This is the transcript of an interview with Sue Gordon, the Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence during the first Trump administration, and Ret. Gen. Frank McKenzie, a CBS News contributor. The interview aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on March 30, 2025.
MAJOR GARRETT: Let’s revisit the situation regarding the administration’s use of Signal, a messaging app, for discussions on military attack plans. According to a new CBS News poll, approximately three-quarters of Americans consider this a serious issue. In fact, 76% of respondents perceive the use of the app for military discussions as inappropriate. This opinion encompasses 80% of independents and over half of the surveyed Republicans. Now, we bring in Sue Gordon, who was the Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence during the first Trump administration, joining us from Austin, along with retired Marine Corps General Frank McKenzie, former head of US Central Command, making his first official appearance as a CBS News contributor from Tampa, Florida. Good morning to you both. Sue, let’s start with you. Can you clarify for our viewers how this sort of communication aligns with established norms concerning sensitive or classified information?
SUE GORDON: Good morning, Major. At the outset, without delving into classification guides, I can say there is nothing about operational information that is suitable for this type of communication channel—absolutely nothing. Alternative communications channels exist for these discussions, and the risks associated with uncontrolled communications are significant. Therefore, I don’t believe we need to debate whether this approach was appropriate. We can discuss how this occurred, what alternatives were available, and our future actions. However, fundamentally, this type of discussion should not happen in those channels.
MAJOR GARRETT: So, Sue, when the administration claims, “Nothing bad happened; no one accessed it, so there’s no cause for concern,” how do you respond?
SUE GORDON: For one, I’m pleased the operation succeeded—great news. However, we have a saying that every success is overshadowed by a failure somewhere along the line. I don’t think we should be complacent simply because nothing adverse occurred this time. We cannot ascertain whether this communication route has been compromised. It’s entirely possible that state actors with significant resources are currently aware of our operations. Any information that has surfaced is incredibly useful for intelligence professionals—whether it’s for future operations, understanding sources, targeting, our operational tempo, or our methods. So, while I’m happy about the successful operation, we must address the fact that this scenario should never have happened. There are consequences for such lapses, and we cannot dismiss the persistent risks that may ensue.
MAJOR GARRETT: Frank, while it’s important not to miss the forest for the trees, the broader issue here is the new and heightened tempo of military operations, particularly against the Houthis in Yemen. Can you evaluate this situation in the context of the larger story?
GENERAL FRANK MCKENZIE (RET.): Absolutely, Major. First, it’s a pleasure to be with you today. The core issue here is that we have finally begun to confront the Houthis decisively. There’s a line from an old Neil Young song that resonates: “Should have been done long ago.” We’re now taking action effectively at a pace and scope that eluded the previous administration. I would argue that we are achieving this because, for the first time, we possess the political will to deploy adequate military resources against the Houthis. Our objectives include deterring them from attacking ships navigating through Bab-el-Mandeb—a crucial path to the Suez Canal. If they refuse to cease, our second objective will be to eliminate their capability to do so. This latter task is more challenging; it will involve sustained efforts over a protracted period, growing in both scale and intensity. Nonetheless, addressing the problem is essential so we can pivot to other priorities. The deployment of a second aircraft carrier to CENTCOM indicates that this administration is serious about this task, as does the movement of B-2s to the region. For the first time, we are combining true political resolve with military capability, presenting a unique moment in the theater, and I am pleased to see this administration seizing the opportunity.
MAJOR GARRETT: Frank, regarding your terminology of “deter and degrade,” can this be achieved from a distance using aerial and shipborne weaponry?
GEN. MCKENZIE: Yes, I believe we can effectively accomplish that. I wouldn’t rule out any options. By eliminating options, we may inadvertently aid the enemy. In the past, we’ve tended to restrict ourselves too much, and I advocate keeping all avenues open, including potential actions against Tehran. Ultimately, all of this relates back to Tehran, as they are the primary supplier for the Houthis. Although Iran may be downplaying their support now, the truth is the Houthis owe their existence to Iranian backing, supplemented by Russian support. We must acknowledge this reality and not allow Iran to evade responsibility. Currently, in Iran’s weakened state, we have the capacity to pose significant threats to them. Moreover, the actions taken by the first Trump Administration—including the strike that killed Qassem Soleimani—while often forgotten in the U.S., remain fresh in Iran’s memory. This demonstrated a level of American resolve that was largely absent in the region. Additionally, the Abraham Accords facilitated Israel’s deeper engagement in the region, diplomatically, economically, and culturally. Although the road ahead may be challenging, these developments will strengthen Israel’s position moving forward. The transition of Israel from the European Command to Central Command has also enabled the successful defense of Israel observed in recent weeks and months. Collectively, these factors grant this administration a uniquely advantageous position to influence regional events.
MAJOR GARRETT: Sue, returning to you, Senator Warner expressed concerns that partners within the Five Eyes intelligence community may view this situation—regardless of legal outcomes—as careless and reckless, potentially leading them to withdraw cooperation. Having worked alongside our partners during the first Trump administration, what insights do you have on this matter? Do you share those concerns?
[CROSSTALK]
GEN. MCKENZIE: They may voice those concerns. I’d argue–
GORDON: I think–
MAJOR GARRETT: Frank, let’s focus on Sue.
GEN. MCKENZIE: My apologies, please continue, Sue.
GORDON: General, your insights are always valued, but let me address this issue directly. We rely heavily on our allies and partners, and safeguarding their interests and information sources is crucial. Historically, there have been errors in this regard; this is not the first instance where a partner has been unable to protect another’s information. However, what’s troubling about this situation are two specific points that need to be tackled by the administration. First, there must be a tighter approach to communication. I suspect there was a reliance on expediency here, and I wish someone had pointed out that if we were going to pursue this method, we ought to switch to a secure channel. The second issue is our reaction—that there was nothing to see here. This is what truly needs to be addressed with our partners and allies. It’s essential to acknowledge that this was not how we preferred to operate, in order to rebuild trust. The question isn’t whether errors occur; it’s about whether we undertake actions that inspire confidence. From an environmental standpoint, our relationships with allies and partners are already somewhat precarious, and further actions that raise doubts about our trustworthiness can significantly affect our ability to advance our objectives.
MAJOR GARRETT: Frank, as a CBS contributor, I’ll give you a one-minute warning to conclude your thoughts on the Signal chat issue.
GEN. MCKENZIE: I believe Sue nailed it with her analysis. I maintain that the United States still holds an indispensable role in many areas. I’m optimistic that we will learn from this incident and hope it won’t be repeated, but it’s regrettable that the Signal chat has overshadowed the significant work being done to address the protracted issue of Houthi actions in Bab-al-Mandeb, which impacts the Suez Canal.
MAJOR GARRETT: And quickly, Frank, when you first heard about this, were you shocked? Is that an accurate response to this situation?
GEN. MCKENZIE: Yes, I was surprised.
MAJOR GARRETT: That’s great for your TV presence! Thank you, Frank McKenzie and Sue Gordon, for your valuable time and expertise today. We’ll be right back.
