Sen. Mark Warner, Gov. Kathy Hochul and more — Face the Nation Full Broadcast - July 19, 2026

[0:01] I'm Margaret Brennan in Washington and this week on Face the Nation, two American troops are dead [0:06] and one missing after an Iranian missile hit. The U.S. military has launched retaliatory strikes. [0:15] Eight consecutive nights of American bombing marks a return to U.S. combat in the Mideast. [0:21] We'll have the latest with Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chair Mark Warner. [0:25] The exchange of fire comes amid a turbulent week at home with the president facing questions on [0:31] everything from immigration enforcement to tariff threats against Canada. Yet in a fiery [0:37] primetime address last week he chose to focus on election security and his 2020 loss. [0:43] I'm announcing the immediate declassification and release of critical intelligence [0:49] revealing shocking vulnerabilities in our election infrastructure. [0:54] A decision some members of his own party are now questioning. [0:58] I don't understand talking about what happened six years ago in light of these upcoming elections. [1:07] We'll examine the president's claims with CBS News election law contributor David Becker and former [1:12] cybersecurity chief Chris Krebs, who was fired by Trump for asserting that the 2020 elections were [1:19] secure. Plus, New York Governor Kathy Hochul on per state's new data center moratorium. [1:25] And White House boarder czar Tom Homan on growing scrutiny of ICE operations. [1:30] And finally, is inflation cooling? We'll ask Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan whether [1:37] Americans can expect relief on affordability. It is all just ahead on Face the Nation. [1:43] Good morning and welcome back to Face the Nation. America is back at war. There were new exchanges [2:03] of fire this morning with Iran launching missiles at U.S. partners in Jordan, with Israel warning that [2:10] could spill into their territory and widen the conflict. Overnight, the U.S. targeted Iranian drone [2:16] and missile sites after Iran's Revolutionary Guard killed two American service members and injured [2:22] others. One service member is still missing from that attack. These are the first deaths of U.S. [2:28] troops since the fighting resumed two weeks ago. To date, 16 American troops have died in this [2:34] conflict with Iran. For more now, we begin with the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence [2:39] Committee, Democrat Mark Warner of Virginia. Senator, good morning to you. You are part of the [2:46] very small group of people on Capitol Hill who are supposed to have sensitive information shared with [2:53] them. Since this was the second hit in about two days on a base where Americans are in Jordan, do you have [3:01] any insight into why they were able to penetrate those American defenses? First of all, condolences to [3:08] the service members' families. And it's remarkable in many ways that we've not had more casualties. We [3:15] literally have hundreds of seriously wounded, but I think we're at 16 fatalities. I would argue, Margaret, [3:22] this is what happens when you start a war of choice. And as a member of the Gang of Eight, I can say [3:27] unequivocally there was no imminent threat from Iran. You start a war of choice without a plan. [3:34] And very briefly, if you go through what the administration finally said their goals were, [3:38] regime change, well, the guys in charge now are worse than the prior crowd. [3:42] Getting the enriched uranium, no progress on that. It'll take 15,000 troops on the ground. Nobody wants to [3:48] do that. 15,000. 15,000 been the minimum assumption you'd need to go into these bunkers, [3:53] take out this enriched uranium and canisters would be very difficult. The Iranians would be shooting at [3:58] them. Nobody has been moving on that. We said we were going to degrade their ability to use missiles [4:05] and drones. Obviously, we've not been successful. On that point, it gets me particularly crazy because [4:11] we're using missiles that cost $2.5 million to shoot down Iranian drones that cost $50,000. [4:18] And the country that has figured out how to do this cheaply, efficiently is Ukraine. [4:22] They can take out Iranian drones with $5,000 drones and we turn down their offer of their technology. [4:28] And then finally, the Strait of Hormuz, you know, gas is now back up to $4.00. That's $1.20 more than it [4:34] was, at least in Virginia when the war started. And there is no plan on how we keep the Strait open. [4:39] Well, the president said he might look at that drone deal. You're right. It hasn't been followed [4:44] through on yet. But just to put a fine point on it, back in May, the U.S. sanctioned Chinese [4:50] entities for helping Iran's military secure weapons and satellite imagery. Does this direct hit signal [4:57] to you they are getting targeting help from our adversaries? I have not been briefed on whether [5:02] they're getting targeting help. I do know that these bases have been on and off under attack since [5:09] the beginning five months ago of, again, this war of choice. [5:12] Okay. I want to move to another topic, and that is the Director of National Intelligence. [5:18] Jay Clayton, who is currently the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, [5:22] seemed unaware under questioning this week that Tulsi Gabbard had been searching an election center [5:28] down in the state of Georgia, something that she does not have the legal mandate to do. [5:33] The president has also tasked Bill Pulte, the acting DNI, to dig up information on 2020. [5:40] You pressed Jay Clayton on who won the 2020 election, and he said Joe Biden was certified as president. [5:48] Is that sufficient for you? Do you intend to vote him out of committee? How quickly will this happen? [5:55] I've known Jay for a long time. I like Jay. I worked well with him when he was at the SEC, [6:01] but I was bitterly disappointed by his performance in front of my committee. Not just from my questions, [6:07] but from many of my colleagues, or even kind of acting like he didn't understand what Gabbard [6:12] had done in Fulton County. So I will be voting against Jay Clayton. [6:18] So he won't advance out of committee? He will advance out, as long as all the Republicans vote for him. [6:23] He will advance out. And we're a little rock and a hard place here. [6:28] I hope, I know Jay Clayton will probably get confirmed. I hope we see the Jay Clayton that [6:33] I've known and have worked with. The one thing I also know is the absolute disaster we have right [6:38] now with the acting DNI, Bill Pulte, who has no intelligence experience, who has nothing but loyalty [6:45] to Trump, and frankly, a past history when he was head of the Fannie and Freddie of taking private [6:50] mortgage information and politically weaponizing that. That is not the kind of person we want in [6:56] as DNI. So you want a quick replacement, but you're not going to vote for his replacement, [7:01] though you think he's got the Republican votes to actually get the job soon? [7:06] I hope so. You hope so. [7:08] The president, as you know, declassified intelligence this past week. He argues there's [7:13] vulnerabilities in infrastructure. It has been public for years that the intelligence community [7:19] assessed China tried to influence the U.S. election, basically change what people think, [7:24] not necessarily hack their ballots, so to speak. Listen to what he said here, though. [7:30] This evidence shows that the election system we have dangerously exposes and really exposes, [7:38] like levels never thought possible, to hacking, exploitation, and foreign interference. [7:47] Has your committee been given evidence to back up those claims that suggest a direct ability to [7:54] interfere? No, absolutely not. And matter of fact, there are so many absurdities and falsehoods [8:03] in Trump's Thursday night speech, and I'm glad that most media treated it not as serious news. And I know [8:09] some folks at your network, the journalists, I have huge respect for. I was disappointed that your [8:14] senior management made the decision to cover it as news. There's so many falsehoods already begin. [8:21] The only election that Trump is concerned about is 2020. That was the election that his [8:26] administration was in charge of. Matter of fact, the director of national intelligence, [8:31] Mr. Radcliffe, it was DNI then. He's CIA director now. If there was mistakes made, why is he CIA [8:39] director? You know, he goes through this focus on China when he forgets or just omits the biggest [8:48] country that tries to influence on every election is Russia. We've documented that time and again. [8:54] And the complete conclusion of the intelligence community, 18 different agencies said, yes, [9:01] folks tried to influence, didn't mean they changed any vote, and they sure didn't interfere in the [9:05] machinery. Now, when he talks about getting all these voter files, you can buy those. They're [9:10] commercially available. What we should be more concerned about is the fact that China hacked into [9:14] the OPM, which gives the background on all federal employees, or when they hacked into some of our [9:19] insurance companies, and they've got personal information on each of us. But the idea that they, [9:24] and I would bet you a dozen other countries have bought up voter files, or knows in politics, [9:29] you don't run in a state like mine, you know, I have to buy the voter file to figure out who to contact [9:33] my, as my last vote. No, and some of my colleagues here have obtained them. You went on websites and [9:38] showed you can do that publicly. I'm wondering though, since the Trump administration has been [9:43] in office for so long now, have they released to the Intelligence Committee their analysis of the [9:49] 2024 election that President Trump won? What degree of foreign influence or interference was there? [9:56] We have not had it released. Why? Not the foggiest idea. Okay. [10:02] Because literally the 2020 election, which was so much hubbub about, it was, [10:09] the president was briefed on January 7th, 2025. So, you know, literally, [10:18] actually that was after the January 2021. There's no explanation. And if Donald Trump is suddenly [10:25] interested in election security, why is he taking the Cybersecurity Agency, which did on a voluntary [10:31] basis? Chris Krebs did a great job on that years earlier as a Trump appointee. Right. [10:36] And they basically completely downsized it. Why have they taken the voluntary programs like Eric, [10:41] where, you know, if you move from one state to another, making sure that dead people don't vote, [10:45] or people who have tried to vote in two states, they've dismantled that. The election assistance [10:51] commission, not very well known, but this is the group that works with individual registrars and states, [10:57] making sure their voting machines are safe. Trump recently fired the Democrats and made [11:02] the Republican quit. Why is he doing all these things? I believe it's because Donald Trump intends [11:08] to interfere in this year's elections. He knows if there is a free and fair election, [11:12] his policies will be rejected at record levels. What do you mean interfere? [11:17] Whether that takes, I think that what we just saw was this was the opening shot, [11:22] the opening shot of trying to undermine Americans' confidence that their votes will be actually [11:28] counted and mean something. I fear as well that if he tries to pull something that could potentially, [11:33] he's not ruled out bringing ice to the polls. He's not even ruled out the idea of trying to bar [11:38] certain voting machines. Well, we're going to talk about what is U.S. law in terms of the presence [11:44] and how those election facilities are going to be run with our two experts next. Senator Warner, [11:49] thank you for your time. Thank you. We'll be right back. And for more on election security, [11:57] we're joined now by CBS News contributors David Becker and Chris Krebs. Good to have you both here, [12:03] because I want to download from both of you what we should be understanding about this past week. [12:09] Chris, the president of the United States, Donald Trump, appointed you to run the Cybersecurity [12:14] Infrastructure Security Agency, that's CISA that Senator Warner was just talking about, [12:18] to help states protect their election infrastructure during 2020. That was a secure election, you said. [12:23] The president fired you for saying that. This past Thursday, he again insisted it was not secure. Did [12:30] you read, did you hear anything that changes your assessment? Not, not at all. In fact, I would say [12:36] that it further bolsters my confidence in the security of the 2020 election between what has been released, [12:43] disclosed last week and all the information and the results of court challenges and other things in [12:47] the intervening six years, six years. But it's also, I think, a good opportunity to reflect on [12:54] the good work that the millions of hundreds of thousands, if not million or more election workers [13:02] that helped execute the 2020 election, the tens of thousands of federal government employees [13:07] that worked to protect the 2020 election. That was not something that came together a couple weeks before [13:12] 2020. That was years in the making. And that work was solid. Secretary Mullen said Friday, [13:19] he'll have a plan within 30 days. We are 100 days out from the midterms. Yeah. And in 2020, [13:25] we had our CISA election security plan out in February of 2020. So just to, before we move on to the [13:34] current day, just to put a fine point on this for you, Chris. So during his first few months in office, [13:39] the president issued executive order against you, saying you promoted the censorship of election [13:44] information and he claimed you dismissed election malfeasance and serious vulnerabilities with voting [13:49] machines. Um, in Intel speak, what you saw, interference would be hacking, changing some of the language [13:57] the president used in those on camera remarks. What you saw, how would you describe the Chinese role in [14:05] the 2020 election? Well, I think there was an honest debate and discussion across the intelligence [14:10] community about what China's intent were. But ultimately, when it came out in the intelligence [14:14] community assessment that was released in the spring of 2021, it was that China had a preference [14:21] and that they were not in favor of President Trump, but their efforts were principally limited to [14:25] influencing the American public, seeking to pay journalists, media, but it was an influence [14:31] operation and they have been doing that stuff since the mid aughts, the mid to early 2000s. This is not [14:44] net new. They did turn up the heat and they are still doing it today. We have a significant and serious [14:51] counterintelligence and counter espionage problem with China. And that's what I really want to see [14:55] us talking about. What are they doing today? We have to put more emphasis on that. Okay. Here is exactly [15:01] what President Trump said on Thursday about China. They did not disclose to me as president or to [15:09] anyone else and to the best of our knowledge, they did not inform Congress. In fact, all they kept [15:17] saying is this is the most secure election in the history of our country, a standard very pat line that [15:24] was divvied out to say. Was the president informed of what China was doing? You were in those rooms. [15:32] In January of 2020, there was a national intelligence committee, a community memorandum about the 2020 [15:39] election that talked about the vulnerabilities we saw on systems and the work we needed to do there. [15:43] But it also talked about the intent of adversaries and there were countless memos after that. So, [15:49] you know, a lot of these products were in senior executive and policymakers binders, [15:53] their intelligence binders every single day. We use those to get out there and talk to the American [15:58] people. I had an op-ed in September of 2020 to the general public that talked about various threat [16:06] actors, including China. So, I have a hard time believing that it didn't get up into the oval. [16:11] Okay. As China was described as attempting to influence, it was Iran and Russia, [16:15] primary actors directly undermining the election in some of those 2020 statements. It sounds like [16:22] you're saying he didn't read the memo. Look, we could not have been more clear. [16:26] Okay. Or search the web. Or search the web. Right. [16:29] We did report on it on this network. I know. I remember. David, I want to go to you because [16:34] the president said a lot of things. One of the other elements this week was what the Justice [16:39] Department put forward. Harmeet Dhillon there sent a letter to state saying any election official who [16:45] knowingly retains non-citizens on voter registration list or facilitates non-citizens in casting ballots will be [16:51] held criminally liable. And then DHS Secretary Mullen described here the consequence of refusing to [16:59] participate in their program. Take a listen. [17:02] If the election officials, once we gave them the information they need to secure their elections, [17:08] and they chose not to, then those individuals can also be held accountable by fines, by penalties, [17:16] and even, depending on how far it goes, prison time. [17:21] You speak to election officials. Are they concerned? That sounds like a threat. [17:26] Hardly a week goes by where someone in this administration doesn't threaten election [17:29] officials with arrests. This week, we had at least two prominent administration officials [17:34] doing that. It's become almost a running joke. They've been into this administration 18 months now. [17:38] The total number of election officials who've been arrested for wrongdoing is zero. And that's [17:43] appropriate because not only have they committed no crime, they've actually acted heroically and [17:48] patriotically to support and facilitate our democracy through a pandemic and after in the aftermath with [17:53] disinformation. What Secretary Mullen's talking about there, he's trying to pressure states to [18:01] surrender sensitive voter data to the federal government. And the DOJ has filed over 30 lawsuits [18:07] about that. And they are 0-16 in those lawsuits so far. He's threatening them with arrest for following the law. [18:14] And so I think the election officials in the states feel very confident that they are following their [18:19] state laws. They're following federal laws. They're doing everything they can to make sure this election [18:23] is going to be safe, convenient, and secure. We are 107 or so days out from November 3rd. [18:31] What Secretary Mullen talked about as well is he said there's going to be a public plan in 30 days. Stay tuned. [18:37] But he wants them to use the systematic alien verification for entitlements program, the SAVE program, [18:43] to screen for the citizenship of voters. How does that work? For people at home who may say sure [18:52] there's a law that says non-citizens cannot vote in federal elections, they say well what's the problem [18:57] with showing an ID? So the SAVE system is a federal system that takes data from federal sources. It's [19:04] currently in legal limbo because there are some challenges over whether it's legal or not. [19:08] And from the limited federal data that it has, it can then match it in some cases to data that states [19:14] may choose to share with it. The problem is that DHS admits that data is incomplete. They don't have [19:19] all of the data. So a lot of the individuals that they might flag are actually citizens. They just don't [19:24] have the documentation in the federal database to back that up. The states actually have far better data. [19:29] The states are doing a really good job with this. And the reason they have better data is because when [19:32] you go into a motor vehicles agency and you get a license, particularly a real ID, [19:37] you have to show proof of legal presence. And that data, what you've shown, what you've documentarily [19:41] shown to a government official, is kept in that database. And so you see election officials in [19:46] states like Georgia, which is run by Republicans, in states like Michigan, which are run by Democrats, [19:52] and all across the country, able to do a better job of confirming that there are non-citizens on their [19:57] voter lists than the federal government could ever do. And they've been in office for 18 months. [20:03] And now they're talking about coming up with a plan in 30 days. Right. [20:06] And in that 18 months, they've only charged 39 people throughout the entire country with voting [20:11] as non-citizens. Chris, we were checking for what election [20:17] officials were saying after Thursday's revelations. Republican officials in West Virginia and in Utah [20:23] say they have no outreach from the White House about direct election threats. They said, you got [20:27] them, bring them. Utah said they actually want the election security resources to be restored [20:33] and to have the federal government stop filing frivolous, again, this is a quote, [20:38] lawsuits that consume our precious time and taxpayer resources. There are, what, a thousand people who [20:44] were cut from the agency you used to run. What should be happening to make sure that these [20:50] officials have what they need? Because they said they do want some federal help. [20:53] Well, first off, exactly what Secretary Warner in West Virginia highlighted. If there is [20:59] intelligence that needs to be shared with the states, get it to them. And typically you share [21:04] the intelligence with the affected parties prior to making a public announcement. So if there was [21:09] something that new in the Thursday night address that needed to get out to election officials, [21:13] that should have gone out Wednesday or Thursday morning. And as of Friday, it had not, you know, [21:18] trickled down to West Virginia. In 2020, we conducted 33 classified briefings with election officials. [21:25] 2020, 33. As far as I can tell, there have been no classified briefings with election officials [21:31] since the beginning of this administration. So number one, we need to start the partnership [21:35] and engagement with election officials, get them the intelligence they need. We need to recapitalize [21:39] CISA, rehire CISA, stand up the election security initiative. We need FBI task forces. We need the [21:45] DNI mission centers all around election security. And we need to give them the funding and the resources [21:51] they need to modernize their security systems and get the people out there that conduct these safe, [21:57] convenient, secure elections. And David, what are you hearing from the officials you speak with? [22:02] It is the states that administer the elections. But what kind of federal help do they even want? [22:07] Well, remember, and Chris alluded to this, in the first few months of this administration, [22:11] they dismantled all of the work that the first Trump administration under the leadership of Chris [22:17] had built and the Biden administration continued. It took a long time to build trust and credibility [22:22] and expertise so that states would welcome federal assistance. That's not their normal status. [22:27] And they built that up admirably. And starting in February of 2025, almost on day one, they [22:32] dismantled all of it. And so all of those things that Chris was talking about that are so essential [22:37] to push back on foreign influence campaigns, they're gone. On the bright side, and this is a pretty [22:43] limited bright side, that happened early in the administration. So the states have been able to [22:50] prepare for that. They have been working and networking amongst themselves to fill that gap. [22:54] And at the end of the day, they have paper ballots. They audit those paper ballots to make sure that [22:59] they're counted properly. They've hardened their systems, their voter registration databases. It's [23:03] going to be a secure election. Thank you, gentlemen. Both of you. We'll be right back. Stay with us. [23:11] Welcome back to Face the Nation. We go now to the governor of New York, [23:15] Kathy Hochul. Good morning to you, governor. Good morning. You've got a big day. World Cup finals in [23:23] nearby New Jersey. I know you'll be attending those. So will the president of the United States, [23:27] the president of Mexico, the Canadian prime minister. Given the threat environment, [23:32] are you confident in the security measures? [23:35] Absolutely. We have worked so closely with our federal, state and local partners in law enforcement. [23:40] We have been preparing for this for literally over a year, over 1,000 exercises, table topping all the [23:47] scenarios. So we're with the best, and particularly with NYPD, the world's greatest police force. I feel [23:54] very confident in our security. And we're so happy to welcome the eyes of the world. The entire [23:59] planet is going to be watching what is happening right here in the New York City area. So it's [24:03] exciting, very exciting time for us. Truly billions watching, and we will be too. [24:09] Governor, I want to ask you about a decision that you made this past week that made very big headlines. [24:14] You signed an executive order to ban large-scale data centers for a year. These are those big buildings [24:21] that helped to power artificial intelligence technology centers. It was just a few months ago [24:27] you said data centers were a local decision for municipalities. What changed for you? [24:32] I would say what changed was talking to the localities and realizing they don't have the [24:38] negotiating ability to or have the clout to be able to demand that their communities benefit from this [24:43] in a more dramatic way. They also don't have the ability to insist that these companies bring their [24:48] own power or pay more for the grid. They don't have an ability to say no to tax breaks. And so I decided [24:55] that I could do much more, especially in this basically flooding the zone is what's happening now. [25:01] We have over 30 applicants. So in a very short time, I changed my position saying, you know what, [25:06] the state has to lead here, but it's not about being the first. It's about being the first to get it [25:11] right. And we will get it right over the course of this year and help those localities negotiate the right [25:17] way, make sure we're keeping track of how much water is being consumed, doing a study of that during [25:22] this year, but also insisting that these companies and they're welcome with the conditions and the [25:28] rules that we set forth, that they also contribute to the larger grid, because this is a huge tax on [25:35] our grid. And I want to make sure that the power is there, our limited power is there for the large [25:40] companies that are creating jobs like the Micron that we recruited here with 50,000 jobs. So we'll get the [25:45] right balance. But I'll tell you this, people want protection. New Yorkers want protection. [25:51] There's a lot of anxiety. Companies want certainty. We'll give them both. [25:55] Well, governors from red states like Missouri, Montana, Wyoming, they signed this [26:01] White House Rate Payer Protection Pledge, which I guess has AI data centers sign on to promising not to [26:09] increase consumer prices like companies, AI, OpenAI and Amazon say they'll help cover the cost of [26:16] infrastructure upgrades. Have you talked to companies, these companies about doing the same [26:21] in New York? Why isn't a White House pledge like that sufficient? [26:27] Asking these companies to keep their word on how much they're going to consume. I'm more realistic [26:33] than I am, perhaps. I'm willing to say I will get it right in New York. We'll work with the companies, [26:38] but also and we're open to AI. Absolutely. This is a place where innovation is welcome and celebrated. [26:44] I, I, but my view is if you're going to succeed in New York because of our talent and our resources [26:51] and our people, I want to make sure that New Yorkers succeed as well. So it's not a one-way street. [26:56] I don't want the companies coming in and telling us how to do things in our state, but there could be, [27:01] they could be welcome when I lay out the rules of the war, world of the road, which they will embrace. [27:06] I mean, once they know how to play the game, how to do things in New York, they'll want to come, [27:10] but I need some breathing room. So my agencies, I've got seven agencies dedicated to different [27:15] elements of this, the economic development benefits for communities, how we manage how much they're [27:20] going to be consuming in water, how we make sure they, I mean, just to say, make sure the ratepayers [27:25] don't pay more. How do you enforce that? I'm more realistic. I want to get things done and make it [27:30] really be effective. It sounds like you want evidence to help get you to yes, but in the meantime, [27:35] you are hearing concerns from unions, for example, that this is going to turn away jobs and that it'll [27:42] send a signal that New York is not a place for companies to invest long term. How do you address [27:46] that? [27:47] That's not the right conclusion from what I've done. We've been very clear. [27:51] And as someone who's created more union jobs in this state than anybody in history, [27:55] the largest private sector development in American history is going on right now with this micro, [28:01] and that is 20 years of union jobs building this. We also have tens of thousands of union jobs over [28:08] years of building the gateway tunnel, which was stymied, stuck, not happening until I unstuck it. [28:15] So I've got more jobs for union members. They don't have to worry about my commitment to their jobs, [28:20] but wouldn't they be rather building jobs that there's jobs that remain after the construction season [28:26] is over, that the project is built, that we actually have people, their neighbors, communities, [28:30] people actually working in those buildings with long term good paying jobs and not just focused [28:35] on construction, which is very important. So I'm asking everybody to say, take a breath. [28:41] This is not the end of the world. We'll get through this. And New York always leads in a smart way. [28:46] And that's what I'm really proud of, of what we're doing here. [28:48] I want to ask you about election security. We're about 100 days out from election day. [28:54] States administer the elections in this country, not the federal government. [28:58] Are you getting the kind of election security resources your state has gotten in the last [29:03] few years? Do you have what you need? [29:06] No, the federal government has basically been dismantling all the protections that we've come [29:10] to rely on to protect this core essence of our democracy, the knowledge that, when you cast that [29:15] vote, that citizen's right, that obligation to determine who our leaders are, that it is uncompromised. [29:22] It is not being challenged by the federal government just because they're so worried about the upcoming [29:28] results. That is exactly what is happening. I want everyone to focus on that. Yes, we passed the John [29:33] Rights Voting Act. We have the toughest protections in the country. And just recently, I signed a law, [29:40] many, many protections against what ICE is doing, to say ICE agents cannot show up at polling places. [29:46] Can you see this scenario? Black and brown communities across our country and in New York, [29:51] where they're all of a sudden on election day, to create that fear factor and intimidation factor [29:56] that they're so good at. I do not want to see that compromise the validity of our election. So [30:03] what Donald Trump is doing right now is throwing out the biggest red herring you'd ever see and [30:09] questioning the actual results that are happening. So we're working hard on this. I'll make sure that [30:15] we are protected. But I can't count on the federal government for anything in this face because [30:19] they're compromised. Under federal law, armed agents are not supposed to be at election centers. [30:25] The attorney general nominee, Todd Blanche, said he'd follow the law. But it sounds like you are still [30:30] concerned that that might happen. Have you... They don't follow the law very much at all, [30:36] Margaret. They don't follow the law much at all. So again, trust but verify. I'm going to verify and [30:42] ensure that New York state is doing it right. I don't trust that they're going to say this because [30:46] what happens is they say the day after like, oh, well, we didn't mean to do it. And oh, sorry about [30:51] that. You know, these are people who go around killing individuals in our streets. So they have no [30:56] credibility with me when they say anything. We will speak to the White House about that topic shortly. [31:02] Thank you very much, Governor. We'll be right back. Return now to the economy. On Thursday, [31:11] we spoke with Bank of America's CEO Brian Moynihan and asked him for an update. [31:16] Well, affordability is a challenge. It talked about challenge that we see in our customer base. But [31:22] as you look at what's really going on, we see a couple of things. One is the consumers that [31:27] are 70 million consumers who spend about $400 billion plus a month are spending about five or [31:33] six percent more money this month of June of 26 versus 25. And likewise in the first part of July here. [31:40] So they're spending money. And while the consumers reflect on higher gas prices or higher [31:46] food prices and inflation and things like that, and they're worried about it, what you see is, [31:51] especially the middle third of households and the top third of households by income, [31:55] their spending is growing faster. What's been interesting, frankly, in the more recent past, [32:00] in the last couple of months, is we're seeing the wage growth of all income cohorts kind of coalesce [32:06] together around three to four percent, which is good. [32:08] So they're holding in there, even though we're seeing gas prices have raised the cost [32:12] for drivers by 31 percent since this war with Iran began. I know fuel inventories remain low. [32:20] How are you thinking about how this geopolitical uncertainty factors in to planning? [32:27] So the price of oil and gas affects not only the gas at the pump, which is what you're [32:33] first reflecting on, and that is up. It actually started coming down. And as the oil prices rise, [32:38] it might rise back up. But it basically, when we were running around $100 barrel equivalent oil, [32:43] you were running about a $4 and change gas price. It actually had come down from the month of May to [32:48] June, because that's when the oil started flowing more. But I think if you talk to businesses, [32:53] it's different. What consumers see is a concerning nature that is out there. But when business see [32:58] it, they worry about the cost of goods that's coming through the pipeline. So the goods are [33:02] being manufactured now, have imported oil and gas to go into the plastics production or the material [33:09] production or whatever it was during the time when gas prices were higher. And that's why our team has [33:15] inflation staying higher all the way into 27, 28, and why the Federal Reserve will probably, our belief [33:21] is will raise rates, whereas six months ago, they thought the Fed would be cutting rates. They're [33:26] actually believing they'll raise rates to fight off this inflation. And it will take them a while to [33:29] get through it. [33:30] So raise rates, you think the Fed will act as soon as next week to do that? Or, excuse me, end of the [33:36] month to do that? [33:37] I don't think we, no, more towards the end of the year. Our team has some raising rates. And, you know, [33:42] I think based on the recent data that came out, they had three rate rises, whether they hold that [33:46] with some of the inflation numbers. But the reality is it's sort of the tail end of this year into next [33:52] year. And it really will depend a lot on the path of other price cohorts other than just oil and gas [33:57] at the pump. And that's the question of what's going on in housing and food and other places where [34:02] you're seeing some continued progress being made. It's drifting down, and it's drifting down slower than [34:07] people would like it. But the reality is this type of inflation takes a long time to squeeze out of the [34:11] system. When you go back to the post-pandemic infusion of cash and infusion of activity, [34:18] that just takes a while to squeeze out. [34:19] When we looked at Bank of America's earnings recently, you had record sales and trading [34:24] revenue in the quarter past. A lot of that, some of it churned from, you know, energy price swings, [34:31] but some of it, it seems, from the tech boom of these massive AI companies and the public listings. [34:39] How do you think about that, what looks like a tech boom? [34:43] It's absolutely a strong market for technology and other IPOs. There's biotech, [34:49] there's biology, there's drugs going out, getting IPO'd and things like that. There's M&A activity. [34:55] And so when you're talking about the investment banking activity of Bank of America was up 70% [35:02] year-over-year or something like that, and our peers were up like amounts. And that has a lot to do, [35:06] at 50% actually, that has a lot to do with the amount of activity our corporate clients are doing, [35:10] in part also comparing to last year, which was a deliberation day quarter. The good news is that [35:15] our company, the nominal dollars we earned in the first quarter and the second quarter went up in [35:19] investment banking, and that's reflecting the environment around us. [35:22] Yeah, Jamie Dimon said, it's getting close to as good as it gets, we just don't know long, [35:28] how long it's going to last. I guess you're in that same camp, you don't know how long this is [35:33] going to last. That's always, that's the pipeline, we measure what we call pipelines, [35:38] so what's the forward activity that you haven't yet booked? In other words, the deals and process [35:43] and that activity is as strong as it's ever been. Well, it's fascinating because Wall Street is [35:49] benefiting from this IPO boom around AI, but it is the state of New York where you are sitting right [35:56] now that has now become the first state to bar the construction of large-scale data centers. There's [36:02] just so much political heat around this, this idea of not in my backyard, and the president argues this [36:08] is all a driving force for jobs and a good thing. Do you see more states following suit? [36:14] This is a classic struggle of land use and everybody's working it through and everybody will work it [36:19] through differently. Well, there's the stories about New York putting a pause on in terms of further [36:24] development while they try to figure out the dynamics of electricity pricing, water pricing, [36:29] and things like that. There's other states are saying, Bill, Louisiana has a major facility going [36:34] in, so I think we see it handled differently, but it really comes down to America being America. My [36:38] community, my town hall, my town meeting, my mayor, my council deciding what they want to do, or my [36:45] governor, and I think that's where the population is trying to figure it out, and so there's a pretty [36:49] good tug of war going on, but I think, you know, the facts ought to get on the table, the decisions [36:54] ought to follow what people want for their community, and then, frankly, the data center builders will go [36:59] to the communities that want them. So I know you've got a FIFA sign next to you, and the FIFA World Cup [37:04] Finals are this weekend. The world's going to be watching. You're a sponsor. Given how high ticket prices [37:11] are to these matches, have you been surprised at the turnout at the tournaments and the spending? [37:17] Absolutely not. Our team did a research piece, Margaret, that said that the total amount that is [37:26] economically generated around FIFA is about $40 billion, $20 billion would be in the U.S., and [37:30] even when we look in the host cities, like at Kansas City, we can see the growth rate and spending [37:33] faster than other cities, so it's having this on-the-ground economic impact, and that spending is [37:38] going into what we call bricks and mortar. It's going to the bars and restaurants and things like that, [37:43] not necessarily only the people in the stadium, and so it's an unbelievable phenomenon. [37:48] I think the United States hadn't seen for a while, seeing again. And to put it in context, [37:53] you know, they're estimated 2 billion people will watch the finals on Sunday, which is just an [37:59] amazing amount. And that's what the brand strategy for us was. We had a great quarter internationally. [38:06] We have a great international business. It's a very important part of what we do. [38:09] You can watch our full interview on our YouTube channel or on facethenation.com. We'll be right back. [38:15] And we're back with President Trump's border czar, Tom Homan. Welcome back to Face the Nation. [38:22] Thanks for having me. [38:24] Uh, Mr. Homan, we saw that two immigrants were shot in the span of a week. There was that one [38:30] in Maine that was fatal just days after, another one in Houston. We also saw that man fleeing agents [38:37] in Florida who then was struck and killed by a tractor trailer. I know you've been trying to [38:43] keep the department out of the headlines ever since that streak in Minnesota that was deadly. [38:48] How do you respond to those who say what's happening now looks like very little has changed? [38:53] Well, you know, first of all, we'll wait and see what the investigations, um, how they play out, [39:00] right? Because, you know, I don't want to get ahead of investigations on who's at fault. Uh, [39:06] what exactly happened? Because we all know when these investigations happen, there's going to be [39:10] cell phone video. There may be city cameras and, you know, of course, then you've got witness [39:15] statements and affidavits from the officer and, and witnesses. So we got to let the investigations [39:20] play out. So I don't want to really comment on investigation themselves. But, you know, I think, [39:24] uh, you know, Mark Wayne Mullen, you know, took some action, um, and, and, and concern of safety [39:30] of the agents and, and how we do operations. And, and that's why he did that, you know, that, uh, that [39:36] pause on, on enforcement on vehicle stops. But, you know, I, my concern is I've never, I've done this [39:42] since 1984. My concern is, I think a lot of the rhetoric that you see every day, especially in sanctuary [39:49] cities and at these protests that resist, uh, members of Congress saying ICE isn't a real law [39:54] enforcement agency. I think that I actually think that emboldens, uh, some people to say, [40:00] I'm not going to comply with ICE. And I think no matter what people think of ICE, no matter what [40:05] you think of immigration law, you should always comply with law enforcement. Yes. Yes. But in the [40:10] shootings in both Houston and Maine, the people who were killed were not the intended targets. [40:14] Have you caught the people you're actually looking for? Uh, one of them, I believe we did, [40:19] but, you know, that happens in law enforcement all the time. I mean, we're working, you know, [40:23] we get leads on individuals. You say, okay, well, this subject lives at this house. He drives his car. [40:28] And when that subject leaves that house, you know, six o'clock in the morning and someone gets in [40:33] that car from that house, you know, they assume, okay, this side guy, and they'll do a vehicle stop. [40:38] And depending on when they make that stop and, and that person complies, either they're going to be [40:43] arrested or released. That's the way it's supposed to be. So, you know, law enforcement deals with [40:48] misidentity every day across the country, not just ICE, every law enforcement agency. I was a cop. I know, [40:53] I know that happens. Yeah. But these were fatal shootings, of course, in Houston and in Maine. And [40:59] in Houston, it was an unmarked car. So when you're saying don't resist, these individuals who were [41:06] chasing, um, the man who died, they didn't have markings on that vehicle that would allow for him to [41:14] know that they were ICE. It just looked like a car coming after them in the videos. [41:20] No, they have emergency lights. Officers have insignia. So when they get out of that car [41:25] and approach the car, you can clearly see the law enforcement officers. [41:28] Well, in the video that has been public, it's not a marked car. [41:32] These people, I'm not saying it's a marked car, but they have emergency lights and sirens. So when [41:37] they pull somewhere, they want to activate the emergency lights. A lot of, a lot of police departments, [41:42] I'm in New York City right now. A lot of NYPD officers are driving unmarked vehicles and that [41:47] helps them find people that don't want to be found. Right? So, you know, but bottom line is, [41:53] we'll see when the investigation plays out, but they'd be alive today if they simply complied [41:58] with, with a vehicle stop by federal law enforcement. Just comply. You can, if you don't think you've been [42:04] treated right and, and they had no reason to stop you, then there's, there's avenues to take them to [42:08] court to sue. Well, the family of the man in Houston said that he thought he was being robbed [42:14] because it was an unmarked vehicle. Not that it was law enforcement at all. They, they had emergency [42:21] lights. They activate emergency lights, blue light, you know, you know, in, in, in my vehicle, [42:26] I drive around with my security. You've seen that on video because we haven't seen one on video, ma'am. [42:31] That there were lights because in the videos that we've seen, there aren't. And because there [42:36] weren't body cameras, it is hard to substantiate some of what you were saying. Okay. Well, I have [42:44] not seen the videos, but I'm saying our vehicles are equipped with emergency lights. Now, if they [42:48] didn't activate the lights again, I haven't seen that video. If they didn't activate the lights and [42:52] then there's an issue there, right? But I'm saying they, they're equipped the lights, lights. So let me [42:57] just caveat that they should have been equipped with lights and sirens, but I do not know specifically [43:03] if they activated those lights. Okay. As far as the cameras, Margaret, you know, everybody in ICE [43:08] would have a camera now if, if the government wasn't shut down by democratic members of Congress. [43:12] There was money in that bill that they held up. Yeah. I think it was 120 million dollars to equip [43:17] all ICE officers with cameras, but because the government shut down, we're behind on that. But they [43:21] got 20 million in April. But the cameras had been purchased. That wasn't enough. The 20 million [43:26] may have bought some cameras, but it doesn't buy the, the, the storage. It doesn't buy the, the resources we [43:32] need for the thousands of FOIA requests we're going to get there. There has to be storage capability [43:37] to hold these videos for a long time. So it didn't fund everything. But now we have the funding after [43:42] reconciliation. The cameras are in purchase right now. They're training the trainer and deploying [43:47] the cameras nationwide. Do you think it was a mistake for the Trump administration to have [43:51] proposed the body cam expansion at the beginning of the term? Because I know you have advocated for body [43:56] cameras and now you're playing catch up, right? I think body. Yeah, I think body cameras are the way to go. [44:02] I think body cameras lets the American people know what that officer sees when he takes that action. [44:08] When will everyone get one? You know, you can have a cell phone camera from a witness on the side. You [44:11] can have, you know, city cameras or whatever. But I want the American people to see what that officer [44:16] sees when he makes, when he takes, when he makes the decision, takes an action. Yeah. I think the American [44:21] people need to see what that officer sees and hears. I think it's important. And if you look at the data, [44:26] body cameras actually exonerate agents more than they, you know, provide evidence of wrongdoing. Well, [44:31] yeah, and it would certainly help with reporting and public knowledge. Let me ask you about something [44:36] else. The DHS secretary has said they went through public records and identified 250,000 noncitizens [44:44] in four states, California, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Nevada. I know those states don't share [44:49] their voter rolls. So it looks like they're just pulling this from public information. For those states, [44:54] are you planning operations before November? And, um, you do acknowledge that it would be illegal to [45:02] have federal agents at, at election locations? You know, that's a question of DHS. I'm not loop on that. [45:09] I'm not, I'm not familiar with, um, the, the information that DHS, uh, just released. I'm not loop on that. [45:17] I might, I might, I might the White House of Borders are, so that'd be a question for Mark [45:19] Wayne. Well, I'm not in the loop on that. Okay. All right. Uh, Mr. Homan, thank you for your time [45:24] this morning. We'll leave it there. Good seeing you, Margaret. We'll be back in a moment. That's [45:33] it for us today. Thank you all for watching. Until next week, for Face the Nation, I'm Margaret Brennan.