Face the Nation: Kaine, Cassidy, Crawford

[0:00] We turn now to Virginia Democratic Senator Tim Kaine, who joins us from Brussels. Good morning [0:05] to you, Senator. Great to be with you, Margaret. Thanks. Because you are in Europe, I want to ask [0:13] you about exactly what is going on with the U.S. Army Europe General Chris Donahue. We know he was [0:20] ordered by Secretary Hegseth to turn in his retirement papers. He's going to relinquish [0:25] command July 2nd, relinquish NATO command July 9th. Do you have any indication why this very [0:31] well-respected general is getting pushed out the door? Margaret, I am in Europe with a bipartisan [0:39] delegation of senators visiting NATO allies and our troops, talking primarily about NATO, [0:46] summit next week, and support for Ukraine. I will say on General Donahue, a lot of questions and [0:51] very few answers. He was very well-regarded in the Armed Services Committee, where I sit, [0:57] both sides of the aisle, thought really highly of him. And so the news that he was being ushered out [1:03] caught us all by surprise, and we don't yet have good answers from the Pentagon. [1:07] Well, it's part of a bigger question as to the changes Secretary Hegseth is making at the Pentagon. [1:15] Retired Admiral Bill McRaven, people know him from commanding the raid to take out Osama bin Laden. [1:22] He wrote a piece in The Atlantic raising concerns about the exit and the firing of at least 12 other [1:28] high-ranking military officials. He explained officers need to be brutally candid in order [1:34] to give good advice. He said these recent firings raise a real risk. Senior officers will be overly [1:41] cautious about providing their best advice, and therefore the chance for military miscalculation [1:46] will grow dramatically. How concerned are you? Can Congress intervene and do anything here? [1:55] Well, I don't think that concern is misplaced. We're worried about the same thing. Are you [1:59] are you pushing out the truth-tellers to surround yourself by yes-men? And in particular, it looks [2:05] like the Secretary is coming down hardest, coming down hardest on the Army. He served in the Army. He [2:12] felt like he wasn't treated well by the Army. That's a grudge he's carried that he's described [2:17] publicly. And so when you see Army officers forced out, you got to wonder, is this a personal thing, [2:24] or is it really what's best for the nation? So we are working on the defense bill right now. We've [2:30] we voted it out of the Senate Armed Services Committee. There's nothing in the bill at this [2:36] point that would address this situation. But when we bring it up on the floor, I think by then we'll [2:41] have some of our questions answered. And if we need to go farther to put some guardrails in place, [2:46] you'll probably find bipartisan support to do that. What are you hearing from your NATO partners [2:51] there about the American plans to reduce the presence in Europe? So it would be difficult to [2:59] reduce the presence in Europe based upon some NDAA provisions that we have put in place that kind of [3:05] set a floor in terms of U.S. troop strength. And here's the good news, Margaret, both because of [3:12] President Trump, but also, frankly, because of the actions of Vladimir Putin. European nations are [3:18] really stepping up their investment in their collective defense. They see the need to do it. [3:24] And they understand that the United States is right there with them. There's some political churn, [3:30] no doubt about it. European nations are not only concerned about rhetoric coming out of the White [3:34] House, they see a chaotic tariff policy as hurting their economies. But they also see the U.S. [3:41] continuing to make sizable investments in European defense, troop presence. The Senate version of [3:47] the armed services bill that we just passed has sizable investments for the defense of Ukraine. [3:53] And I think you're going to see some positives coming out of the NATO summit next week. That's my [3:57] expectation. So you just mentioned the defense bill that is so significant. And we looked and you [4:05] said that for the first time in your 13 years on the committee, you voted against it. I understand [4:11] you have objections to the Iran war. But given the significant military community you have in [4:16] Virginia and the need the military says it has, how can you defend that? [4:24] Margaret, it was one of the hardest votes I've cast in 13 years in the Senate. But [4:28] here was the reason. President Trump is seeking at least a 40 percent increase in the defense budget [4:35] in one year. He hasn't really told us where that money's coming out of. Is it coming out of education? [4:41] Is it coming out of health care? And to vote for that kind of an increase without knowing where [4:47] we're going to pull the money from in the middle of a war that I think is illegal, unnecessary and foolish. [4:54] And also to support that kind of an increase without guardrails about how the money is spent, [4:59] I just couldn't do it. Part of protecting our Virginia troops and going to bat for them [5:04] is making sure that they're that when we use troops, especially we go to war, we do it the right way, [5:09] not the wrong way. Our troops have deployed into the Middle East often over the last 25 years. [5:15] And an illegal war for us kind of a suspect rationale. That's no way to treat our troops. [5:22] Well, I need to talk to you about more in regard to this, but I have to take a commercial break. [5:27] So please stay with us if you would. Senator Cain there in Brussels. We'll be right back. [5:34] In just under a week, America will be celebrating its 250th birthday, [5:38] and we hope you'll join CBS for a special presentation of the festivities. [5:42] The Great American Block Party airs at 8 p.m. Eastern on the CBS Broadcast Network, CBS 247, [5:48] as well as Paramount+. Welcome back to Face the Nation. We return to our conversation with [6:00] Virginia Democratic Senator Tim Kaine. Senator, I want to ask you a little bit about what's [6:05] happening here at home. There were three far left candidates handpicked by New York City Mayor [6:11] Mamdani, who won last week over more centrist candidates. Some are looking at that and saying, [6:18] the reach of the left wing of your party seems to be expanding. And here is what President Trump said. [6:25] Take a listen. It's becoming a communist party. [6:29] These are not social Democrats. These are hardcore, godless communists. They're godless communists. [6:36] All communists are godless. They don't believe in God. This is the most serious threat to our country [6:42] since its existence. What do you make of that attack here? And do you have concerns that the [6:51] progressive platform of some members of the party will make it more difficult to win in other parts [6:58] of the country headed into November? Margaret, what the president said is just goofy word salad. [7:07] I'm not an expert on New York House races. I am an expert on Senate races. And we have got Senate [7:12] candidates all over this country working to flip red seats blue by focusing on the president's [7:19] mismanagement of the American economy. Families are suffering cost increases because of chaotic tariffs, [7:26] illegal war, and focus on goofy things like ballrooms, arches, and the reflecting pool. [7:33] And in Virginia, the House races, I've got four Democratic challengers running to flip red seats [7:38] blue who are focused on that same kind of cost and affordability agenda that led us to have a landslide [7:44] win in state races last fall. So I can't really explain, you know, what's on the voters' minds in New York [7:51] city congressional races. But I know it's on Virginians' minds, and I think I know what's on [7:55] Americans' minds. Let's focus on the economy and bringing costs down, not foolish wars and chaos. [8:01] Well, as Senator Alyssa Slotkin of Michigan said, the party needs significant new leadership because [8:07] the old models are not working. And she pointed a finger at leadership. Leader Jeffries, Leader Schumer [8:13] said they need to make room for others who can adapt if they cannot. Do you agree with her assessment? [8:21] Well, I don't know exactly the context in which she was making it. Look, I do think some of these [8:25] elections can show that there's a desire for new, and it's a tough environment for incumbents. [8:32] And that, I think, works to the Democrats' advantage in November. Remember, primaries are interesting, [8:38] but where you really make the difference is not trading out one Democrat for another or one Republican [8:43] for another. Where you make the difference is flipping a seat from red to blue. And it is a challenging [8:49] environment for incumbents, but that's going to work to Democrats' advantage in November. [8:52] So you will continue to support Chuck Schumer as leader? [8:58] I, yes, he is. He was one of the best majority leaders we've had in a long time. And if he gets [9:03] the chance, he's going to be a good majority leader going forward. [9:06] Well, just to pick up on something Senator Cassidy said he was talking about [9:10] health care affordability. Is there any Democratic plan for health care or opportunity to work across [9:15] the aisle? There is. And look, Bill has been a good chairman. I agree with him on a lot. We have [9:22] some disagreements, but he's been a good chairman of the health committee. And we're working on some [9:27] affordability issues. For example, we have a bipartisan bill that we've enacted some pieces of, [9:32] but we could do more to rein in pharmaceutical costs by more effective regulation of the PBMs, [9:38] the pharmacy benefit managers. On the Democratic side, we want to reverse some of the harmful [9:44] Medicaid cuts that the Republicans put in place a year ago. And we've had some interest by some [9:49] Republicans in that. But reversing those Medicaid cuts and the cuts to SNAP benefits is something [9:54] that we feel very, very strongly about as Democrats. [9:57] Senator Kaye, thank you for joining us this morning. We'll have to leave it there. [10:01] And we return now to our conversation with Republican Senator and Dr. Bill Cassidy. [10:07] Let me ask you about your role on this powerful committee overseeing health policy. [10:15] You were recently raising concern that the World Cup and some of these other mass gatherings happening [10:19] in the United States run the risk of transmission at mass scale of some of these diseases right now. [10:27] Given the cuts to personnel, given the concern you have about what's happening inside these [10:33] institutions, is American public health up to dealing with this level of risk? [10:40] Well, we would, one, we don't know the complete effort that's being taken, okay? [10:45] You don't. [10:46] Well, the Center for Disease Control, for example, has many things going on at any one moment that no [10:52] one person knows unless you're directly involved in the agency. And so let me just say that. And I [10:57] have no doubt that there's a commitment to making sure that there is not a widespread dissemination of [11:02] disease at one of these mass events. I'll say that as well. We do see the consequences, [11:07] though, of ignoring the benefits that things like vaccines brings for public health. And if you will, [11:14] I think what you're going after is that this administration, parts of it, have tried to [11:18] downplay the importance of immunization. The Secretary of War, Hegseth, recently did away with the flu mandate, [11:27] and then there was a big outbreak of flu in one of their military outfits. Yes. If you ignore history, [11:37] history doesn't necessarily repeat, but it has a rhythm. And we can look back in World War I, where [11:43] the Spanish flu went through, decimating armies. But one of the reasons the Germans collapsed is because [11:49] so many people died from Spanish flu that they had and didn't have manpower to fulfill that their lines [11:54] begin to collapse. Combat readiness means preventing disease. And if you want to be combat ready, [12:01] you don't want everybody out with the flu. But he was following the Secretary of Health and Human [12:06] Services push for medical freedom. So if you see that, you can see we have a mutual obligation. [12:13] When our founding fathers pledge their life, their fortune, and their sacred honor, there is a sense [12:20] that we all have to, one, achieve, to achieve those inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the [12:26] pursuit of happiness. There has to be also a spirit of sacrifice among everyone else. And so, if we're [12:32] speaking about how to protect others, obviously, more people being immunized makes it less likely that [12:39] someone else gets ill. There is a consequence to not obeying the science of immunization. And one is [12:45] children dying from measles, as has occurred, and thousands getting sick with many in the hospital. [12:51] So, I would argue, unfortunately, facts can be a tough, tough teacher. Protect yourself, [13:00] talk to your doctor. But society has a vested interest, as we all do, and we all being protected. [13:06] We now have a longtime vaccine skeptic who is running HHS, who in private practice sued vaccine makers. [13:14] How much harm has he done? Or do you believe that he has restored trust in public health, [13:21] as you thought he might do? Well, he has not restored trust in public [13:24] health. And you can see the administration, if you believe the press accounts, are trying to limit [13:28] his range of activity. Polling shows that the American people understand that vaccines are important. [13:33] And for someone to be out there saying that they're not goes against their experience. And again, [13:37] if you look at the measles outbreak, in which thousands of kids got measles, with the consequences of [13:43] that. Clearly, the American people understand immunization is important. So, I think you can [13:51] see the administration responding to the American people's awareness that folks should be vaccinated. [13:56] But we looked at the vaccination rates, which have plummeted. There is not a single county or [14:01] parish in Louisiana where kindergarten rates meet herd immunity protection levels for measles, [14:07] meaning it could still be transmitted. Why do you think that is happening, particularly in red [14:13] states like yours? Well, as Kennedy says, it's not his fault this predated him, even though he had [14:19] been working on the issue. Yeah. So, so leaving that aside, we can look back two things. One, [14:25] people have not seen that illness. They've not seen illnesses. So, if you've not been exposed to [14:31] something, sometimes it's a little bit harder to imagine that it can occur to you. If you've never had [14:35] somebody who's had a child who's deeply mentally retarded because they, the mama was exposed to a disease [14:41] while the child was in utero, you may not be able to relate to it. What we're going to find, though, [14:47] is that people see these terrible events. When they see children die, a woman abort, perhaps a child [14:54] unfortunately born mentally retarded, then they will have greater understanding. Facts can be a tough [15:01] teacher, but they do teach. Do you see Secretary Kennedy learning from those facts? Is he open to those facts? [15:09] He and I have had multiple conversations, text messages going back and forth and emails. And he [15:16] seems pretty dug in on his positions. And whatever you bring to the table, for some reason, is not [15:22] adequate. So I don't see him changing his mind. Do you think he's going to still be here after you [15:29] leave in January? He serves at the president's pleasure. And so I can't answer that. You've called [15:34] forward some of these former CDC officials to share with you what's happening inside public health. [15:40] Secretary Kennedy went on television and made false claims about the MMR vaccine, [15:44] even claiming there were fetal parts in it. You had CDC officials saying that the secretary is out [15:50] there in the middle of a measles epidemic telling people false information. Why isn't that disqualifying [15:58] for the job? Well, first, he's already in the job. And so again, he serves at the president's pleasure. [16:04] And you think the president is now aware that this is a problem? [16:08] The polling, just what I read in the paper, the White House has seen polling that shows the [16:14] American people rightly understand that immunization is important. And they see these [16:19] measles outbreaks and they understand that folks under that the American people, whoa, [16:25] we're not getting immunized. And now we have children dying from measles. We have people in [16:28] the hospital because of measles. We have schools that can't open because of measles. [16:31] And so the administration clearly has gotten off the anti-vaccine message [16:40] into something more positive. By the way, let's give the secretary credit. He is very much into [16:46] ultra-processed foods. If that's where he stayed, our country would be really much better off. [16:51] But the concept that immunizations somehow are bad has been clearly disproven by life experience, [16:59] because what's happening is people getting sick, in some cases dying. And the administration clearly [17:04] has moved away from that. Well, there's no Senate-confirmed surgeon general, no Senate-confirmed [17:09] CDC director. There hasn't been for nine months now. No Senate-confirmed FDA chief. 13 of the 27 NIH [17:15] centers are currently run by acting directors. Is this a problem? Is this something you want [17:20] to move through by the time you leave? Clearly, it is a problem, if you will, [17:26] that would reflect a wider problem at HHS. That just goes without saying. Lack of stability is a [17:34] problem. But there are people nominated for some of these positions. We will process them in this [17:41] committee, the committee I'm chair of, the help committee, we're in the help committee room, [17:44] as soon as we get their paperwork. That's something we just have to have. There's a process you go [17:49] through. But I've met with the nominee for the surgeon general, and I met with the nominee for CDC [17:55] director and very favorably impressed. And so I imagine they will, I can't speak for everybody, [18:01] but I imagine they will be approved. And so progress is being made. Well, I mean, the current CDC autism [18:07] and vaccines page has a heading that says vaccines do not cause autism, very clearly. But there's an [18:13] asterisk next to it. And it says it's up there due to an agreement with you, the chair of the committee. [18:21] Do you think there will be strong oversight after January? Do statements like that disappear? [18:27] I cannot tell you that it's going to disappear. Excuse me. I can tell you that that broke an [18:34] agreement that I had with the secretary, that that was not supposed to happen. So once you lose trust [18:39] in somebody, you're not quite sure what to trust going forward. In fact, you don't trust anything. [18:44] It should go away, because the evidence is that that is not the case. That is a prejudice being [18:50] brought. And by the way, if you build public health upon a foundation of lies, [18:56] then you're going to have the absence of adequate public health. You need to build everything in [19:03] life on truth. I go back to being a doctor. You've got to search for the truth and use the truth for [19:09] your solutions. That sounds kind of, oh my gosh, no, that's the only way you make the correct diagnosis [19:15] and the correct. This is not true. And there'll be a consequence of it. And that consequence, [19:20] unfortunately, will be borne by those who actually are influenced by it. I will say, [19:26] except for, except for news anchors, very few people read the CDC website. And so I'm not sure [19:31] how much influence that has, how much negative influence that has. But the message is hurt. I [19:36] mean, from the president United States on social media account, [19:38] I'm not sure how much that does, but that's false. It is wrong. And if you build a position based upon [19:56] lies, upon falsehoods, that position cannot stand. I am a doctor searching for truth, both for the [20:03] diagnosis of the problem and how do you cure it. In this case, autism is, oh my gosh, don't, [20:09] doesn't our heart go out for those parents who have autism, but putting them on a guilt trip [20:13] because they gave their child a Tylenol or they took Tylenol when they were pregnant is not the answer. [20:19] You don't make that mom guilty. What you do is you invest those resources into finding the true answer. [20:24] You said that secretary Kennedy broke promises to you. It's pretty clear. [20:29] Do you think he just made those promises to win your vote, that it was just political expediency? [20:35] Easy to surmise. [20:37] You hate the question of whether you regret your vote. Can you explain why you said yes? [20:45] Bobby Kennedy was going to have the ear of the president. The president seems to be fascinated [20:51] with the Kennedys. So either he was going to be in a position where there are guardrails, [20:57] and I did have commitments made as to kind of guardrails, or he was going to be appointed White House [21:02] Health Czar, in which case he would have the president's ear without the guardrails. Now, [21:09] now, I had to make a decision. He's going to have the president's ear. Is it going to be with some [21:14] sort of guardrails where there'd be a commitment to meet on a quarterly basis in which there could be [21:18] regular communication, in which there would be kind of an agreement that I would have, you know, [21:23] obviously as a chair, I have some role in terms of the people who assist him, or would he be an [21:28] unappointed, it should be a non-senate confirmed health care czar? That's kind of my choice, [21:34] and I chose, you can criticize it, but I chose to have the one with the guardrails. [21:38] Do you think you reined him in? The commitment? It would have been worse? I don't, um, well, [21:46] that is something that you cannot know. We can't go back in time and say, [21:52] White House Czar. But we do know the president is very influenced by Bobby Kennedy. But you don't [21:57] think he should be in that job? At this point, the commitments that were made to me have been [22:03] violated. When commitments are made, trust is destroyed. It's difficult to have effectiveness. [22:09] By the way, I once read trust is the coin of the realm. If you lose trust, you lose everything here. [22:15] And by the way, the ability to work with others is essential for our government to function, essential. [22:21] The head of the political action group, Make America Healthy Again, or MAHA, says they poured [22:26] hundreds of thousands of dollars into your primary race. Do you think it made a discernible difference? [22:32] TO BEAT ME, I had a governor, a state legislature, a president, cabinet officials and members of [22:37] Congress all coming at me. And they obviously succeeded. But we used to have an open primary, [22:43] in which 1.2 million people could vote for or against me. And they closed it to 400,000, [22:48] trying to distill it down to those who are least likely to vote for me. And among those people, [22:54] the critical issue is, who did the president endorse? He endorsed somebody different. [22:59] AMY WALTER, And so — [23:00] AMY WALTER, He openly encouraged a primary challenger. [23:02] TO BEAT ME, Absolutely. And so — so — and we know why. I voted to uphold the Constitution. [23:08] The president was offended by that. But that said, it took all that effort in order to beat me. [23:14] So in one way, I'm complimented. MAHA, they just supported my state's economy, [23:18] because the real issue is, who did the president endorse? [23:22] AMY WALTER, The advocacy group MAHA Action touted the win [23:26] as the MAHA movement's taking its first scalp by defeating you. [23:32] TO BEAT ME, That's a press release they're going to put out to try and raise money. [23:35] It was the president's endorsement period, end of story. [23:37] AMY WALTER, Secretary Kennedy testified last year that he is complying with all the agreements he made [23:44] with Senator Cassidy. We did reach out to HHS to confirm that the secretary still believes that, [23:50] but we did not hear back. We have requested an interview with the secretary for this broadcast, [23:55] and we will continue to do so. Our full conversation with Senator Cassidy can be [24:00] viewed on our website and our YouTube channel. We'll be right back. [24:05] The Supreme Court is on the verge of wrapping up this session for some analysis on last week's [24:10] key decisions. And to look ahead to these last few cases, we turn to Chief Legal Correspondent [24:15] Jan Crawford. Jan, it's always the hardest ones at the end. [24:20] We know the Supreme Court ruled the president or the DHS secretary can decide, the courts cannot, [24:27] on the right to cancel temporary humanitarian protections or TPS designations for Haitians [24:32] and Syrians. That was a decision, but it had bipartisan outcry because and part of the impact [24:37] on the economy. Should we expect everyone here on TPS to be expelled sometime soon? [24:43] No. I mean, that will take some time. They're, you know, going to lose their legal status, work [24:49] permits. But there will be some process as this kind of unfolds because they will now be subject to [24:55] deportation. But advocates say that they could have other grounds for staying in this country, [25:00] some of the people. And so it really will have to be done more on a case by case basis. Now, [25:04] this was just one of two of the big immigration wins for the president last week. And in this case, [25:09] it actually could go beyond the Haitians and the Syrians, some 350,000 who now are subject to [25:16] deportation. President Trump is wanting to end or will be ending now 13 of the 17 countries [25:24] that currently have temporary protected status for people from those countries. So we're talking [25:29] upwards of 1.5 million people who now could be subject to deportation. [25:34] So on this particular ruling, the lawyers for the Haitian immigrants argued the administration's [25:40] decision to revoke TPS and specifically the president's own language was racially based and [25:46] therefore in violation of equal protection. I just want to read a few of the things he said. [25:51] The president said Haitian immigration is like a death wish for the country. [25:54] They probably have AIDS. He falsely claimed they're eating cats and dogs. You remember that [25:59] from the presidential race. And he described Haiti with a word that I can't say on this network. [26:06] Why did the court look at that and say, this is not racial animus? [26:11] Because of the sweep of the president's efforts to end these TPS designations for 13 of 17 countries. [26:18] Right. And, you know, Trump wants to end almost all of them. So they're not just singling out Haiti. [26:24] So they had a race neutral reason. And the court said that that was sufficient. [26:28] So among the other decisions, asylum, Stephen Miller, the architect of a lot of these policies, [26:34] stood on the White House lawn and says America's doors are fully closed to asylum seekers. [26:39] Yeah, I mean, no, not quite. I mean, it certainly could be severely restrictive. But this case was [26:45] about a program that started under the Obama administration and President Trump expanded. [26:49] It's not even an operation right now. It's called metering. And it allows agents, when there's a lot [26:55] of people trying to come into the country at one time. It's just overcrowded to stand at the border [27:00] and turn people back. Well, that conflicts with federal immigration law. What does that mean for [27:04] federal immigration law? Because you have to be physically present or have arrived in the country [27:10] to apply for asylum or to seek admission. And so this case turned on what did the statute say? [27:16] What does it mean to have arrived in the country? And the Supreme Court said arrived in means you're in the [27:21] country on U.S. soil, not standing on the front yard, you know, front yard of the country. And I think if [27:27] you look at both of these immigration cases, they both turn on what Congress said, temporary protected [27:34] status. Congress created that in 1990. And it says courts have no role in reviewing the president's [27:40] determinations. So that's what the court ruled. But Congress can change these laws. And if you don't [27:46] like it, they can change them. And that I think is a real theme that we're seeing from the Supreme Court. [27:51] It's reinforcing the idea that elections have consequences. And who you vote for, [27:56] whether in Congress or for the White House, that matters. And if they can actually legislate. [28:02] Very quick decisions. Transgender, birthright, how are these going to go? Well, I think it's going to be [28:07] a mixed bag for the president. He'll lose birthright, but he may get a win on another firing executive [28:12] officers. All right. We'll be back in a moment. Thanks for watching. For Face the Nation, I'm Margaret Brennan.