"Face the Nation" Full Broadcast — Jan. 5, 2025

[0:01] I'm Margaret Brennan in Washington and this week on Face the Nation, the nation's capital braces [0:07] for the unprecedented in the new year amid growing threats to our nation's security. [0:12] As Washington prepares to certify the 2024 presidential election to bid a former farewell [0:19] to the 39th president and make way for the return of the 45th who becomes the 47th to the Oval [0:27] Office, extraordinary security arrangements are underway. All this as the struggle to make sense [0:34] of the horrifying New Year's attack in New Orleans and incident in Las Vegas continues. [0:40] We'll sit down for a bipartisan conversation with the heads of the House Intelligence Committee, [0:44] Ohio's Mike Turner and Connecticut's Jim Hines. On Capitol Hill, Speaker Mike Johnson's job is safe [0:52] for now. And in the Senate, Republicans take control with a new leader, South Dakota's John Thune. [0:58] He's responsible for getting President-elect Trump's ambitious agenda through the Senate. [1:04] Will you tell him when you think he's wrong? I will. At the top of Mr. Trump's to-do list, [1:09] what he promises will be the largest mass deportation in U.S. history. We'll ask his border [1:16] czar Tom Homan how he plans to execute that. And as we mark four years since the January 6th attack [1:23] on the Capitol, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will be here to talk about the growing threats [1:32] of political violence. It's all just ahead on Face the Nation. Good morning and welcome to Face [1:52] the Nation. As we begin the new year, the first few days of January are already proving and providing [1:59] enormous challenges, both here in Washington and around the country, especially in terms of security. [2:04] We begin today with House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner and ranking member Jim Hines, [2:10] who will join us in a bipartisan fashion. Thank you for doing so and for joining us today. [2:15] Thanks for having us. [2:16] So we have, Chairman, heightened security at U.S. airports, on trains, military bases, [2:23] this bulletin that went out recently warning of perhaps retaliatory attacks, copycat attacks from [2:32] that New Orleans car ramming incident. How should Americans understand the threat environment we're in? [2:38] Right, right. Well, it's really very difficult and our heart breaks as we think of what occurred just [2:44] after New Year's Eve and on New Year's Day. What we know that the FBI director has said [2:51] is that we are in a heightened threatened environment. We see from, of course, what occurred in New Orleans. [2:59] We have the threat of those who can be lone wolves, those individuals who might be as the [3:04] self-declared terrorist has indicated, inspired by ISIS, by terrorist threats. We also have those who [3:12] who are here who've come across the border that the director has said are affiliated with terrorist [3:17] groups organizations outside of the country who want to do Americans harm. Those individuals [3:25] still pose a threat to Americans and to the United States. The director, the FBI, local law enforcement [3:32] are continuing to work to try to find them and try to lessen the risk. But certainly at this time, [3:37] as we go into the inauguration for Donald Trump, where we even have state actors like Iran, [3:43] who we have in custody individuals who've come here with the stated purpose to assassinate as a part [3:50] of a plot to have been alleged to perpetrate a plot to assassinate Donald Trump. We have a number of [3:56] actors that pose a risk and a threat to Americans. Congressman Himes, ISIS has not claimed responsibility [4:04] for this New Orleans attacker. He did pledge allegiance in these social media videos. But [4:10] Homeland Security, as far as we have heard from them, said there's no linkage to the U.S. border. [4:16] There is no linkage established to a foreign actor at this point. Is this just an example of someone [4:23] with mental health issues choosing violence? Well, and I'm glad you said that because there was so much [4:29] misinformation right out of the box because these attacks happened at the same time. You know, there was all [4:33] sorts of stuff on social media about how they were coordinated and together and that the Las Vegas [4:38] with New Orleans, you know, the New Orleans Jabbar, the attacker there clearly had himself [4:46] affiliated with ISIS. Now, what we need to know and what to date there is no evidence that this is the [4:51] case, but we need to know whether that individual was deliberately tasked. Again, no evidence that he [4:56] was. And of course, we constantly see these lone wolf attackers who get radicalized, maybe on social [5:01] media, maybe in some other location. And, you know, I would certainly agree with Mike's characterization [5:07] of the danger out there. But just add that as Americans think about the people who are protecting [5:12] them, and I think the chairman would agree with me on this, the people and assets that we put up [5:17] against this threat are the best in the world. It is also true that lone wolf attackers, that is an [5:22] individual who's not communicating with somebody abroad, who's not sending texts or sending emails, [5:26] are extraordinarily difficult to detect. And, you know, though our people are the best in the world, [5:32] that is hard to find. And by the way, there's a role for people. You know, in New York City, [5:36] if you go on the subway, it says, if you see something, say something. And so there's a role [5:40] for everybody out there, you know, to help try to stop these kinds of lone wolf attacks. [5:46] But as one official said to me, this isn't a problem you solve with another aircraft carrier to [5:50] the Middle East. Some of these things run deeper in terms of the lone wolf element. That's the term [5:56] you've used. How do you diagnose and deal with that, Chair Turner, if people are able to be [6:03] radicalized online and whether it's political violence or just another form of domestic violent [6:08] extremism? Well, in the issue of New Orleans, we don't know yet whether or not he will evolve as [6:14] the actual lone wolf where he operated completely alone. As Jim is saying, as the investigation unfolds, [6:20] he himself indicated that he joined, as he claimed, at ISIS in the summer. We don't know what that [6:26] involved. We don't know if it's going to turn out that he was tasked. He went to New Orleans also in [6:35] October. There may have been opportunities or times at which he could have been found and could have [6:40] been prevented. We'll learn what those are and ways in which he might have been found and maybe we could [6:46] have intervened. But those will give us greater opportunities at which we'll look to how we [6:50] might be able to, in the future, find others. Now, we've spoken to both of you on this program [6:55] in particular about the heightened threat environment many times. And back in June, [6:59] when there was that arrest of those eight men from Tajikistan who were ISIS-linked, we spoke in depth [7:05] about that. Chair Turner, shortly after that, you said on this program, we have terrorists that are [7:11] actively working inside the United States that are a threat to Americans. Do you know if there are [7:17] active terror cells in the United States right now? Well, I think the issue of cells, and you [7:23] were talking about that at the beginning of the show, are there individuals that are affiliated with [7:28] ISIS and terrorist groups and organizations that have crossed the border that are inside the United [7:32] States? Director Ray, FBI director, has said so. We certainly have intelligence that says so. I agree [7:37] with his assessment. Jim has also seen it. He's testified before our committee publicly of that fact. [7:44] Those individuals are working in conjunction with ISIS with the intention of harming Americans. The [7:50] director has said it directly. They are known to U.S. intelligence and law enforcement. And we are [7:56] working diligently to try to take them down to prevent them from doing so. And that's why the director is [8:01] publicly saying such. And that's what the new administration is going to be handed. The fact that [8:06] these individuals are here, that we need to locate them, we need to remove them, we need to bring them [8:11] to justice and prevent them from doing harm to Americans. When we have spoken about this issue in [8:16] the past, you characterized particularly the rest of the eight as a success story, because there was no [8:22] plot carried out. They were disrupted. Are the individuals that are of concern, do we know where they [8:29] are? I mean, in terms of those eight, they are, we know they were detained and five of them were [8:34] actually sent back to Tajikistan. You never know what you don't know. And so none of us, [8:39] certainly in positions of responsibility, would ever say that there's not terrorists in the United [8:43] States. And I'll say what I said before, which is that we have the very best people and the very [8:46] best technology looking to root these people out and find them. But let's, if the question is, [8:52] what should Americans be afraid of? What has killed Americans since 9-11? It hasn't been people [9:00] sneaking across the border. And that's not to say that the border shouldn't be secure. The border must be [9:04] secure. But what has been killing Americans, whether it was Fort Hood in 2009, I think, whether [9:09] it was the New York attacks that killed eight people in 2017, what we just sadly saw in New Orleans, [9:15] it's actually Americans who are in this country. Actually, in a bizarre number of cases, [9:20] service people. That was the Fort Hood attacks. That was what we saw in New Orleans. That was, [9:24] though I don't, it doesn't seem to be shaping up as a terrorist attack, what we saw in Las Vegas. [9:30] So again, that's hard, right? Why is that hard? Because if you're in this country, [9:35] you have constitutional rights, meaning the FBI can't say without a warrant, I want your Facebook [9:40] posts. I want your emails. That's what makes this very hard. And again, let's look at what has [9:45] actually killed Americans in the 20 years. And sadly, it has been radicalized other Americans. So this [9:51] gets to the question of what are the mechanisms by which they are radicalized? And how can we, [9:57] as a community, push back on that radicalization? Right, which is why I asked you, [10:01] that's a harder problem to solve for. Much harder, because you have constitutional rights. And because, [10:06] you know, let me give you an example. If somebody is standing out on the street corner right now, [10:10] saying ISIS is the greatest thing in the world, and the president is a traitor, [10:14] that, people would say, boy, we should interview that person. That is constitutionally protected speech. [10:20] And I wonder how some of my colleagues would respond to the idea, because this individual in New [10:24] Orleans did post some Facebook posts saying, I pledge allegiance to ISIS. You know, what if we [10:30] had that debate? Should Facebook have instantly submitted that to the FBI? And if so, where's the [10:37] line? If I say, I'm not a big fan of the next president, and I don't believe that he was, you [10:42] know, whatever, should that go to the FBI? It's a tough conversation. Well, Margaret, there's no question [10:47] that that is what we're seeing from New Orleans. But the answer to your question is, [10:52] but no, we don't know where they are. We don't know where the people are. [10:54] The people who have exploited vulnerabilities at the Southwest border. [10:58] That has come across the border, that are terrorists affiliated with ISIS, that [11:02] intend to do Americans harm, that are here in our country. We do not know where they are. And part of [11:08] the work and part of the reason why he's raising the alarm is we need to find them to protect Americans. [11:14] Now, what Jim's saying is absolutely correct. And that, obviously, is the part that also breaks our [11:19] heart and makes what happened in New Orleans so hard is that we had an American who was killing [11:25] Americans. Right. American-born army vet. I want to ask you both about China as well. In terms of [11:33] traditional adversaries, they are looming large here. We learned just in the past few days that [11:38] China hacked the U.S. Treasury Department. This is on top of the major cyber espionage against nine [11:45] telecom companies against hacking of U.S. infrastructure that incoming National Security [11:51] Advisor Mike Walz said was planting cyber time bombs in U.S. infrastructure. How much of a trump [11:58] card is this? I mean, can the U.S. expel China from these systems and get control? So, I mean, [12:05] let's start with what we know. China has been absolutely predatory in just about every dimension. [12:10] They've stolen our IP, our intellectual property. You know, they've manipulated the trading system [12:17] to hollow out our industrial base. Absolutely predatory. And by the way, I happen to believe, [12:21] and I'd be interesting if the chairman agrees with me on this, they believe they can operate [12:25] inside our networks without consequence. And that needs to change immediately. They need to understand [12:29] that we're as good at this stuff as they are. And if they get into our networks and start planting [12:33] beacons or start planting landmines or whatever, we're going to do the same to them so that we [12:37] establish deterrents. Now, you also have to acknowledge that China does and the U.S. do [12:41] about $800 billion in trade back and forth, right? And if you snap your fingers and make that go away, [12:46] you think COVID inflation was bad? Wait till you see that. By the way, they own a trillion dollars [12:50] of our treasury. So the point I'm making here is that I think we need to be a lot tougher on them, [12:55] on the areas in which they are predatory against us, even as we recognize that there are areas where we [12:59] need to tread very carefully, including that economic interconnection. I know that we're going to have you both [13:04] back to talk about exactly this problem. I'm out of time today, but thank you. [13:08] There have to be consequences. What he said. [13:11] We will stay tuned. Face the Nation will be back in one minute. Stay with us. [13:16] Tomorrow marks four years since the attack on the U.S. Capitol. And we spoke to then House Speaker [13:25] Nancy Pelosi just a short while ago this morning. She's recovering from a fall last month. And we began [13:32] by asking her why she thinks so many Americans decided that Donald Trump's support for the rioters [13:39] in 2020 should not disqualify him from a second term as president. I wouldn't say that the American [13:47] people disregarded this. They just had a different view as to what was in their interest economically [13:57] And even just last night at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was screening a documentary about the 2020 election, [14:19] claiming his win and trying to talk about the legal challenges he had. There seems to be a continued [14:28] effort to claim that he won in 2020. It's really sad. It really is sad. And I don't know about the [14:38] film that he had and the rest, but it's almost sick that he would be thinking that in 2020. [14:49] He's won the election now. That will be clear. That will be clear. And tomorrow he will be [14:56] clearly accepting the results of the Electoral College. So he should be triumphant about that. [15:07] But to be still trying to fight a fight that he knows he lost is really sad. [15:15] You know, the president-elect has said that in the first nine minutes of his new term, [15:22] he will pardon many of those who participated in January 6th. He said, [15:26] he'll look at it on a case-by-case basis. But in looking back at what happened four years ago, [15:33] there are recordings, there's video evidence of what happened. And this is personal for you. [15:39] Some of these writers in your office chanting your name. One of them, one of the defendants, [15:45] we were looking for Nancy to shoot her in the friggin' brain, but we didn't find her. For you, [15:52] this is personal. So when you hear about pardons, do you think the nonviolent attackers deserve to be [16:00] pardoned? The nonviolent? I think that's a violent attacker, where the intention- [16:06] The violence itself? Yeah. [16:08] The violent language, you think? The violent language. Yes, the intention. And of course, [16:13] the intention to attack the vice president of the United States. Now, it didn't end that day. As you know, [16:22] you know, he called out to these people to continue their violence, my husband being a victim of all of [16:32] that. And it's still, he still has injuries from that attack. So it just goes on and on. It isn't [16:43] something that happens and then it's over. No, once you are attacked, you have consequences that continue. [16:50] So I don't, it's really a strange person who's going to be president of the United States who [16:59] thinks that it's okay to pardon people who are engaged in an attack. But let's, you know, let's do [17:07] this. Let's just say, okay, to the American people, this is what this is about. Do not be [17:18] conned by the denial of the election of 2020. And why would he be saying that? But he is. And then on top [17:31] of that, the denial of what happened on January 6th. But some of the 1600 defendants here were really [17:42] only charged with trespassing. And when you look at the profiles, University of Chicago did a study, [17:49] half of those who broke into the Capitol were white collar workers. They were small business owners, [17:55] didn't necessarily have a criminal record. When you look at that profile, you said intention. It was the [18:03] intention itself, you think, that needs to be considered. More so than the crime, you know, [18:11] that it casts the crime itself of trespassing in a different light for you. [18:16] Well, the president said he would go on a case by case basis. So I assume that some of those people [18:22] may not have engaged in the violent activities that some of the others did. Look at this beautiful [18:30] Capitol, the dome built by Lincoln. Under Lincoln's leadership during the Civil War, they said, [18:38] don't build the dome. It takes too much steel and person power, manpower, they said, from the war [18:46] effort. And he said, no, I have to show the resilience of America. And then under that dome, you saw, [18:53] you saw flags, the flags, you know, just horrible flags under the dome of Lincoln. [19:05] And so it was a tragedy. And we cannot be in denial about what it was. If the president's going to go [19:16] on a case by case basis, I hope he does. And then maybe trespassers, you would be comfortable with [19:23] pardoning. Well, just depends on how they define what that is. But the but I know that some of that [19:31] that encouragement and then the follow up that that so many people were threatened, including [19:41] me and to my home, looking for me and finding my husband. And as I say, who still suffers from [19:51] head injuries from on that day. So these things don't just happen and go away when you have a head [20:00] injury. But anyway, to to to see the threat to so many people in elective office now going beyond me, [20:09] but so many people in elective office, it shouldn't be a threat to your family that you have chosen [20:16] to do public service. You wrote in your book about that 2022 attack on your husband. And you said your [20:24] daughter told you she had known what you were signing up for. She would never have given you her [20:29] blessing to run for office in the first place. Do you think that this threat of domestic violent [20:35] extremism is having a chilling effect on new talent and anyone running for office? [20:41] Well, I certainly hope not. But over the years when I was encouraging people to run [20:47] for office, especially women, they would say we could never take the [20:53] abuse that you take. And that was really just abuse. It wasn't physical. It was criticism and the rest of [21:01] that. And that we don't want our children subjected to that. And yes, I do think it will have a negative [21:11] impact on people running for public office. Just, you know, in other words, if you're if you're a mom [21:18] and they go after you as a as a mom and your child comes home crying from school because somebody said a [21:28] negative thing because they saw it on TV that the other side said something bad about you, you might not [21:39] run for office. Do you think it will discourage particularly women, particularly women from running? [21:45] Yeah, I do. I mean, I know that it has, but I hope that it will not that we will have shine a bright [21:52] light on this and just say this is unacceptable. This is unacceptable. See, for women, they always [22:02] they always women are known to be more, shall we say, ethical than men. And so when they go after women [22:11] candidates, they go after their ethics and they'll say this, that and the other thing. And then the child [22:19] comes home from school crying because somebody said a bad thing about mom on TV and nobody, nobody wants [22:28] that. So hopefully the bright light shining on that will reduce reduce that. But I think that women have [22:38] proven that they are are more ethical and that they are, well, maybe they're not more ethical, [22:46] they're all ethical, but that they can withstand that criticism. And you can see more of our [22:53] conversation with Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi on our website and our YouTube page. Welcome back to [23:06] Face the Nation. Republicans have full control of Congress, although their majority is small in both [23:12] chambers. We sat down Friday with the new Senate leader, John Thune, and asked if those narrow margins [23:19] would hamstring the party when it came to making major policy changes. It's always challenging, [23:25] and especially in the in this current political environment. We don't always agree among Republicans [23:30] within the family. Particularly among Republicans. But I think when it comes to the big issues, [23:35] securing the border, rebuilding the military, strengthening the economy, you know, generating energy [23:40] dominance for this country, those are all things on which we agree. With respect to even narrow margins, [23:44] I think we're going to have a hopefully a very unified effort when it comes to those core issues. [23:50] We'll disagree on the margins and the process and all that sort of thing. But when it comes to the [23:54] things we need to get done, those are all things I think we agree on. [23:57] You've had disagreements with Donald Trump in the past as part of this advise and consent role, [24:03] the role of the Senate. Will you tell him when you think he's wrong? [24:06] I will. And I think my job is to do everything I can to help him achieve success, be a successful [24:13] president, which in my view means it will be a successful country. We have the same set of [24:17] objectives. We want to get to the same destination. But I think at times there will be differences in [24:22] how we get there. And understanding the unique aspects of how the Senate operates is something [24:27] that I'm going to have to be able to share and convey to the president and help him understand, [24:33] I think, what the contours are of what we can accomplish here in the Senate and what's realistic. [24:38] You have a 53-seat majority over here, which means you can only lose [24:42] three votes if Democrats remain unified in their opposition to some of Mr. Trump's picks [24:48] for his Cabinet. Do you expect them all to make it through? [24:52] What I've promised is a fair process for all of them. When it comes to his picks, [24:55] and I would say this of any president, they deserve a lot of latitude. [24:59] His picks are going to come through a process where if they get reported out of the committee, [25:03] come across the floor of the Senate, we'll make sure that they get the vote. [25:07] And I think that I suspect a lot of them will get through. And we'll see about all of them. [25:13] Remains to be seen. But I think that's why we have the process, adhere to that process, [25:18] and give all of these nominees an opportunity to make their case. [25:20] You've said you have to see if Democrats play ball or not. [25:24] But you don't need Democrats to get these through. [25:27] So does that mean you already know some of your Republican senators won't vote to confirm [25:32] Kash Patel at the FBI or Pete Hegseth at the Pentagon? [25:35] We don't have, at this point, I don't think clarity on that. [25:39] I think these are nominees who are new enough. They've been going around and conducting their [25:43] meetings, which I think, frankly, have gone very well. [25:46] But they still have to make their case in front of the committee. [25:49] And, you know, we don't know all the information about some of these nominees. [25:52] I think we know a lot about them. But they deserve a fair process. [25:56] We have a three-vote margin in the Senate, as you point out. [25:59] But I do think that, in most cases at least, most of our Republican senators are inclined [26:06] to give the president the people that he wants in these positions, [26:10] given, you know, the process that they go through and whether or not they can [26:13] manage the committee process and ensure that they get to the floor for vote. [26:16] Does that include FBI background checks? [26:19] I know often the ranking members get them on armed services, for example. [26:22] But some of your colleagues, they want to see Pete Hegs' FBI background check before they vote. [26:28] Right. And I think that's going to be determined largely by the committee chairs. [26:33] I think there will be an interest, obviously. [26:34] Would you encourage them? [26:36] Well, sure. I mean, I think that you want to have as much background as possible [26:40] that is available to the committees as they make their decisions. [26:43] I have a high level of confidence in our chairs that they will ensure that, [26:47] as members of the committee and of the full Senate have an opportunity to consider these nominees, [26:52] that they've got all of the information available to them that they should have. [26:55] I want to ask you about what you need to get done policy-wise as well, [27:00] in terms of providing the president with the funding to execute on some of his big goals. [27:04] Right. [27:05] You've said you're going to go out of the gate with a generational investment in border security [27:10] and immigration enforcement. [27:11] You're going to pass it on 51 party-line votes. [27:15] If you want to govern through regular order, why go through this in a party-line direction? [27:21] Well, it's one of those issues that has become incredibly divisive for the country, [27:25] and there aren't very many people left in the middle. [27:29] Reconciliation enables us. [27:30] It doesn't come along very often where you have unified control of the government. [27:33] In a lot of cases, it doesn't last very long. [27:35] It's a couple of years. [27:37] The Democrats provided a template in the last couple of years [27:40] for how to expand the scope of what's available to get done [27:44] through the reconciliation process. [27:45] It's the only process in the Senate that enables you to enact legislation [27:50] with a 51-vote threshold as opposed to 60. [27:52] Right. [27:53] And so immigration- [27:54] But it's out of the gate saying we're not going to work with Democrats. [27:57] Well, I'm not saying what- [27:58] They came out of the gate. [27:59] They had their first reconciliation bill done in four weeks, [28:03] coming out of it when they got the majority. [28:04] Two trillion dollars with the COVID bill, and you didn't like it. [28:07] Two trillion dollars. [28:08] You faulted them for using reconciliation. [28:10] And then another trillion with the IRA. [28:11] Exactly. [28:12] It would be ideal if we could figure out a way to do things at the 60-vote threshold. [28:17] And there are a number of things we will. [28:18] We think that a generational investment in the border is necessary, [28:22] given where we are after the last four years of a, [28:25] what I think is a very failed Biden-Harris border policy. [28:28] There are 1.4 million people here with deportation orders, [28:32] orders of removal against them. [28:34] I've seen numbers that put the cost of expelling them at between $80 to $100 billion annually. [28:40] Can you get that kind of money in the first 100 days? [28:43] What we're trying to do is get an assessment from the people who are going to be in place. [28:47] They're going to be implementing a lot of the president's policies when it comes to the border, [28:51] to determine what that resource allocation is going to need. [28:54] They don't know yet. [28:56] Well, I think that what we do know is we need physical barriers. [28:59] We need technological barriers. [29:01] We need more ICE agents. [29:02] We need more Border Patrol agents. [29:04] And, yes, we're going to need ways of deporting people that are on that list that you mentioned. [29:10] And so it's going to take some resources to do that, which is why I would argue [29:13] that when the president takes office, and he's going to do a lot of things on the border, [29:17] by executive order, by executive action, that we're going to need to be able to provide the [29:20] resources in order for him to do that. [29:22] And that's why I've suggested that we take that border issue on right away [29:27] and enable him to do the things that he needs to do. [29:30] Is it true you're going to put some defense spending in that as well? [29:33] Well, I think one of the things that we always argue about around here [29:36] is the amount of money we need to spend on defense. [29:39] If you look at every Biden administration budget, there wasn't a single one of them [29:43] when it came to military spending that kept up even with inflation. [29:46] Mm-hmm. [29:47] So we have a military readiness in this country. [29:50] You know, we have the Defense Commission strategy group that comes out with a report all the time [29:54] and tells us we are dramatically underfunded relative to countries like China. [29:57] And that we don't have the capacity— [29:58] But those should be bipartisan issues, right? [29:59] And we don't have the capacity and the capability to do what needs to be done to protect the country. [30:04] There's a big difference in Delta and the two parties and how they approach the issue of defense [30:09] and, you know, and military readiness. [30:11] And I think we are dramatically underfunding our military today. [30:14] I think the president believes that, President Trump. [30:16] And I think a lot of our Republican colleagues in the House and the Senate share that view. [30:20] So can we do this through reconciliation? [30:23] We're obviously looking at our options. [30:25] I want to make sure I ask you about the other big promise you made [30:28] in terms of delivering on tax reform and reconciliation. [30:31] Right. [30:32] The estimates are it could add $4 trillion over the next decade. [30:36] Is that really something you think is going to pass on a party-line vote [30:41] and without any revenue or spending cuts? [30:45] You can't be comfortable. [30:46] These are tax laws that will expire at the end of this year [30:49] if Congress doesn't take action to extend them. [30:52] And it would represent a $4 trillion tax increase on the American people [30:56] if we don't extend that policy. [30:58] We're going to have a very robust conversation about tax reform. [31:01] There's a lot riding on it economically. [31:03] I think regulatory policy, tax policy, energy policy are going to be really essential [31:07] to the strength of the VR economy, how fast we can grow and expand [31:10] and create better-paying jobs in this country. [31:13] So I'm a big believer in pro-growth tax policy. [31:16] I believe you get a lot of that back through growth and additional revenue. [31:20] Every 1 percent— [31:21] Not tariffs, as Mr. Trump has promised. [31:23] Well, that's a different subject. [31:25] But I would say every 1 percent increase in GDP and economic growth, [31:29] we're told, generates about $3 trillion in additional tax revenue. [31:32] Mm-hmm. [31:33] So you're going to get some back in terms of a growth dividend, [31:35] and there will be spending cuts. There's no question about it. [31:38] But going out of the gate with two big issues on party-line votes, [31:43] aren't you concerned that will blow up your chances [31:45] at working with Democrats on some of those bigger immigration issues or bigger policies? [31:50] We need to continue to work on those big policy issues. [31:52] But I also think we have some immediate concerns, matters that need to be addressed, [31:58] one of which is national security, given the increasingly dangerous world in which we live. [32:02] And, of course, I would argue that that starts with the border. [32:04] So border national security, I think energy policy, [32:07] energy dominance is a huge objective and goal. [32:11] And I would hope that a reconciliation bill could also address that issue. [32:16] If we do something on taxes, that traditionally has been in the past. [32:20] The Democrats did it twice while they had the majority in the last session of the Congress. [32:24] Trump did that in 2017, too, with taxes. [32:26] And both sides have done it, and that's the unique aspect [32:29] of having unified control of the government. [32:31] But I think those are all important, and they are things that, as a country, [32:36] if we don't get right, I fear what the results and the outcome will be. [32:40] And, yes, it would be ideal if you could do it with bipartisan. [32:43] I hope that there are some Democrats who would vote for some of the tax policies that we have, [32:48] but I'm not expecting that at the moment. [32:51] You can see the full interview on our website and YouTube channel. [32:54] We'll be right back. [32:55] President-elect Trump has promised to seal the southern border, [33:03] where illegal crossings are now at a four-year low. [33:06] CBS News immigration and politics reporter Camilo Montoya-Galvez has more from both sides [33:13] of the U.S.-Mexico border. [33:16] This has been a proven deterrent. [33:19] Along the U.S.-Mexico border, Arjun captured a group of migrants, including young children, [33:25] trying to enter the country illegally. [33:27] But they were unable to get past a razor wire set up by the state of Texas. [33:31] Some people may look at this and say, this looks like a war zone. [33:35] The tactic behind all this optic is doing what it just did right now. [33:40] It prevents them from coming over illegally. [33:42] Texas credits its aggressive efforts for the current four-year low in illegal border crossings. [33:48] The Biden administration attributes that drop to asylum restrictions, [33:52] Mexico's efforts to stop migrants, and a phone app known as CBP-1 [33:57] that allows up to 1,500 people per day to schedule legal crossings. [34:04] But on the Mexican side of the border, we found a bottleneck of people desperate to enter the U.S., [34:10] awaiting the appointment under the app. [34:12] President-elect Trump has vowed to shut down the app, [34:15] expand border restrictions, and conduct mass deportations. [34:19] Here in this food pantry in Tijuana, Mexico, migrants from across Latin America can get food, [34:25] water, basic necessities, clothing, and legal services. But now the concern is that the incoming [34:31] Trump administration could derail their plans to make it into the U.S. [34:35] Food pantry director Cristina Coronado worries Trump's plan to shut down the app [34:40] could backfire, prompting more migrants to cross into the U.S. illegally. [34:46] There's a lot of uncertainty. [34:49] Anxiety, too. [34:50] JANE FERGUSONO, Haitian migrant Michele Nelson uses CBP-1 every morning, [34:55] hoping to get her daughter a golden ticket into the U.S. [34:58] Everything you're doing now is for your daughter to have a better future. [35:01] Yes. [35:02] That's all you want. [35:04] Can you? [35:05] Whether that future will be in the U.S. is still to be determined. [35:09] That's our Camilo Montoya Galvez reporting. [35:14] We go now to Tom Homan. He will serve as Mr. Trump's borders are. [35:17] And he joins us this morning from Naples, Florida. [35:20] Good morning to you, sir. [35:21] Good morning. [35:23] Deportations are now at a decade high. They were at the end of 2024. Nearly 300,000 [35:31] people deported by the Biden administration. The incoming administration has promised the [35:37] largest deportation operation in history. What's the number? What's the measure of success? [35:44] Well, let's talk about this administration, what they claim is a huge deportation [35:51] number this year. Actually, if you drill into the numbers, about 80 percent of those numbers were [35:56] actually border patrol arrests that the enforcement move operation of ICE process and moved back [36:01] across the border. They want to enter an enforcement arrest. If you look at the historic number of [36:06] illegal entries the last four years, ICE, Immigration Customs Enforcement, has the lowest number of [36:11] deportations in the history of the agency. So they're playing a numbers game, just like they play [36:16] the numbers game and the number of people coming across the border. Okay. [36:18] So even though they claim we got the highest number of deportations, look at those deportations, [36:22] who actually made those arrests, who actually removed those people. It's not ICE. [36:25] Okay. It's still a higher number than the Trump administration. But I want to ask you, [36:30] for the incoming Trump administration, what's the measure? It is not deportations at the border. [36:36] You're saying you are going to measure success by people who are already internal in the country [36:41] to deport. That's how you're going to measure it. And what's that figure? [36:46] Well, again, let's get the numbers straight. You say they're higher than Trump administration. [36:50] It isn't about how many get deported, because Trump had illegal border crossings at a 45-year low. [36:55] So of course removal is going to be lower. The number is how many were released into the United [36:59] States that are now in the country illegally. Under Biden administration, [37:03] we have millions of people released in the United States who have lost through hearings. [37:06] And we have millions of people that are, you know, released in the United States despite [37:09] a statute saying that you cannot be released in the United States without proper documentation, [37:14] you shall be detained. So you can compare the numbers of deportations under Trump versus Biden. [37:19] But when you consider a 45-year low in crossings, of course the number of deportations is going to [37:25] be lower because we don't have that population to process and deport. [37:29] Okay. Well, I'm just trying to measure success going forward. For day one, can you help us [37:35] understand what the plan is? You know, a number of industries in this country hire undocumented workers [37:45] because they are cheap labor. On day one, are you going to restart raids on work sites, [37:51] on construction sites? [37:52] The President Trump's been clear, as I've been clear from day one, that President is going to [37:59] concentrate on public safety threats and national security threats. And as you heard from your [38:03] previous segments, we have a huge national security issue in this country. The southwest border has [38:08] become the biggest national security vulnerability we've seen in this nation. FBI Director Wray agrees with me. [38:14] We know there's people in this country who pose a national security threat. They've arrested a record [38:18] number of people on the terrorist watch list, a 3500% increase in people on the terrorist watch [38:24] list being arrested at the border. We got over 2 million known gotaways. We know 2 million people [38:29] crossed the border, weren't arrested, weren't vetted, weren't fingerprinted. So you got to ask yourself, [38:33] why did 2 million people pay more to get away? Why didn't they pay less, turn themselves into [38:38] border patrol, get a free airline ticket to the city of their choice, get a free hotel room, [38:42] get three meals a day, get free medical care? Yeah, I'm not disputing that it is a hemisphere-wide [38:47] crisis. We're talking about how you're going to deal with it. That's why I'm asking you, [38:51] when you say criminals, does that mean you are going to go into already existing prisons at local [38:59] level and deport people who are in those prisons? Are you going to go to workforces? I mean, how do you [39:05] know where the criminals are, I guess is the question. And if they're working at a work site, [39:09] are you going to show up to surprise them? Well, look, we know where a lot of the criminals are. [39:16] ICE, ICE does, they're great at this work. We know where some are, but they simply haven't [39:20] been able to go arrest them because the secretary of Mallorca's priorities, it handcuffed ICE. So we [39:27] know where a lot of criminals are. They've been prevented from arresting that we're going to arrest [39:31] starting day one. As far as being in jails and prisons, we would love to work in local jails. [39:36] But sanctuary cities won't allow us into those jails. It's much easier to arrest a public safety [39:41] threat and the safety and security of public jail than out in the street because the officers are [39:47] safer that way, the aliens safer that way, the community is safer that way. But sanctuary cities [39:51] who continues to release public safety threats back in the community, to the immigrant community, [39:55] it puts that community at greater risk of crime. And here's what's going to happen. When we go to the [40:00] community and find that person, find that criminal alien, he's probably going to be with others. [40:04] Others will have to arrest. So it's not safe for the community, not safe for the officers, [40:08] not safe for anybody. Let us arrest a bad guy in a jail cell where you chose to arrest somebody [40:13] and put him in a jail cell because obviously he's a public safety threat. [40:16] Okay. What you just said in there, it sounded like you were talking about collateral arrests. [40:21] So you're going to target people you know are criminals, but if they happen to be living in a house [40:26] where there are other undocumented people, you're going to sweep them up too. [40:29] That's what I think you were just saying there. I wonder how you're going to parse out some of [40:35] those collateral arrests. For example, will Dreamers be protected? Donald Trump has said he wants to [40:41] work with Democrats to protect them and give them status. That takes a long time in Congress. [40:47] What do you do in the meantime? How do you make sure they're not caught up in a dragnet? [40:50] Look, every person I used to arrest, they do what we call a fugitive operation spreadsheet. [40:57] They know exactly who they're going to arrest. They know exactly where they're probably likely to [41:01] find them and they have a lot of information on that arrest. Other people that are there that [41:05] may be illegal, they'll handle by a case-by-case basis. Okay. [41:08] The concentration, I want to be clear on some public safety threats, if more agents in the jails [41:14] means less agents in the neighborhood. That's why I'm pleading with sanctuary cities, [41:18] let us in the jail to arrest the bad guy. That way you're not forcing in the community. [41:23] So, you know, if you go to an immigrant community and ask them, would you rather have ICE operating [41:26] in your local jails? Would you want them in the community? What do you think they're going to say? [41:29] They don't want bad criminal aliens in their neighborhoods either. So let us work with the [41:34] jails. Let us work with law enforcement. Sanctuary cities are not safe for the immigrant [41:39] community. They're not safe for our officers. Okay. So that's like Secure Communities Act kind of [41:44] action. But then where do you send people? Because some of these countries like Venezuela [41:49] don't accept deportations right now. Mexico's president indicated her country might be willing [41:55] to receive non-Mexican migrants who are deported. How does that work? Does the U.S. pay Mexico to then [42:02] ship those people off somewhere else? Well, first of all, we got President Trump [42:07] coming to the Oval Office and he's proven during his first administration his leadership on illegal [42:13] immigration was a game changer because, for instance, El Salvador wouldn't take back MS-13 [42:17] members when I was the ICE director. It took President Trump 48 hours to get El Salvador to [42:22] take back their criminal aliens into their prisons. And Mexico didn't want to do the Remain in Mexico [42:26] program, but President Trump was able to get Remain in Mexico established in Mexico. He was able to [42:32] get Mexico put military in the southern and northern border. President Trump's a strong president. [42:36] This administration has not forced these countries to take them back. And we have what we call [42:40] a third-safe country. We already have countries talking about taking back people from other [42:44] countries. If, for instance, Venezuela don't want to take their people back, [42:48] there's other ways we can do it. There's other countries to be willing to accept them. [42:51] We're hoping that President Trump will work with Venezuela like he did with Mexico and El Salvador [42:56] and get these countries taken back. If they don't, they're still going to be deported. They're [43:00] just going to be deported to a different country. We're not going to be held up by removing [43:03] public state districts in this country. We got to put the safety of the American people first. We've had too [43:08] many young women murdered and raped and burned alive by members of Venezuela and gangs. They [43:14] need to be a priority under this administration. They're going to be a priority starting day one, [43:17] and they will be deported. We will stay tuned for the details. Border Czar Tom Homan, [43:22] thank you for your time. We'll be back in a moment. Yesterday marked the beginning of a series of [43:30] public remembrances for former President Jimmy Carter, who died last Sunday at the age of 100. [43:36] Mark Strassman reports. A moment long in the making for those who served for so long. Jimmy Carter's [43:44] Secret Service detail, present and past, escorting his casket to the presidential hearse. [43:49] Plains is a tourist town and President Carter is our favorite sign. He has molded this town. [43:57] This is the end of an era here in Plains. Jimmy Carter was their friend, their neighbor, [44:02] this small community's identity. He was everything that America should have been, [44:07] and he really meant a lot to people around here. Outside his boyhood farm, a bell tolled 39 times. [44:17] Saluting America's 39th president. At the Carter Presidential Center in Atlanta, [44:24] Marines carried in the casket. Jimmy Carter will lie in repose through Tuesday morning. Five more days of [44:31] remembrances will honor a former president and globe-rotting humanitarian. [44:36] He was held up and propped up and soothed by an amazing woman. And the two of them together [44:44] changed the world. Starting Tuesday morning, America's final salute will shift to Washington, [44:49] D.C. for two days of remembrance. That was our Mark Strassman reporting. [44:56] Be sure to tune in to CBS News for our coverage of America's farewell to Jimmy Carter. [45:02] On Tuesday, the former president will lie in state at the U.S. Capitol. And on Thursday, [45:07] the state funeral at the National Cathedral. We'll be right back. [45:14] That's it for us today. Thank you all for watching. Until next week. [45:18] For Face the Nation, I'm Margaret Brennan.