOGE and Congress.
This effort will amend the unfavorable macroeconomic conditions highlighted by Furman. Furthermore, we aim to enhance energy production and deregulation while also addressing individual issues as they arise.
As for the avian flu, President Biden lacked a solid plan. Brooke Rollins and I are working on a comprehensive strategy involving top experts and academics that will be ready for the president next week to tackle the avian flu situation effectively.
I’m currently finalizing the report with them.
(LAUGHTER)
KEVIN HASSETT: The essential question is, why did we reach this point? That’s a prevalent topic of discussion.
However, I often contemplate why the administration opted for such a serious strategy.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes, indeed.
KEVIN HASSETT: We discuss this frequently. I’m not making negative remarks towards you; I simply aim to clarify. That’s often my line of thought.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Certainly.
KEVIN HASSETT: Next week, we aim to unveil the plan addressing avian flu management.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Please share what you plan to implement.
KEVIN HASSETT: Traditionally, the Biden plan consisted of indiscriminately culling chickens. They allocated billions towards killing birds located within the perimeter of any identified sick cases.
After shopping at the store, I’ve recognized a scarcity of eggs, with only a handful available. This situation arose due to their killing policy.
We require more strategic measures implementing biosecurity and medical treatment to ensure these perimeter protocols can avoid unnecessary killing; essentially, we seek smarter perimeter management solutions.
The concept of an effective perimeter is our current focus. We should have initiated this plan a year ago to mitigate escalating egg prices now.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood.
KEVIN HASSETT: The avian flu is a legitimate concern.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Absolutely.
KEVIN HASSETT: The primary spread occurs predominantly through ducks and geese. We find it perplexing that we cull chickens when they generally do not fly. Therefore, it’s illogical to have an extensive perimeter of slaughtered chickens when the actual carriers are different birds.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The Department of Agriculture has maintained a policy of culling chickens, as you know.
KEVIN HASSETT: Indeed.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Let’s return to an issue raised by the president.
To combat inflation, the Federal Reserve has implemented higher interest rates. Recently, the president called for these rates to be reduced. Does he believe this will subsequently lower grocery costs?
KEVIN HASSETT: First and foremost, I have arranged for regular discussions with Jay Powell at the Federal Reserve starting this weekend.
Jay and I share a long, collegial relationship, and I’ll be discussing our perspectives during these meetings. The president values this relationship.
MARGARET BRENNAN: This is not an attempt to influence him?
KEVIN HASSETT: No, rather, it’s an opportunity to share insights.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood.
KEVIN HASSETT: The key issue revolves around the correlation of controlling inflation, which might alleviate pressure on the Fed, resulting in lower rates. Observing longer-term interest rates which are not dictated directly by the Fed can be quite telling.
For instance, the 10-year Treasury yield has dropped by approximately 40 basis points…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
KEVIN HASSETT: …over the past few weeks, following our announcements aimed at controlling inflation.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right, but the president’s statements contradict the economic policy.
KEVIN HASSETT: No. Inflation rates are already trending down. The interest rates have quagmired less significantly, in terms of immediate matters, given the shift of possibly -40 basis points already evident. Those rates are fundamentally lower. It concerns which rates impact the economy most, typically the 5- or 10-year rates.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Certainly. Before we conclude, I want to discuss tariffs.
KEVIN HASSETT: Absolutely.
MARGARET BRENNAN: There are concerns that implementing tariffs could ultimately drive up prices.
How will these reciprocal tariffs function? The president has indicated intentions to impose them on around 175 nations with VAT taxes.
KEVIN HASSETT: We continuously engage in discussions with leaders from other nations. Last night, during late-night talks, I spoke with Minister Reynolds from the U.K. regarding this matter. Overall, consider this: currently, U.S. companies contribute around $370 billion annually in taxes to foreign governments while foreign companies transfer merely $57 billion to the U.S. government.
A major portion of that differential is attributed to VAT. Should we cease these payments, over a decade, it would save U.S. citizens around $5 trillion in taxation. That amount has the potential to compensate for the tax reductions under consideration.
Thus, reclaiming some of that revenue, whether through tariffs or if they reduce their tariffs reciprocally, would favor American citizens financially.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
KEVIN HASSETT: The president’s vision is aimed toward this outcome.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Kevin Hassett, we hope to have you back to discuss this topic in greater detail at another time. Today, we will pause here.
KEVIN HASSETT: Always happy to contribute.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Thank you.
A lot more “Face the Nation” is ahead.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re returning shortly with further insights from the Munich meeting of world leaders.
Here at home, seven federal prosecutors resigned on principle last week. We will explain the reasoning behind this.
Stay with us.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome back to “Face the Nation.”
The Munich Security Conference gathers global leaders and international security experts annually, and one of this year’s primary topics has been the ongoing war in Ukraine.
Earlier, we spoke with two lawmakers from Munich, including House Intelligence Committee member Dan Crenshaw. We inquired about President Zelenskyy’s expectations regarding security measures needed in a potential peace agreement.
(BEGIN VIDEO)
MARGARET BRENNAN: It’s my understanding he has requested not only ongoing military assistance but also security guarantees in line with a peace agreement. Can you share what he might expect from America?
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW (R-TX): Recently, I attended a luncheon where General Kellogg, the special envoy tasked with spearheading this peace initiative, spoke. His message was clear: the peace being discussed must be enduring, which will inevitably involve security assurances.
A part of that effort lies in determining what that means. The Ukrainians themselves are contemplating its significance. Numerous options exist.
European involvement is crucial during this phase. A common topic of discussion is European forces acting as peacekeepers.
Ukrainians undoubtedly have a voice in these negotiations, with the U.S. positioned as an intermediary to foster a resolution.
European leaders must assertively engage to earn their rightful place at the negotiating table; they should convey discomforting threats to Putin, as intimidation is the one language he comprehends. General Kellogg needs to harness finite leverage to assure favorable outcomes.
If someone can effect change, it is Donald Trump, who insists that nothing is off the table—economically or militarily. They will command whatever leverage they can.
My message to European counterparts is to adopt an aggressive stance in order to secure favorable terms for Ukraine during these peace talks. European nations currently match U.S. assistance, yet they should focus on amplifying it—this is their continent.
Zelenskyy recently advocated for a European army, denoting significant discussions at play. While NATO exists, it’s primarily a defense alliance, not an offensive military force aiming to adopt a different, more assertive strategy.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: Europeans need to forge their message directly toward Putin instead of merely waiting for the U.S. to decide on aid, making sure they effectively eradicate the current impression that the U.S. constantly drives the agenda.
Ukrainians have proven their valor and have garnered respect for their courage. They’ve earned the right to a place at the table, and we must value their desire for a stake in this conversation.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You mentioned that both President Trump and Vice President Vance were consistent in stating that nothing is off the table. However, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicated in Brussels that the U.S. is unwilling to support Ukraine’s inclusion in NATO, acknowledging potential territorial compromises regarding Crimea and eastern regions.
Do you believe offering such concessions prior to initiating negotiations is advantageous?
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: Certainly, it’s essential to heed the collective voice of the White House. The Secretary’s prior comments have since been revised.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Correct.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: They have reiterated that no options are definitively off the table. You must engage negotiations by keeping all possibilities open, which is what this administration aims to accomplish.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Certainly.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: It’s important to note that they aim to move forward rapidly because there’s an urgency; it’s only been under a month since the current administration took over.
I assure you that transitioning away from a strategy of indefinite funding that lacks a sustainable conclusion is imperative. We cannot endure any business-as-usual approaches.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Indeed.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: Initiating discussions is crucial, as getting Putin to engage in these talks represents a substantial strategic achievement for the U.S. in terms of restoring our deterrence over time.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you know if he has indeed expressed willingness to negotiate? Currently, we lack any clear commitment from Putin to engage in talks.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: No, that remains uncertain.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Got it.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: Encouraging an assertive European approach could significantly bolster the situation, as power is the key factor influencing Putin’s decisions.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Certainly, regarding Putin, let’s not forget he’s labeled a war criminal with a valid arrest warrant against him due to his actions in Ukraine.
President Trump recently stated his desire to have Putin rejoin the G-8, suggesting a return to normalcy for him as a global leader. Would it be acceptable to consider such a move, as he also mentioned visiting Russia or inviting Putin to the U.S.?
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: It might be more beneficial to pursue dialogue rather than the silence maintained by President Biden over the past two years. What has that strategy achieved?
MARGARET BRENNAN: Talking is one thing; inviting him to the U.S. is an entirely different matter.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: Certainly, it’s up for interpretation. The reality remains that to facilitate any form of peace, engagement is essential. We must consider both a carrot and a stick approach, with Trump adept at utilizing that persuasion to bring adversaries to negotiating tables effectively.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But flattering a brutal dictator, who is also quite shrewd, does not seem like an effective strategy.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: He’s not as clever as some attribute to him. The war he’s waged has led to significant societal devastation and loss of life, representing a catastrophic miscalculation. He’s demonstrated profound errors in judgment and deserves scrutiny.
Allow Trump to carry out his campaign promise to establish open lines of communication. It’s important to bear in mind that nobody will take advantage of him; General Kellogg has made it clear that Trump will never be perceived as having compromised his integrity in negotiations with adversaries.
MARGARET BRENNAN: However, moments in history have shown that blind faith in Trump’s strategies could easily replicate a previous negotiation failure with the Taliban in Afghanistan, leading to criticisms of sidelining allied perspectives.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: I mirrored those criticisms regarding the Afghanistan agreement.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Understood.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: Yet, the current context vastly differs. The enthusiasm resonates among the Ukrainians, who are optimistic about the ongoing dialogue and demonstrate a willingness to engage.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Thank you for your insights, Congressman Crenshaw.
REPRESENTATIVE DAN CRENSHAW: Thank you for having me.
(END VIDEO)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Next, we hear from Senator Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Stay with us.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: We connected with New Hampshire Democrat Jeanne Shaheen during her time at the Munich Security Conference, discussing diplomatic negotiations to wrap up the war in Ukraine, as well as bipartisan initiatives in the Senate to bolster Ukraine.
(BEGIN VIDEO)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Regarding the negotiations, President Trump’s recent utterances raised eyebrows. Secretary Hegseth indicated that reverting Ukraine’s borders to pre-2014 conditions seems implausible, suggesting that parts of eastern Ukraine and Crimea could be permanently ceded to Russia. Given these sentiments, why such concessions even before talks have commenced?
SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN (D-NH): Mixed messages emerged from the administration. Secretary Hegseth suggested NATO membership should be off the table, along with that Ukraine might need to yield territory, juxtaposing the Vice President’s remarks advocating for comprehensive negotiations keeping all options at hand, including potential troop deployment within Ukraine.
MARGARET BRENNAN: It’s a conflicted narrative. What do you anticipate the outcome will be?
SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN: I hope this mixed messaging ultimately points toward an unwavering commitment to fortifying Ukraine’s standing.
MARGARET BRENNAN: What role can Congress play? Are there Republican allies open to including provisions in an upcoming defense bill to support Ukraine?
SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN: That’s certainly possible. We are exploring initiating statements on repossessing Russian assets held in the U.S. and Europe. It is vital that these assets assist Ukraine both in their military efforts and in rebuilding afterward.
We find substantial bipartisan support for measures that will ensure the repatriation of Russian assets to Ukraine, as Russia remains the aggressor in this conflict.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Your Republican counterpart, Senator Roger Wicker, chair of the Armed Services Committee, expressed deep concern over Secretary Hegseth’s statements in Munich. He drew historical parallels, suggesting Putin’s actions mirror those once associated with Adolf Hitler. To have such strong rhetoric in light of President Trump’s intentions to engage personally with Putin raises tensions.
SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN: Such remarks are valid and infinitely justified. Despite President Trump’s intentions to build groundwork for imminent negotiations, there exists a documented bipartisan commitment in Congress to reinforce support for Ukraine as it contends with Russia’s unjustified aggression.
MARGARET BRENNAN: During your conference panel with Zelenskyy, what were his sentiments about the U.S. role and the current dynamics?
SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN: I engaged with various leaders from the U.K., Canada, and Balkan countries, alongside President Zelenskyy. Concerns about the U.S.’s position regarding Ukraine were palpable during discussions.
We underscored the necessity for Europe and the United States to present a united front, holding Putin accountable through sanctions and maintaining no divide between the U.S. and our NATO allies. Putin has long sought to create disunity, and we must emphasize that it will not be tolerated. Our support for Ukraine endures.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Now, regarding any legislative input concerning President Trump’s suggestion to grasp possession of critical minerals extracted from Ukraine as a means of repayment for U.S. weaponry expenses, will Congress receive involvement in such plans?
SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN: Investments from the United States in Ukraine could yield benefits. Such a deal for critical minerals may have positive implications, yet the details surrounding who possesses these minerals remain murky. They occupy eastern regions with Russian control, and many stakeholders include private oligarchs. The specifics await further clarity as no agreements have been presented to President Zelenskyy.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Zelenskyy reiterated his stance of “nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine” during our conversations. You confirmed that bipartisan senators back this notion positively.
SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN: Absolutely. Ukraine must have ownership over any negotiations.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Thank you for your time today, Senator Shaheen.
SENATOR JEANNE SHAHEEN: Thank you.
(END VIDEO)
MARGARET BRENNAN: You can access our complete interviews with Congressman Crenshaw and Senator Shaheen on cbsnews.com and our YouTube channel.
We’ll return shortly.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Notably, seven federal prosecutors resigned last week, protesting the Justice Department’s directive to abandon investigations into New York City Mayor Eric Adams, who faces multiple allegations, including bribery and conspiracy. Acting U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon stated that dismissing the charges amounted to a quid pro quo, asserting the DOJ’s proposal to retract charges in exchange for cooperations on federal immigration enforcement.
In retaliation, Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove threatened Sassoon with an inquiry into her conduct.
We’re joined now by Maryland Democrat Jamie Raskin, the leading Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.
This incident is highly irregular. Is there an action you can take regarding the proceedings within Attorney General Bondi’s Justice Department?
REPRESENTATIVE JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): It seems the Justice Department is at odds with its own legal staff. This scenario paints an alarming picture of the corruption permeating the situation. This was an investigation rooted in corruption, leading to the grand jury indictment of Eric Adams on multiple counts, including bribery, but subsequent developments reflect a clear attempt to shield him politically.
In effect, the new Justice Department suppressed this case, suggesting to Adams that his charges would be dismissed in exchange for certain political compromises.
To facilitate this corrupt arrangement, they pressured their own attorneys into compliance. Yet, those attorneys firmly argued that there were no changes warranting a dismissal and even presented new evidence necessitating an expanded indictment.
Such maneuvers depict a grave breach of prosecutorial ethics and due process, representing a concerning first step for the DOJ under this administration.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Mayor Adams disputes the existence of any quid pro quo and insists there was no wrongdoing, yet the lead prosecutor on this case has also resigned. Currently, the fate of this case rests with a judge. Does he possess the authority to proceed with prosecution?
REPRESENTATIVE JAMIE RASKIN: Firstly, let’s talk about Danielle Sassoon – she’s a very conservative U.S. attorney, and she found the situation untenable. The most conservative prosecutors stood against this pressure from the administration.
However, the outcome is not finalized, as Judge Dale Ho retains the discretion to reject the dismissal, potentially appointing another prosecutor to pursue the grand jury’s previously handed-down indictment.
MARGARET BRENNAN: In response, Attorney General Bondi claims these actions are lawful, asserting that it’s President Biden’s weaponized DOJ seeking to harm Adams politically, notwithstanding his critiques of Biden’s immigration policies.
Do you believe Adams should face prosecution? Would you respond to such claims?
REPRESENTATIVE JAMIE RASKIN: Initially, the attorney general failed to demonstrate any alterations regarding the case’s factual context or legal basis—none existed, and her claims regarding investigative irregularities lack merit.
MARGARET BRENNAN: She contends it’s all fabricated.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMIE RASKIN: It appears that her assertions are echoes of her superior’s rhetoric, which has habitually lacked credibility. I would expect nothing less than integrity from the U.S. attorney general.
Moreover, the administration’s widespread assault on judicial integrity could constitute grounds for impeachment under different political circumstances. The fact that Adams identifies as a Democrat does not influence my stance; I oppose corruption, regardless of party affiliation. It appears Trump aims to cozy up to the most corrupt elements across the spectrum.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Notably, President Trump has prominently displayed a framed cover of “The New York Post” featuring his own mugshot in the Oval Office. He tweeted yesterday that those saving their country do not violate any laws.
Trump espouses the belief that the allegations against him are politically motivated, and voters seem unfazed by this narrative—he was elected with substantial support. What’s your strategy to convince the public of the significance of these issues?
REPRESENTATIVE JAMIE RASKIN: This administration’s principle aim has been to cultivate corruption and lawlessness. They began their term by sacking 17 inspectors general, key figures in overseeing governmental integrity. These individuals uncovered substantial amounts—$91 billion—linked to waste, fraud, and corruption.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Their defense is that this is within their lawful discretion.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMIE RASKIN: It absolutely is legal, but their conduct violates established norms. Their obligation includes notifying Congress 30 days in advance, specifying the grounds for dismissing an inspector general. Of course, they neglected that requirement.
Their actions imply a desire to disrupt systems safeguarding against corruption, displaying a willful noncompliance with the rule of law.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Democrats appear to have limited influence as the opposition. What recourse remains for you within the system?
REPRESENTATIVE JAMIE RASKIN: Thankfully, we continue to secure victories in court. We’ve obtained multiple federal injunctions and temporary restraining orders against a wide range of illegal activities enacted by their administration, from data seizures to unlawful attempts to hinder birthright citizenship.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We will remain vigilant on upcoming court decisions. Thank you, Congressman Raskin.
We’ll return shortly.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMIE RASKIN: Absolutely.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re pleased to share that after nearly 500 days in captivity, American Israeli Segui Dekel-Chen was released yesterday, along with two other Israeli hostages. Dekel-Chen was abducted during the October 7 attack from the kibbutz where he lived with his wife and two young daughters. They survived the assault, and yesterday marked a milestone for the family as he learned the name of the third daughter born in his absence.
Thank you for joining us, and we will see you next week.
