2026-05-24T15:02:32-0400 / https://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-full-transcript-05-24-2026/
在本期《与玛格丽特·布伦南直面国家》节目中，由南希·科德斯主持：
- 凯文·哈塞特，白宫国家经济委员会主任
- 马里兰州民主党参议员克里斯·范·霍伦
- 缅因州民主党众议员乔希·戈特海默与纽约州共和党众议员迈克·劳勒
- 黛博拉·伯克斯博士，前白宫新冠疫情应对协调员
- 退役陆军中校威廉·斯旺森与退役陆军总军士长马修·威廉姆斯，荣誉勋章获得者
点击此处浏览2026年《与玛格丽特·布伦南直面国家》的完整 transcript。
南希·科德斯：我是华盛顿的南希·科德斯。
本周的《直面国家》节目中：美国谈判代表似乎即将与伊朗达成和平协议。我们将带来最新进展。
熟悉谈判的消息人士告诉CBS新闻，这项为结束已持续13周的战争而提出的最新方案包括重启霍尔木兹海峡的流程、解冻一些伊朗在外国银行持有的资产，以及继续就伊朗核计划进行谈判。
我们将与总统的首席经济顾问凯文·哈塞特谈谈这场战争对经济的影响。我们还将详细探讨本周两党对设立18亿美元反武器化拨款基金的愤怒反应。马里兰州民主党参议员克里斯·范·霍伦将做客节目。
我们还将听到两党搭档为打击政坛反犹太主义而发声的内容，他们是纽约州共和党众议员迈克·劳勒与新泽西州民主党众议员乔希·戈特海默。
此外，在世界卫生组织警告埃博拉病毒在刚果民主共和国快速传播之际，我们将采访黛博拉·伯克斯博士。
最后，我们将与两位荣誉勋章获得者进行一场特别的阵亡将士纪念日对话，探讨服役的意义。
所有内容即将在《直面国家》播出。
早上好，欢迎收看《直面国家》。玛格丽特本周休假，由我南希·科德斯代班。
在这个周末的节假日里，特朗普总统一直在白宫努力与伊朗敲定协议。我周六采访总统时，他对达成协议的可能性持乐观态度，并表示——引用他的话——“如果不能阻止伊朗拥有核武器，我甚至不会谈论这项协议”，他还补充道：“我们正在得到所有我们想要的东西。我只会签署一份我们能得到所有想要的东西的协议。”
但看起来大多数核问题的决定权实际上将留给下一轮谈判，这让一些共和党人在今天感到担忧。
我们首先来看资深外交记者伊姆蒂亚兹·塔伊布从特拉维夫发回的报道。
（开始视频连线）
伊姆蒂亚兹·塔伊布（旁白）：今天上午在新德里，美国国务卿马可·卢比奥就伊朗问题发表了如下言论：
马可·卢比奥（美国国务卿）：我将留给总统来就此发布进一步公告。简而言之，我们已经取得了一些进展。
伊姆蒂亚兹·塔伊布：周六，特朗普总统与多个阿拉伯和穆斯林国家的领导人举行了电话会议，包括沙特阿拉伯、卡塔尔、埃及、土耳其、阿联酋和巴基斯坦。
会后，总统在TRUTH社交平台上发帖称：“美国与伊朗伊斯兰共和国之间的协议已基本谈判完成，待最终敲定。”
作为主要调解人的巴基斯坦陆军参谋长阿西姆·穆尼尔当时正在德黑兰，他会见了伊朗领导人，以缩小与华盛顿之间尚存的分歧。
在一场媒体吹风会上，伊朗外交部发言人伊斯梅尔·巴盖伊表示，过去一周，谈判进程正朝着减少分歧点的方向推进，但仍有一些问题需要通过调解方进行讨论。
这些分歧点包括霍尔木兹海峡的命运、伊朗在外国银行的冻结资产，以及其核计划——其中包括大量接近武器级别的高浓缩铀库存，这是总统所说的红线。
（结束视频连线）
伊姆蒂亚兹·塔伊布：在昨晚与穆斯林和阿拉伯国家领导人通话后，特朗普总统还与以色列总理本雅明·内塔尼亚胡进行了交谈。
一位以色列资深政治消息人士告诉CBS新闻，总理已向总统明确表示，以色列将保留对其所认定的威胁采取行动的权利，包括在黎巴嫩，此前有报道称美伊之间的潜在协议也将结束当地的战争。
南希·科德斯：伊姆蒂亚兹·塔伊布，非常感谢你。
一些关键的共和党参议员已经就有关可能达成的协议框架的早期报道发表了看法。
参议院军事委员会主席罗杰·威克表示，将核问题谈判推迟到以后将——引用他的话——“是一场灾难”，并且“‘史诗暴怒行动’所取得的一切成果都将付诸东流”。
得克萨斯州参议员特德·克鲁兹称：“如果最终结果是伊朗政权现在获得数十亿美元资金，能够浓缩铀并研发核武器，那么这一结果将是一场灾难性的错误。”
我们现在连线马里兰州民主党参议员克里斯·范·霍伦。
参议员，非常感谢你做客节目。
参议员克里斯·范·霍伦（马里兰州民主党）：很高兴与你连线，南希。
南希·科德斯：我想强调的是，所有这些都还在演变中。我们从美国和伊朗方面听到了对协议条款略有不同的解读。
但就你目前听到的内容，你有什么看法？
参议员克里斯·范·霍伦：嗯，南希，这场针对伊朗的战争从一开始就是一个巨大的错误。
总统本应坚持他的竞选承诺，让我们远离战争，并专注于降低物价。但他恰恰做了相反的事情。物价在上涨，利率在上升，而我们却深陷这场对伊朗的战争。
当你在挖洞时，你应该停止挖掘。这就是这项协议听起来的样子。听起来我们将重新开放霍尔木兹海峡——当然，战争爆发前海峡一直是开放的。
不过我得说，伊朗似乎将对这些海峡保留更多控制权。我们也知道伊朗现在的政权更加强硬，而我们正在讨论解冻伊朗的一些冻结资产。
所以，听着，我的观点是，正如我所说，停止挖掘。
南希·科德斯：我想问问你本周在国会两党引发巨大争议的一件事：司法部新设立的反武器化基金，拨款近18亿美元，用于那些声称自己受到联邦政府不公平对待的人。
你一直称其为政治分肥基金。你正试图迫使共和党人就为该基金设置一些保障措施进行投票。你所说的保障措施是什么样的？
参议员克里斯·范·霍伦：嗯，南希，首先我们应该取消这个政治分肥基金，这是纳税人的18亿美元资金。
但我一直在提出修正案，禁止例如在1月6日骚乱中袭击警察的人有资格获得该基金。被判有猥亵儿童罪的人，也不应该有资格获得该基金。国会议员也不应该有资格获得该基金。
我希望所有共和党人，包括共和党候选人，都能强烈反对这个总统为这些目的设立的分肥基金。
南希·科德斯：本周你就袭击警察的人是否有资格获得该基金的问题质问了代理司法部长。我本周也采访了总统关于这个问题，他没有说这些人将被排除在外。
参议院共和党人对此非常愤怒，他们本周在闭门会议上狠狠批评了代理司法部长。你认为国会中是否有取消这个基金的意愿，以及这将如何实现？
参议员克里斯·范·霍伦：嗯，我希望如此，南希。
我认为大多数共和党人更恼火的是，这个基金打乱了他们通过另一项为移民海关执法局（ICE）拨款700亿美元纳税人资金的和解法案的努力。我认为这是让他们最不满的地方。
他们决定离开国会山，因为他们不想就我和其他人提出的这些修正案进行投票。所以我们将看看事情会如何发展。我们应该彻底取消这个政治分肥基金，我们将坚持在回来后就这些问题进行投票。
南希·科德斯：一位高级政府官员告诉我，目前正在进行一些紧急努力，以解决共和党人对该基金提出的担忧。
但他们继续坚称他们有权这样做，实际上他们已经有能力进行这些支付，而且事实上，他们正在通过制定规则、任命专员等方式让这个过程更加透明。
你对这个论点有什么看法？
参议员克里斯·范·霍伦：嗯，这太荒谬了，从一开始就非常腐败。
我的意思是，这本质上是特朗普总统通过代理司法部长与他自己进行谈判，这位代理司法部长曾是特朗普的私人律师。他们的设置使得这个由五人组成的委员会完全由他们控制，特朗普总统可以随时解雇其中任何一人。
所以这完全在他们的控制之下，就是一个分肥基金。而且南希，他们没有承诺完全透明。代理司法部长拒绝透露他们是否会披露所有获得这些纳税人资金的人的姓名。
所以我们要明确。这是一个腐败交易。而且在这个过程中，总统当然获得了一张彻底的免罪符，无需缴纳他应缴的所有税款，这是这笔交易中另一个腐败的部分。
南希·科德斯：我想问问你一直密切参与的一个案件。本周有了重大进展。一名法官驳回了对你家乡马里兰州的基尔马尔·阿布雷戈·加西亚的联邦人口走私指控。你在他被错误驱逐到萨尔瓦多并被关押在超级监狱CECOT后，曾前往萨尔瓦多探望他。法官称司法部对他的起诉是报复性的，而司法部现在表示计划上诉。
你有没有和他或他的家人联系过？他们对这个判决有什么感受？
参议员克里斯·范·霍伦：南希，我已经和他和他的妻子詹妮弗谈过了，他们当然对法院适用法律感到高兴。
这绝对是一起报复性起诉。法官称这本质上是权力滥用，因为特朗普政府对他提起了新的指控，因为他决定行使正当程序和宪法权利。
他们已经承认错误地将他遣返到萨尔瓦多，而他对此提出了异议。当然，他现在已经回来了。他们仍试图将他驱逐出境。但他根据宪法提出了自己的诉求。
所以这个案件不仅仅关乎基尔马尔·阿布雷戈·加西亚一人。这真的关乎我们每一个人的权利。当特朗普政府决定对他进行报复性起诉时，他们是在进一步威胁我们所有人的权利。
南希·科德斯：我们剩下的时间大约还有一分钟，但我想问一下本周民主党全国委员会最终发布的选举复盘报告。
你觉得从这份复盘报告中你是否找到了民主党在2024年失利的原因？你认为 DNC 的主席应该为此辞职吗？
参议员克里斯·范·霍伦：嗯，南希，这是一份非常敷衍的作品。一份不完整的作品。我能理解肯·马丁为什么不愿意早点发布它。
但正如他所说，他要为这个问题负责。他本应该早点揭开这个伤疤，把报告公之于众。不，距离一场非常重要的选举还有六个月，我们现在不应该换帅。
我想说的是，报告的总体主旨表明，我们不应该仅仅回到特朗普上台前的状态。我从一开始就说过，民主党第二次输给唐纳德·特朗普这样的人显然是一场失败。
我们需要向美国民众明确，我们理解他们在财务和经济上的困境以及日常挣扎，我们将为此采取行动，我们将为他们而战，我们将与那些试图操纵规则、损害他们利益的强大特殊利益集团作斗争。
南希·科德斯：没错。
马里兰州参议员克里斯·范·霍伦，非常感谢你今天上午做客节目。非常感谢。
我们马上回来。
（广告时段）
南希·科德斯：我们现在连线两党搭档的众议员。
乔希·戈特海默是新泽西州民主党众议员，迈克·劳勒是纽约州共和党众议员。
议员们，欢迎做客。感谢你们加入我们。
众议员乔希·戈特海默（新泽西州民主党）：感谢邀请我们。
众议员迈克·劳勒（纽约州共和党）：感谢邀请我们。
南希·科德斯：不客气。
劳勒议员，我想先请你谈谈美伊之间似乎正在成形的谅解备忘录。我们已经看到一些共和党同僚对此表示反对。南卡罗来纳州参议员林赛·格雷厄姆称，如果有关该协议的报道属实——引用他的话——“人们不禁要问，这场战争到底是为什么而打的。”
议员，你同意他的观点吗？
众议员迈克·劳勒：不。
我认为重要的是，首先我们要了解所有细节。其次，如果你看看在军事行动期间发生的情况，他们做了什么？他们专注于弹道导弹计划、无人机能力、海军舰队，并控制了伊朗的领空。
他们做到了这一点。伊朗通过封锁霍尔木兹海峡进行报复，而特朗普总统对其实施了封锁，这对伊朗经济造成了巨大损害，阻止了石油流向中国。因此，各方都面临着巨大的达成协议的压力。
但底线是，目标是确保伊朗不拥有核武器。这是特朗普总统从一开始就明确且始终坚持的立场。因此，我认为在所有人都急于发表言论之前，了解拟议协议的条款至关重要，特别是关于浓缩铀的部分。
南希·科德斯：所以，你对听到的内容感到满意？
众议员迈克·劳勒：听着，我一直在与政府保持联系。我担任外交事务委员会中东和北非小组委员会主席。
我认为，总的来说，政府在47年来首次迫使这个政权的残余势力进行谈判，一场真正的谈判。十年多前的伊朗核协议（JCPOA）并不是一场谈判。它让伊朗走上了制造核弹的道路。我们正试图阻止这一点，而总统采取了果断行动。
南希·科德斯：戈特海默议员，你一直在推动通过一项战争权力决议。你离实现目标越来越近了。如果核问题的决定被推迟，但霍尔木兹海峡能更快重新开放，这对美国纳税人来说是一场胜利吗？
众议员乔希·戈特海默：嗯，我认为这里的好消息——正如迈克所说，我们仍在了解细节。
好消息是，如果情况属实，海峡将重新开放，这意味着美国的汽油价格将会下降，这是个好消息。
在我看来，坏消息是——这一点还不明确——最初的目标与浓缩铀有关，目的是确保伊朗的核能力，我认为伊朗是打着“去死吧美国”的旗号的美国明确对手，我认为伊朗政权应该被击溃。
但其中一部分是确保我们削弱他们的核能力，这样他们就无法跨越拥有核武器的门槛，我们要大幅削弱他们的弹道军事能力、导弹能力，当然还有无人机活动，以及所有用于恐怖主义计划和其代理机构——哈马斯、真主党、巴勒斯坦伊斯兰圣战组织——的资金。
这些都是悬而未决的问题，目前还不清楚我们是否在这些方面取得了实质性进展。
而且我认为，归根结底，就像格雷厄姆参议员所说的，如果我们回顾一下，好吧，我们投入了巨额资金，我们始终有一个明确的目标，即击溃伊朗，削弱他们的弹道和导弹计划、核计划、恐怖主义计划，而最终我们得到的只是原本不在谈判桌上的东西，即重新开放霍尔木兹海峡，那么在我看来，这最终不会达到最初设定的目标。
所以这就是——这是最大的问题，我们是否真的一无所获，只是原地踏步。
南希·科德斯：劳勒议员，总统周五高调访问了你所在的选区。他为你助选，因为你是美国仅有的三个 Kamala Harris 在2024年大选中获胜的共和党-held 选区之一的议员。
你如何向你的选民解释这项新协议，该协议阻止了国税局在今年之前对特朗普家族的文件进行审计？
众议员迈克·劳勒：嗯，我认为，当谈到总统与国税局达成的任何协议时，从我的角度来看，你知道，我认为回顾拜登政府的所作所为，他们当然将政府武器化， targeting 总统。
而且我认为他显然对此提出了索赔，作为对此的回应。从总统的角度来看，我很高兴能欢迎他来到我的选区，就像我之前欢迎乔·拜登总统一样。乔·拜登三年前来到我的选区，我也到场了。
特朗普总统也来了。有超过5000人来到我的选区，直接听取总统关于对他们影响最严重的问题的讲话，包括我能够推动取消州和地方税（SALT）抵扣上限的能力。
总统还宣布将总统自由勋章授予我的一位选民，他在9/11事件中遇难，威尔斯·克劳瑟，那个戴着红色头巾拯救了18条生命的人。
我们还听到了戈尔曼一家的故事。他们的女儿谢里丹·戈尔曼被一名非法移民残忍杀害，这名移民根据乔·拜登的开放边境政策被允许进入美国，后来在芝加哥被捕，根据芝加哥市的无现金保释和灾难性的亲犯罪政策被释放，随后杀害了这位年仅18岁、前程似锦的女孩。
南希·科德斯：议员……
众议员迈克·劳勒：听到她家人的故事至关重要。所以，我很高兴总统周五能来这里。
南希·科德斯：明白了。
我确实想谈谈反犹太主义的问题，因为我们希望邀请你们两人一起做客，因为你们正在共同努力解决美国国内反犹太主义抬头的问题。
戈特海默议员，我理解议员们关注最近该国发生的一些极其恶劣的事件的价值，比如纽约街头一名犹太男子被刺伤，华盛顿国会山犹太博物馆发生枪击事件，但国会实际上能为解决这个问题做些什么？
众议员乔希·戈特海默：嗯，我们知道，自10月7日哈马斯恐怖袭击以来，美国的反犹太主义事件上升了70%。
迈克和我所在的州都是全国反犹太主义事件数量最多的州之一。这完全不可接受。而现在的问题是，在我们的政坛上，双方都太常见了，对吧，无论是左翼主播哈桑·皮克还是右翼的坎迪斯·欧文斯，他们都在全国各地与候选人一起竞选，实际上在鼓励一些最恶劣的反犹太主义言论，比如哈桑·皮克称犹太人为猪狗，坎迪斯·欧文斯否认大屠杀。
我们有双方的候选人支持他们，发表了疯狂的言论，比如本周德克萨斯州的一位民主党候选人，她说犹太人应该被关进集中营。还有佛罗里达州的比尔泽里安，他说我们应该消灭犹太人。
这些都不应该被接受。而且——迈克和我，无论是通过我们在上届国会通过并在本届国会重新提出的《反犹太主义意识法案》，该法案旨在定义反犹太主义，还是通过立法谴责皮克和欧文斯，我们两人都坚信我们需要站出来反对这种行为。
迈克一直直言不讳，其他人也是如此。我们两党的领导人都需要一次又一次明确表示——你不应该与欧文斯和皮克这样的人站在一起，他们在我们的选区不受欢迎，这种言论也完全不可接受。我认为这非常重要。
南希·科德斯：劳勒议员，你为什么认为像戈特海默议员刚才提到的那些边缘候选人会觉得这种仇恨言论有市场？是不是在你们两党中都存在某种许可结构？
众议员迈克·劳勒：嗯，毫无疑问，反犹太主义得到了跨政治阵营人士的纵容。
在我看来，无论党派如何，我们所有人都有责任予以反击。这些候选人站出来，他们认为指责犹太人应对世界上的所有弊病负责是可以接受的。
显然，你知道，就在上周，兰德·保罗的儿子在酒吧里对我大喊大叫，因为他以为我是犹太人，而实际上我是爱尔兰裔意大利裔天主教徒。而且不管我是不是犹太人，这种想法……
南希·科德斯：他已经为此道歉了，对吗？
众议员迈克·劳勒：……人们认为可以进行这种行为是可耻的。我认为乔希和我正在努力做的，就是提出这项决议，说够了，并且对两党说，我们必须自我整顿。我们不能允许这种情况发生。我们不能支持参与公然、恶劣的反犹太主义的候选人。
南希·科德斯：没错。
众议员迈克·劳勒：你知道，犹太人口大约占美国的2%，但与此同时，他们遭受的仇恨犯罪却超过了50%。
南希·科德斯：是的。
众议员迈克·劳勒：必须有所改变。
南希·科德斯：明白了。
劳勒议员，戈特海默议员，感谢你们两位做客。非常感谢。
我们马上回来。
（广告时段）
南希·科德斯：我们将很快回到更多《直面国家》的内容。请继续收看。
（广告时段）
南希·科德斯：欢迎回到《直面国家》。
我们现在连线国家经济委员会主任凯文·哈塞特，他从白宫北草坪加入我们的节目。
凯文，非常感谢你做客。
凯文·哈塞特（国家经济委员会主任）：很高兴来到这里。谢谢。
南希·科德斯：我想先谈谈你对经济状况的看法，因为本周出现了一种令人困惑的局面。道琼斯工业平均指数创下历史新高，但消费者信心指数却创下历史新低。抵押贷款利率达到九个月来的峰值，通货膨胀率上升。
像沃尔玛这样的大型折扣店的营收在增长，部分原因是各个收入阶层的人们都被其低价商品所吸引。经济中是否正在聚集风暴？
凯文·哈塞特：不，我不认为经济中正在聚集风暴。
事实上，我们先从消费者信心指数说起，因为这个数字让我和你都非常惊讶，它得出的结果非常非常低。我们去了他们的网站，发现他们实际上按政治派别进行了分类，所以有民主党人、无党派人士和共和党人的数据。
如果你看看，在拜登通胀最严重的时候，也就是滞胀时期，消费者信心指数远高于100，而现在已经跌至30左右，这是民主党人有记录以来的最低水平。但对于共和党人来说，这个指数基本保持稳定。
如果你看看，无党派人士和民主党人的数据高度相关，这表明他们的样本主要是民主党人。所以如果你看消费者信心指数，我认为这是一项更科学的调查，该指数与我们目前看到的所有其他积极数据一致。
南希·科德斯：但你不否认这场战争对经济部分领域造成了影响？
凯文·哈塞特：目前，消费者信心指数是今年年初以来的最高水平，所以你看不到战争对消费者信心的影响，这是世界大型企业联合会的调查数据。
但话说回来，亚特兰大联邦储备银行的第二季度GDPNow预测超过4%。我们的首次申请失业救济人数达到了自60年代以来的最低水平。所以有太多非常令人惊讶的积极数据，以至于那些认为中东地区的 disruption 会损害经济的人所预期的情况，在数据中根本看不到，除了消费者信心指数。但我实际上认为我们应该停止称之为消费者信心指数，而应该开始称之为政治情绪指数，因为这些变量真的——它真的是一个政治变量，而不是经济变量。
南希·科德斯：汽油价格的数据是相当不容置疑的。
阵亡将士纪念日周末，汽油价格达到了四年来的最高点。美国汽车协会表示，至少在整个夏季，汽油价格将保持高位。上个月你曾表示，高汽油价格将是暂时现象。白宫是否对这场战争的影响描绘了过于乐观的图景，强调这场战争将是四到六周的短期行动？
凯文·哈塞特：嗯，我认为四到六周是对积极军事行动持续时间的准确描述。
现在，我将由总统决定他是否认为本周协议已经准备就绪。但底线是，一旦海峡重新开放，油轮将立即返回，几乎立刻就能重新填满炼油厂。
一艘油轮每天大约航行300海里，所以像印度和巴基斯坦这样靠近海峡的地区将立即获得石油，并立即将其转化为精炼产品。新加坡，也就是航空燃油价格最高的地区之一，也将几乎立刻获得供应。
但如果你在新西兰，可能需要更长一点的时间。但实际上，预计在一到两个月内，地球上每个炼油厂都将获得所需的全部石油。
南希·科德斯：我们知道一旦海峡重新开放，情况会好转。问题是，什么时候会重新开放？
凯文·哈塞特：没错。嗯，这是——这是总统、马可·卢比奥和伊朗人需要解决的问题。
南希·科德斯：我知道作为白宫经济委员会主任，这18亿美元的反武器化基金不属于你的职责范围。
凯文·哈塞特：没错。
南希·科德斯：但对该基金的反对确实打乱了本周一项为移民海关执法局（ICE）和海关与边境保护局（CBP）提供资金的法案。而政府资金是你的职责范围之一。
那么，政府是否在采取任何行动，试图平息总统所在政党议员对这个问题的不满？他们似乎非常愤怒，而且完全措手不及。
凯文·哈塞特：嗯，我不知道所有人都是这样，但肯定有一些人有这种感觉。
而且——我们的国会联络负责人詹姆斯·布雷德是一位真正的专业人士。他一直在与所有人沟通。他一直在安排白宫的相关人员与那些希望与他交谈、听取选民担忧的人进行电话会议。
但底线是，我们期望总统希望在国会看到的进展能够实现。在迈克·约翰逊的领导下，国会一次又一次地完成了任务。所以我理解，你知道，本周有些事情与你预期的略有不同，但我不认为这种情况会持续下去。
而且我们从初选中学到的一点是，违背总统意愿的人通常会在政治上后悔。
南希·科德斯：《华尔街日报》的编辑委员会本周六在社论中对总统就该基金和舞会预算一事进行了抨击。
他们引用他们的话说：“共和党人不想公开这么说，但私下里他们会。特朗普总统的个人政治执念正在损害他的总统任期，损害进一步外交政策成果的机会，并危及参众两院的控制权。”
总统是否意识到，在中期选举年，他迫使共和党人就不受欢迎的问题进行投票，比如该基金、舞会预算、这场战争，这让他们陷入了困境？
凯文·哈塞特：听着，我非常尊重《华尔街日报》。我周五在凯文·沃什的就职典礼上见到了保罗·吉戈特，但底线是，总统认为那个舞会预算早就应该有了，他用自己的资金和捐赠者的资金来支付，这样纳税人就不必为那个舞会预算买单。
至于反武器化基金，我不认为你或我会不同意……
南希·科德斯：嗯，他们将不得不支付10亿美元，对吗？
凯文·哈塞特：不，那不是为了舞会预算。那是为了整个白宫的安保。
而且，天哪，在我们昨天都在这里之后——我实际上不在白宫，枪击事件发生时我在几个街区外的家里。当然，我们必须让白宫更加安全。
但关于18亿美元的反武器化基金，我认为你不会不同意，对吧？上一届政府和奥巴马政府将政府武器化， targeting 特朗普总统。
而他想做的是确保这种情况永远不再发生，并赔偿那些生活被摧毁的目标人物。他们会打电话给人们到杰克·史密斯的办公室，然后用传票请求淹没他们，让他们破产。这种事情永远不应该再发生了，永远。
而且我认为——我怀疑没有人会反对这一点。
南希·科德斯：凯文·哈塞特，国家经济委员会主任，感谢你今天上午抽出时间。
凯文·哈塞特：谢谢。我也是。
南希·科德斯：我们马上回来。
（广告时段）
南希·科德斯：我们现在来谈谈刚果民主共和国不断升级的埃博拉疫情。
前白宫新冠疫情应对协调员黛博拉·伯克斯博士将加入我们的讨论，她曾在担任全球艾滋病协调员期间协助协调了2014年埃博拉疫情的国际应对工作。
伯克斯博士，非常感谢你做客。
黛博拉·伯克斯博士（前白宫新冠疫情应对协调员）：很高兴与你连线，南希。
南希·科德斯：医生，世界卫生组织表示，刚果境内目前已有近750例疑似病例，近200人死亡。与之前的疫情相比，此次疫情的严重程度如何？
黛博拉·伯克斯博士：嗯，此次疫情的问题在于，可能在报告之前就已经有两到三轮的感染传播了。
所以你看到的这些数字以及病例数的快速上升，是因为疫情可能有三到四周未被发现和报告。这导致了大量病例同时被报告。所以我无法确切告诉你新病例的增长趋势，这才是追踪急性传染病时真正重要的指标。
但要向你的观众明确说明的是，我们今天看到的病例患者可能在两周前就已经被感染了。所以我认为这就是让我们所有人都感到担忧的原因，我们正在用相当陈旧的数据来看待这场疫情和病毒。
南希·科德斯：我想稍后谈谈疫情报告的延迟问题。但首先，本周我们看到一架从巴黎飞往底特律的飞机在一名来自刚果的乘客被错误允许登机后，被迫改道飞往蒙特利尔。美国人需要了解这种疾病的传播情况以及美国本土的风险吗？我想人们很担心。
黛博拉·伯克斯博士：嗯，当你看到这种程度的疫情时，自从新冠疫情以来，我能理解人们为什么会担心。
但请记住，刚果民主共和国在过去20到30年里已经发生了17或18次这类疫情。所以这实际上相当常见，尽管这次规模较大。
我认为我们从新冠疫情中学到了如何更加积极主动地防止病毒传入该国。自从近十年前的那些病例以来，我们真正加强了医院建设。现在我们在多家医院设有生物安全容器设施，所以如果疫情发生或有人入境，我们已经做好了准备。
但重要的是我们要像他们那样采取积极主动的措施。当你实施旅行禁令时，你必须真正执行它。他们就是这么做的，拦截了那架飞机。
南希·科德斯：对来自刚果……
黛博拉·伯克斯博士：旅行禁令——是的。是的。
南希·科德斯：……以及其他几个国家的人员，即使是绿卡持有者，如果他们在过去21天内去过该地区，都被禁止进入美国，这是正确的应对措施吗？
黛博拉·伯克斯博士：你知道，这是全面应对措施的一部分，确实如此，而且我认为它没有得到足够的报道，但美国在四天内就派出了灾难援助反应队（DART）。
许多原本在USAID大楼的工作人员现在在国务院，他们曾参与过埃博拉疫情的应对工作，包括2014年和2018年的应对工作。他们已经在现场了。有一个CDC小组一直在金沙萨，他们已经在金沙萨常驻。他们正在做出响应。
所以，当这是全面资金应对的一部分时，是的，这不是唯一的解决方案。
南希·科德斯：如你所知，在过去一年半的时间里，特朗普政府基本上解散了USAID，退出了世界卫生组织，削减了对刚果和乌干达的资助。
你认为这些举措是否导致了此次疫情报告的延迟？它们是否加剧了刚果应对疫情的物资短缺？
黛博拉·伯克斯博士：嗯，当我看看政府最近的行动时，我认为他们立即拿出了5000万到1亿美元的资金，并派出了人员，这是应对措施的一部分。
我认为对我来说更大的问题是，全球社区中的很多人投入了大量资金为非洲疾控中心的建立提供资金，正是为了应对这种情况。我们投入了数亿美元在刚果民主共和国建设实验室能力，在非洲疾控中心。但出于某种原因，这没有起到作用。
所以我们需要弄清楚，为什么我们没有更早地发现疫情？为什么我们作为全球社区建立起来的这些机构没有有效地在早期控制住疫情，从而防止疫情在刚果民主共和国境内传播得如此广泛？
我知道这是一个冲突地区，但我们必须做得更好。我们欠刚果民主共和国人民一个交代。
南希·科德斯：我听到你说美国现在正在向该地区提供资金，但我们也采访了该地区的救援人员，他们表示，在USAID解散后，许多当地项目被终止了，这些项目旨在应对埃博拉疫情的准备和响应，所以他们现在的能力不如以前了。
黛博拉·伯克斯博士：我认为这是一个很好的问题，我们需要真正审视一下。
我知道CDC的全球健康安全项目被保留了下来，很多相关资金也被保留了下来。我知道我们在金沙萨有CDC的人员。如果你看看乌干达的资金——现在，我是从艾滋病方面来看的，这确实建立了很多实验室能力。今年，他们获得了超过4亿美元的资金，所以可能只削减了5%。
但我认为美国民众认为这些项目被大幅削减了。如果你看看美国政府达成的谅解备忘录，我实际上对书面上的数字感到放心。
南希·科德斯：美国目前没有确认的疾控中心主任，没有确认的食品药品监督管理局局长，也没有确认的卫生局局长。
美国是否做好了应对埃博拉或其他传染病疫情传入本国的准备？
黛博拉·伯克斯博士：我认为这是一个很好的问题。
观察事态的发展将非常重要。我正在关注这一点。他们已经成立了一个跨部门的埃博拉应对工作组。而且为了让美国民众放心，我在联邦政府工作了40多年，在军队服役了29年。
我们有一支强大的后备力量。所以，是的，配备所有这些机构的负责人非常重要。我认为至少CDC的人选已经提名了。所以这一点非常重要，但我们在许多机构都有强大的后备力量。而且我真的——我认识他们。他们都是很棒的人。
我认为这个跨部门的应对小组已经在现场部署了资产、人员和资金。而且我认为我们确实需要——我一直回到非洲疾控中心的问题上，因为它本应是我们早期动员防护装备、检测和社区工作的机构。我们只需要弄清楚如何进一步加强它。
南希·科德斯：明白了。
黛博拉·伯克斯博士，非常感谢你做客。感谢你提供的背景信息。我们非常感激。
我们马上回来。
（广告时段）
南希·科德斯：为了纪念即将到来的我国250周年国庆日的阵亡将士纪念日，玛格丽特采访了两位荣誉勋章获得者：退役陆军中校威廉·斯旺森与退役陆军总军士长马修·威廉姆斯。
以下是他们对话的部分内容。
（开始视频连线）
玛格丽特·布伦南：威尔，奥巴马总统在为你颁发荣誉勋章时曾说：
巴拉克·奥巴马（美国前总统）：像威尔这样的美国人提醒我们，我们的国家能成为最好的样子，成为一个公民之间相互照顾、相互履行义务的国家，不仅在容易的时候，也在艰难的时候。
玛格丽特·布伦南：当你进入私人生活后，背负着这样的期望是一种负担吗？
退役陆军中校威廉·斯旺森（荣誉勋章获得者）：我认为我们必须记住，战争的熔炉是不公平的，它确实展现了我们最糟糕和最好的一面。
在危及我们自身生命的时刻，我们会做出一些无法解释的事情，我们会看到一些几乎堪称奇迹的事情。人们作为一个团队团结起来，做一些最终违背良好决策逻辑的事情。
但归根结底，他们所做的是为彼此、为他们的国家而战。当我意识到我从总统那里获得了个人荣誉时，我们必须记住的一件事是，特别是作为荣誉勋章获得者，我们是他人故事的大使。
我们是那些未被讲述的故事的大使。我们是那些和我们一起在战场上的人的大使，约翰逊、约翰逊、肯尼菲克、莱顿和韦斯特布鲁克，他们没有回家。他们的故事是我们故事的一部分。
我们佩戴这枚勋章是为了代表服役，而不是代表我们自己，作为这个奖项的获得者，我们必须记住，我们的责任是继续讲述这些故事，不仅是我们自己的故事，还有所有我们曾服役过的人和所有将服役的人的故事。
玛格丽特·布伦南：这感觉很沉重。感觉经历过这样的事情后，你将永远投身公共服务。
退役陆军中校威廉·斯旺森：我想说，作为荣誉勋章获得者，我们非常能代表美国。我们是这个国家的缩影。我们来自不同的城镇、城市，来自各行各业，有着不同的政治观点。
归根结底，我们是这个国家价值观的非常民主的代表。但作为这个奖项的获得者，我们必须带着这些背景，有些 humble，有些不，并且以此为基础，继续努力过符合这个奖项所代表的生活。
玛格丽特·布伦南：我知道你们两人都在继续努力——帮助他人、服务他人，特别是为退伍军人服务。
马特，特朗普总统曾这样评价你：
唐纳德·特朗普（美国总统）：我们向你不屈不挠的服务、坚不可摧的决心和对我们伟大国家不知疲倦的奉献致敬。
玛格丽特·布伦南：你是否将这些话视为一种负担，或是余生的一项任务？你是怎么看待的？
退役陆军总军士长马修·威廉姆斯（荣誉勋章获得者）：是的。
我认为这可能两者兼而有之，但我想换个角度来表述。你知道，对我来说，这是一种特权，因为不是每个人都有机会佩戴这枚勋章。
超过50%的勋章是追授的。所以能够站在全国人民面前，站在你的家人、你的同伴、你的团队面前，接受美国总统颁发的奖项，而你永远觉得自己配不上这个奖项，因为这根本不可能，你知道，这是极其沉重的。
而且归根结底，这是一种负担。而且，你知道，我的一位朋友和 fellow 获得者，凯尔·卡彭特，经常这么说。他称之为美丽的负担。我在某种程度上同意他的观点，但我也——我也认为归根结底，这是一种特权。
能够继续服务，服务我们的国家，服务我们的人民，服务我们的 fellow 获得者，以及服务今天在全球各地服役的 fellow 军人，这是一种特权。
玛格丽特·布伦南：另一个重要的周年纪念是阿富汗战争。五年前的八月，这场持续了最久的战争结束了，现在这个国家对此进行了大量的审查。真是难以置信。
退役陆军总军士长马修·威廉姆斯：是的。
玛格丽特·布伦南：美国最长的战争。
我想知道你们对此有什么看法，因为你们两人都在那个战场上服役。你如何看待在这场冲突中牺牲的人们？人们对此的谈论方式有很多种，充满了激烈的情绪。但对你来说，当你想到这场战争时，你如何理解美国的经历？
退役陆军中校威廉·斯旺森：作为军人，我们被国家要求 overseas 服役，以保卫国家。就这么简单。我们完成了我们的任务。我们光荣地完成了任务，我们完成任务的代价是留下了一些我们的战友。
因为我们相信这项任务，所以有人失去了生命。归根结底，作为军人，这就是我们的本职。当国家召唤我们服役时，我们会尽我们所能去服务。
玛格丽特·布伦南：听到人们谈论这场战争会感到难过吗？
退役陆军中校威廉·斯旺森：我们的战争是我们历史的一部分。我们 overseas 服役是我们历史的一部分。如果我们不讲述这些故事，作为一个国家，我们就不知道如何不断改进。
我们是一个不完美的国家，一直在努力改进，而我们的历史就是我们展望未来如何做得更好的透镜。
玛格丽特·布伦南：你对谈论美国最长的战争有什么感受？我的意思是，这会很痛苦吗？
退役陆军总军士长马修·威廉姆斯：你知道，我认为我们必须谈论它。你知道，我们必须从中吸取教训。
你可以——你可以爱它或恨它，同意或不同意，这都没关系，这是你的权利。这就是——这就是我们生活在一个自由国家的原因。你知道，这就是我们为什么要做我们所做的事情，这样你可以不同意、喜欢或讨厌，或者任何其他感受。这都没关系。
你知道，我的想法略有不同。我知道我在那里做了什么。我知道我看到人们在那里做了什么。我的经历让我成长为一个丈夫、一个父亲，一个男人。
而且我认为所有这些都极其重要。我知道我为什么服役。我知道我做了什么。我知道我们作为一个团队、作为一个特种部队作战小组（ODA）和整个特种部队社区共同取得了什么成就。我为此感到非常自豪。我为我在阿富汗的服役感到非常自豪。
玛格丽特·布伦南：我们即将迎来美国建国250周年纪念日。具体是什么让你感到乐观？因为如今这个国家有时会让人感到黑暗，有很多黑暗的东西。是什么让你感到乐观？
退役陆军中校威廉·斯旺森：嗯，归根结底，因为我们在华盛顿特区，一切都围绕着政治，我们必须记住，政治并不是一切。
美国人的生活还在继续。孩子们出生了。孩子们去上学。生活得以实现。梦想得以实现。这个国家是一个伟大的地方。这不是政治。也不仅仅是媒体上的新闻片段。归根结底，我们作为一个国家继续前进，不断不完美，不断向前发展，始终努力实现一个更完美的联邦。
这是我们需要记住的重要一点，我们可以在理想上实现什么。在历史上，在这个星球上，没有任何其他地方能达到我们今天的水平。我们需要为此感到骄傲，我们需要记住，这是我们需要专注的地方，我们可以成为什么样的人。
玛格丽特·布伦南：我们可以成为什么样的人，以及这个承诺。
是什么让你感到乐观？
退役陆军总军士长马修·威廉姆斯：记住我们作为一个国家的身份，并借此机会庆祝这一点，思考我们克服的所有——挑战，以及我们已经走了多远，这非常重要。
你知道，我认为，如果你——如果你从这个角度来看，你会非常深入地思考我们从开始到今天的考验和磨难，我们已经取得了巨大的进步。我们的国家是——你知道，我们是一个全球超级大国。我们的经济发展良好。所有这些都很棒。
而且——抛开政治不谈，脱离整个对话。感谢你所拥有的一切，以及为你提供的伟大——机会。而且如果你这么做了，我看不出你怎么能不对我们的未来感到乐观。
玛格丽特·布伦南：嗯，谢谢。谢谢你们两位，也感谢你们的服务。
退役陆军总军士长马修·威廉姆斯：谢谢。
（结束视频连线）
南希·科德斯：两位美国最优秀的人。完整的对话内容可在我们的网站和YouTube频道上观看。
我们马上回来。
（广告时段）
南希·科德斯：今天的节目就是这些。感谢收看。玛格丽特下周将回归主持节目。
代表《直面国家》的所有工作人员，向我们的军人、退伍军人及其家属，感谢你们的服务。
我是南希·科德斯，为您带来《直面国家》。
Full transcript of “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” May 24, 2026
2026-05-24T15:02:32-0400 / https://www.cbsnews.com/news/face-the-nation-full-transcript-05-24-2026/
On this “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” broadcast, moderated by Nancy Cordes:
- Kevin Hassett, director of White House National Economic Council
- Sen. Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland
- Reps. Josh Gottheimer , Democrat of Maine, and Mike Lawler, Republican of New York
- Dr. Deborah Birx, former White House coronavirus response coordinator
- Lt. Col. William Swenson (Ret.) and Master Sgt. Matthew Williams(Ret.), Medal of Honor recipients
Click here to browse full transcripts from 2026 of “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”
*
NANCY CORDES: I’m Nancy Cordes in Washington.
And this week on Face the Nation: U.S. negotiators appear to be nearing a peace agreement with Iran. We will have the latest.
Sources familiar with the talks tell CBS News that the latest proposal to end the war, which is now in its 13th week, includes a process to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the unfreezing of some Iranian assets held in foreign banks, and a continuation of negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program.
We will talk to the president’s top economic adviser, Kevin Hassett, about the impact of the war on the economy. And we will take a closer look at the outrage on both sides of the aisle this week over the creation of a $1.8 billion anti-weaponization payout fund. Maryland Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen will be with us.
We will also hear from a bipartisan duo working to fight antisemitism in politics, New York Republican Mike Lawler and New Jersey Democrat Josh Gottheimer.
Plus, as the World Health Organization warns that Ebola is spreading rapidly in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, we will talk to Dr. Deborah Birx.
And, finally, a special Memorial Day conversation with two Medal of Honor recipients about the significance of service.
It’s all just ahead on Face the Nation.
Good morning, and welcome to Face the Nation. Margaret is off. I’m Nancy Cordes.
On this holiday weekend, President Trump has been hard at work at the White House to iron out an agreement with Iran. When I spoke to the president on Saturday, he sounded upbeat about the potential for a deal and said that he – quote – “wouldn’t even be talking about an agreement” if it did not prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon, adding – quote – “We’re getting everything we want. I will only sign a deal where we get everything we want.”
But it appears that most of the nuclear decisions would actually be left to the next round of negotiations, and that has some Republicans worried this morning.
We’re going to begin with senior foreign correspondent Imtiaz Tyab reporting from Tel Aviv.
(Begin VT)
IMTIAZ TYAB (voice-over): In New Delhi this morning, Secretary of State, Marco Rubio had this to say about Iran:
MARCO RUBIO (U.S. Secretary of State): I will leave it to the president to make further announcements on it. Suffice it to say that some progress has been made.
IMTIAZ TYAB: On Saturday, President Trump held a conference call with leaders of several Arab and Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt, Turkey, the UAE, and Pakistan.
In a TRUTH Social post afterwards, the president said: “An agreement has largely been negotiated, subject to finalization between the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
Pakistan’s army chief, Asim Munir, who’s been acting as lead mediator, was in Tehran at the time-, where he met with Iranian leaders as part of attempts to narrow the remaining gaps with Washington.
At a media briefing, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Esmaeil Baghaei, said, over the past week, the process has moved towards reducing the points of disagreement, but there are still issues that need to be discussed through the mediators.
Those points of disagreement include the fate of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s frozen assets in foreign banks, and its nuclear program, which includes a large stockpile of nearly bomb-grade highly enriched uranium, which the president says is his red line.
(End VT)
IMTIAZ TYAB: And after his calls with Muslim and Arab leaders last night, President Trump also spoke to Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Now, a senior Israeli political source has told CBS News the P.M. made it clear to the president that Israel would retain the right to take action against what it sees as threats, including in Lebanon, Nancy, amid reports the potential agreement between the U.S. and Iran would also see an end to the war there.
NANCY CORDES: Imtiaz Tyab, thank you so much.
Some key Republican senators have already weighed in on the early reports about the contours of a possible deal.
Senate Armed Services Chair Roger Wicker said putting off nuclear discussions for later would – quote – “be a disaster” and that “everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught.”
Senator Ted Cruz of Texas said: “If the result of all that is to be an Iranian regime now receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium and develop nuclear weapons, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake.”
We turn now to Maryland Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen.
Senator, thank you so much for being with me.
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-Maryland): It’s good to be with you, Nancy.
NANCY CORDES: So, I want to stress that all of this is still evolving. We’re getting slightly different takes on the terms of the deal from the Americans and the Iranians.
But what do you think about what you have heard so far?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, Nancy, this war against Iran has been a big blunder from the very start.
The president should have stuck to his campaign pledge of keeping us out of war and focused on bringing down prices. He’s done just the opposite. Prices are going up. Interest rates are going up, and we’re mired in this war in Iran.
And when you’re digging a hole, you should stop digging. That’s what this agreement sounds like. It sounds like we will go back to opening the Strait of Hormuz, which, of course, was open before the war started.
I will say, however, it looks like Iran will retain more control over those straits. We also know Iran has an even more hard-line regime in place now, and we’re talking about releasing some of Iran’s frozen assets.
So, look, my view is, as I said, stop digging.
NANCY CORDES: I want to ask you about something that stirred up a lot of controversy on both sides of the aisle on Capitol Hill this week, the DOJ’s new anti-weaponization fund, nearly $1.8 billion set aside for people who say they were treated unfairly by the federal government.
You have been calling it a political slush fund. You are trying to force Republicans to take a vote on placing some guardrails around that fund. What kind of guardrails are you talking about?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, Nancy, first we should get rid of this political slush fund, $1.8 billion of taxpayer money.
But I have been proposing amendments to prohibit, for example, people who rioted on January 6 and assaulted police officers from being eligible for the fund. People who have been convicted of child molestation, they should not be eligible for the fund. Members of Congress should not be eligible for the fund.
And I would hope all Republicans, including Republican candidates, should come out strongly against this slush fund which the president has set up for these purposes.
NANCY CORDES: You pushed the acting attorney general this week on that question of whether people who attacked police officers would be eligible for the fund. I asked the president about that this week as well. He did not say that those people would be ineligible.
Senate Republicans were very angry about this, and they really gave it to the attorney – acting attorney general behind closed doors this week. Do you think that there is an appetite for trying to get rid of this fund in Congress, and how would that even work?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, I hope so, Nancy.
I think most Republicans are more upset about the fact that this interrupted their effort to pass this reconciliation bill with another $70 billion of taxpayer funds for ICE. I think that’s what upset them the most.
And they decided to leave town because they didn’t want to have to vote on these amendments that I have proposed and others have proposed. So we will see how this all turns out. We should get rid of this political slush fund altogether, and we will insist on having these votes when we get back.
NANCY CORDES: I have been told by a senior administration official that there are now some urgent efforts under way to address the concerns that Republicans have raised about this fund.
But they continue to insist they have got the right to do this and that, in fact, they already have the ability to make these payouts, and, if anything, they’re making the process more transparent by coming up with rules, by appointing commissioners, and all the rest.
What do you think of that argument?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, that’s absurd, and this is really corrupt from the start.
I mean, this is essentially President Trump negotiating with President Trump through the acting attorney general, who was Trump’s former personal lawyer. They have set it up so they have complete control over the five members of this commission that can be selected. President Trump can fire any of them whenever he wants.
And so this is completely under their control, a slush fund. And they have not committed, Nancy, to being completely transparent. The acting attorney general refused to say that they would disclose the names of all the people who receive these taxpayer funds.
So let’s be clear. This is a corrupt deal. And, in the process, the president, of course, got a complete get-out-of-free – get-out-of-jail- free card with respect to any taxes that he has due and owing, another corrupt part of this deal.
NANCY CORDES: I want to ask you about a case that you have been heavily involved in. And there was a big development this week. A judge threw out the federal human smuggling charges against Kilmar Abrego Garcia of your home state, Maryland.
You visited him in El Salvador after he was wrongfully deported to that country, placed in the Supermax prison CECOT. The judge said that DOJ’s prosecution of him was vindictive, and DOJ now says it plans to appeal.
Have you spoken to him or his family? How are they feeling about this decision?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Nancy, I have spoken to him and his wife, Jennifer, and they’re, of course, pleased that the court system have applied the law.
This was absolutely a vindictive prosecution. The judge called it essentially an abuse of power, because the Trump administration brought these new charges against him because he decided to exercise his due process and constitutional rights.
They had admitted that they had wrongfully disappeared him to El Salvador, and he contested that. And, of course, he is now back. They’re still trying to deport him. But he filed his claims under the Constitution.
And so this case is not about Kilmar Abrego Garcia alone. This is really about the rights of each and every one of us. And when the Trump administration decided to vindictive – vindictively prosecute him for that, they were further threatening the rights of all of us.
NANCY CORDES: We have got about a minute left, but I want to ask you about this election autopsy that was finally released by the Democratic National Committee this week.
Do you feel like you got any answers from that autopsy on why the Democrats lost in 2024? And do you believe that the head of the DNC should resign over this?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, Nancy, this is a very shoddy piece of work. It’s an incomplete piece of work. And I can understand why Ken Martin was reluctant to release it earlier.
But, as he has said, he owns this problem. He should have ripped the Band- Aid off earlier and put it out. No, we’re six months from a very important election, and we should not be changing horses at this time.
I will say that the overall thrust of the report in indicates that we should not just go back to the pre-Trump status quo. And I have said from the beginning it was a failure, obviously, of the Democratic Party to lose to someone like Donald Trump a second time.
We need to be clear to the American people that we understand their financial and economic pain and their daily struggles and that we’re going to do something about it, we’re going to fight for them and we’re going to fight against the special interests, very powerful special interests, who try to stack the deck against them.
NANCY CORDES: Right.
Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, thank you so much for joining us this morning. I appreciate it.
And we will be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
NANCY CORDES: We go now to a bipartisan pair of representatives.
Josh Gottheimer is a Democrat from New Jersey and Mike Lawler is a Republican from New York.
Congressmen, welcome. Thank you for joining us.
REPRESENTATIVE JOSH GOTTHEIMER (D-New Jersey): Thanks for having us.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE LAWLER (R-New York): Thanks for having us.
NANCY CORDES: Sure.
Congressman Lawler, I want to start with you and get your take on this memorandum of understanding that appears to be taking shape between the U.S. and Iran. We’ve already seen some blowback from some of your fellow Republicans. South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham said, if the reports on the deal are accurate – quote – “It makes one wonder why the war started to begin with.”
Congressman, do you share his view?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE LAWLER: No.
And I think it’s important that we actually get all of the details, number one. Number two, if you look at what took place during the kinetic activity, what did they do? They focused on the ballistic missiles program, the drone capabilities, the naval fleet, and seizing control of Iran’s airspace.
They were able to do that. Iran retaliated with a blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, and President Trump blockaded that, which caused great harm to Iran’s economy, stopped the flow of oil to China. And so there’s been immense pressure for everybody to reach a deal.
But the bottom line is, the objective is to ensure that Iran does not possess a nuclear weapon. And that is what President Trump has been clear and consistent on from the very beginning. And so I think it is imperative, before everybody rush to, you know, get to the microphone, that they actually understand the terms of the agreement that is being proposed, and specifically with respect to the enriched uranium.
NANCY CORDES: So, you like what you’re hearing?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE LAWLER: Look, I have been in touch with the administration. I serve as chair of the Middle East and North Africa Subcommittee on the Foreign Affairs Committee.
I think, on the whole, what the administration has been able to do for the first time in 47 years has forced the remnants of this regime into a negotiation, a real negotiation. The fact is, the JCPOA from over a decade ago was not a negotiation. It put Iran on the glide path to a nuclear bomb. We are trying to stop that, and the president took decisive action to do it.
NANCY CORDES: Congressman Gottheimer, you’ve been pushing to get a war powers resolution passed. You’re getting closer to doing it. If the nuclear decisions get pushed off, but the Strait of Hormuz does get reopened more quickly, is that a win for American taxpayers?
REPRESENTATIVE JOSH GOTTHEIMER: Well, I think the good news here – and, as Mike said, we’re still getting details.
The good news, is the straits will be back open, if that’s true, and that will mean gas prices will go down for Americans, and that’s good news.
The news that’s bad news, in my opinion, is – and this is where it’s unclear – is, the initial objectives had to do with enriched uranium and making sure that, from a nuclear capability, Iran, which I think is a clear adversary to the United States under banners of “Death to America,” and I believe the Iranian regime should be crushed.
But part of that is making sure that we diminish their nuclear capabilities, so they can’t make the jump to having a nuclear weapon, that we significantly diminish their ballistic military capabilities, their missile capabilities, and, of course, their drone activity, and then with all the dollars that have gone historically to terror programs and their proxy programs, Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Those are all questions that are out there, and it’s unclear if we’ve made any substantial progress there.
And I think, you know, if, at the end, to the point of Senator Graham, if you look back at this and say, OK, we’ve made huge investments, and we’ve had a clear goal along, which is to crush Iran and reduce their ballistic and missile program and their nuclear program, their terror program, and all we got was actually something that was never on the table, a reopening of the Straits of Hormuz, that, to me, in the end, will not be reaching the goals initially set forth here.
And so that’s – that’s the big question, if we’ve just really gotten nothing and kind of run in place.
NANCY CORDES: Congressman Lawler, the president made a high-profile visit to your district on Friday. He campaigned for you because you represent one of just three Republican-held districts in the U.S. that Kamala Harris won in 2024.
How are you explaining to your constituents this new settlement that prevents the IRS from auditing any Trump family documents prior to this year?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE LAWLER: Well, I think, when it comes to any agreements that the president has made with the IRS, from my vantage point, you know, I think, looking back at what the Biden administration did, they certainly weaponized the government and were targeting the president.
And I think he obviously had claims that he brought against the government as a result of that. From the standpoint of the president, you know, I was happy to welcome him to my district, just as I did Joe Biden when he was president. Joe Biden came three years ago to my district, and I showed up.
President Trump was here. We had over 5,000 people show up in my district to hear directly from the president on the issues most acutely impacting them, including my ability to deliver on lifting the cap on SALT.
The president also announced bestowing the Presidential Medal of Freedom on one of my constituents who died on 9/11, Welles Crowther, the man in the red bandana who saved 18 lives.
And we also heard from the Gorman family. Their daughter Sheridan Gorman was brutally murdered by an illegal immigrant who was allowed into this country under Joe Biden’s open border policies, and then arrested in Chicago, released under cashless bail and disastrous pro-criminal policies in the city of Chicago, and murdered this 18-year-old girl, who had her whole life ahead of her.
NANCY CORDES: Congressman…
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE LAWLER: And so hearing from her family was paramount. So, I was happy to have the president there on Friday.
NANCY CORDES: Understood.
I do want to get to the issue of antisemitism, because we wanted to have you both on together because you are working together on ways to address the rise in antisemitism in the U.S.
Congressman Gottheimer, I understand the value in lawmakers drawing attention to some of the really vile incidents that we have seen in this country lately, the stabbing of a Jewish man on the streets of New York, the shooting at the Capitol Jewish Museum here in Washington, but what can Congress realistically do about this problem?
REPRESENTATIVE JOSH GOTTHEIMER: Well, we know, since October 7 and the Hamas terrorist attacks, antisemitic incidents in the country are up 70 percent.
Mike and I, both our states have some of the top anti – numbers of antisemitic incidents in the entire country. It’s totally unacceptable. And what’s happening now is, it’s far too often in our politics on both sides, right, whether it’s Hasan Piker, who’s a streamer on the left or Candace Owens on the right, who are campaigning with candidates around the country, actually encouraging some of the most vile antisemitic language, like Hasan Piker, who calls Jews pig dogs, Candace Owens, who denies the Holocaust.
We’ve got candidates on both sides who’ve embraced them, who’ve made insane comments, like the woman in Texas this past week, a Democratic candidate, who said that Jews should be in camps. You’ve got Bilzerian, Bilzerian, Florida, who said we should exterminate Jews.
None of this should be acceptable. And – and Mike and I, whether it’s through the Antisemitism Awareness Act, which we passed out of the House last Congress on defining antisemitism, and introduced again this Congress, or both of us condemning Piker and Owens in legislation, both of us believe deeply that we need to stand up to this.
And Mike’s been very outspoken, as have others. And our leadership on both sides needs to make it very clear time and again that – that you don’t stand with these – with people like Owens and Piker, and they’re not welcome in our districts, and none of this language in – is acceptable either. I think it’s very important.
NANCY CORDES: Congressman Lawler, why do you believe that fringe candidates like the one that Congressman Gottheimer just mentioned sense that there is a market for that sort of hate to begin with? Is there some kind of permission structure that has been created in both of your parties?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE LAWLER: Well, I don’t think there’s any question that antisemitism has been condoned by folks across the political aisle.
And, from my vantage point, it is something that all of us have a responsibility to push back against regardless of party. These candidates are coming forward. They feel it is OK to blame Jews for whatever ills there are in the world.
Obviously, you know, I experienced just last week Rand Paul’s son screaming at me in a bar because he thought I was Jewish, when, in fact, I’m Irish Italian Catholic. And regardless of whether I was or I wasn’t Jewish, the idea…
NANCY CORDES: He has apologized for that, correct?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE LAWLER: … that people feel it is OK to engage in that.
He did, ultimately. But the idea that people feel it’s OK to engage in that type of conduct is shameful. And I think what Josh and I are trying to do, in putting this resolution forward, is to say, enough, and to say to both parties, we have to police our own. We cannot allow this. We cannot support candidates who engage in rank, vile antisemitism.
NANCY CORDES: Right.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE LAWLER: You know, the Jewish population is about 2 percent of the United States, and, meanwhile, it’s over 50 percent of the hate crimes that are experienced.
NANCY CORDES: Yes.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE LAWLER: Something’s got to give.
NANCY CORDES: Got it.
Congressman Lawler, Congressman Gottheimer, we appreciate both of you coming on. Thank you so much.
And we’ll be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
NANCY CORDES: We will be right back with a lot more Face the Nation. Stay with us.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
NANCY CORDES: Welcome back to Face the Nation.
We turn now to the Director of the National Economic Council, Kevin Hassett, who joins us from the White House North Lawn.
Kevin, thank you so much for being with me.
KEVIN HASSETT (Director, National Economic Council): Great to be here. Thank you.
NANCY CORDES: I want to start by getting your take on the state of the economy, because a kind of confusing picture emerged this week. The Dow Jones hit an all-time high, and yet consumer sentiment hit an all-time low. Mortgage rates hit a nine-month peak. Inflation is up.
Earnings at big box stores like Walmart are up, in part because people from across the income spectrum are being drawn to low prices right now. Are there storm clouds gathering in the economy?
KEVIN HASSETT: No, I don’t think there are storm clouds gathering at all.
And, in fact, let’s start with the consumer sentiment number, because that was a number that was very striking to me and to you, I know, when it came in very, very low. And what we did is, we went to their Web site and we looked that they actually break it out by political affiliation, so they have it for Democrats, independents, and Republicans.
And if you look at it, consumer sentiment at the sort of peak of the Biden inflation, the stagflation was way above 100, and it’s dropped all the way down into the low 30s now, about the lowest it’s ever been for Democrats. But, for Republicans, it’s held about steady.
And, if you look at it, independents and Democrats are really highly correlated, which suggests to us that their sample is Democrats. And so if you go to consumer confidence, which is something that’s actually, I think, a more scientific survey, the consumer confidence is consistent with all the other positive numbers we’re seeing right now.
NANCY CORDES: But you don’t dispute that the war has taken a toll on parts of the economy?
KEVIN HASSETT: Right now, consumer confidence is the highest it’s been in – since the beginning of the year, and so you don’t see a toll of the war on consumer confidence, which is the Conference Board survey.
But, again, GDPNow, the Atlanta Fed’s estimate of second-quarter GDP, is north of 4 percent. We’ve got initial claims for unemployment insurance as low as they’ve been since the ’60s. And so there’s so much going on that is really, I think, surprising people that think that the disruption from the Middle East is going to harm the economy.
It’s just not there in the data, except for the consumer sentiment data. But I actually think that we should stop calling it consumer sentiment and start calling it political sentiment, because the variables really are – it’s really a political variable, and not an economic variable.
NANCY CORDES: The data on gas prices is pretty undeniable.
Memorial Day weekend, gas prices are at a four-year high. AAA says they’ll remain elevated throughout the summer, at least. Last month, you said that high gas prices would be a temporary phenomenon. Did the White House paint too rosy a picture of the impact that this war would have by emphasizing that this was going to be a four-to-six-week excursion?
KEVIN HASSETT: Well, I think the four to six week was an accurate description of like, when, the sort of active kinetic events were going to happen.
Right now, I will let the president decide on whether he thinks the deal is ready to go this week or not. But the bottom line is, once the straits are open, then the tankers are going to go back and they’re going to refill the refineries almost right away.
A tanker goes about 300 nautical miles a day, and so the places like India and Pakistan, which are close to the straits, are going to get their oil and then turn it into refined product right away. Singapore, which is one of the places where jet fuel prices are the highest, is going to get its stuff just about right away.
But, if you’re down in New Zealand, it’ll take a little bit longer. But, really, like between a month and two months, we expect everybody to have all the oil they need at every refinery on Earth.
NANCY CORDES: Well, we know that things will get better once the strait reopens. The question is, when will it reopen?
KEVIN HASSETT: Right. Well, that’s – that’s something for the president and Marco Rubio and the Iranians to work out.
NANCY CORDES: I realize that, as director of the White House Economic Council, this $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund is not part of your portfolio.
KEVIN HASSETT: Sure.
NANCY CORDES: But the backlash to that fund did derail a bill this week that included funding for ICE and the CBP. And government funding is part of your portfolio.
So, what is the administration doing, if anything, to try to cool members of the president’s own party down on this issue? They seemed really angry and really blindsided.
KEVIN HASSETT: Well, I don’t know if across the board they were, but there’s certainly some people who felt that way.
And – and our head of leg affairs, James Braid, is a real professional. He’s been talking to everybody. He’s been arranging for phone calls with those of us at the White House that want to talk to people and hear people’s concerns.
But the bottom line is that, you know, we expect the progress that the president wants to see in Congress to happen. Congress has delivered over and over under the leadership of Mike Johnson. And so I understand that, you know, there’s something that was a little bit different this week than maybe you expected, but I don’t expect that to go on.
And one thing we’ve seen from primaries is that people that buck the president generally regret it politically.
NANCY CORDES: “The Wall Street Journal” editorial board really took a swipe at the president over that fund, over the ballroom on Saturday.
They said – quote – “Republicans don’t want to say this publicly, but, privately, they do. President Trump’s personal political obsessions are hurting his presidency, hurting the chances for further foreign policy gains, and putting control of the House and Senate in jeopardy.”
Does the president realize that he is putting Republicans in a tough spot by forcing them to take votes on things that are unpopular, like the fund, like the ballroom, like the war, in a midterm election year?
KEVIN HASSETT: Look, I respect “The Wall Street Journal” very much. I saw Paul Gigot at the Kevin Warsh signing-in on – just on Friday, but the bottom line is, the president believes that the ballroom is something that should have been there for a long time, and he’s using his own money and the money of donors to make it so that the taxpayers don’t have to pay for that ballroom.
And, as far as weaponization, I don’t think that you or I would disagree…
NANCY CORDES: Well, they would have to pay a billion dollars, correct?
KEVIN HASSETT: No, it’s not for the ballroom. That’s for securing the entire White House.
And, my goodness, to argue about that after we were all here yesterday – I actually wasn’t here. I was at my home a couple blocks away when the shooting happened. Of course, we’ve got to make the White House more secure.
But on the $1.8 billion fund for weaponization, I don’t think you would disagree, right? The previous administration and the Obama administration weaponized government against President Trump.
And what he wants to do is make sure that never happens again and compensate the people who were the targets of the destruction of their lives. What they would do is, they would call people in to Jack Smith’s office, and then bury them in subpoena requests and bankrupt them. And that’s something that should never happen again, never.
And I think that I – I doubt that there’s anyone that disagrees with that.
NANCY CORDES: Kevin Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council, appreciate your time this morning.
KEVIN HASSETT: Thank you. Same here.
NANCY CORDES: And we’ll be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
NANCY CORDES: We turn now to the escalating Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Joining us to discuss is the former White House coronavirus response coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx, who also previously helped coordinate the international response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak when she was global AIDS coordinator.
Dr. Birx, thank you so much for being with us.
DR. DEBORAH BIRX (Former White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator): Good to be with you, Nancy.
NANCY CORDES : Doctor, the White House – the WHO, rather, says there are now almost 750 suspected cases in the Congo, around the Congo, and nearly 200 deaths. How does the severity of this situation compare to previous outbreaks?
DR. DEBORAH BIRX: Well, the problem with this particular outbreak is there was probably two, three, or four cycles of infection before it was even reported.
And so a lot of the numbers you’re seeing and the rapid rise of the numbers is because it went undetected and underreported for probably three or four weeks. That resulted in a lot of case reporting all at once. And so I can’t really tell you what the slope of new cases are, which is really the important thing when you’re following an acute infectious disease.
But just to make it very clear to your audience, the people we are seeing today that are cases were probably infected two weeks ago. And so I think that’s what makes us all concerned is, we’re looking at this – at this virus and this outbreak with really old data.
NANCY CORDES: I want to get to that delay in reporting the outbreak in a moment.
But, first, we saw this week that a plane from Paris to Detroit had to be diverted to Montreal after a person from the Congo was mistakenly allowed to board. What do Americans need to know about the transition of this disease and the risk here at home? I think people are worried.
DR. DEBORAH BIRX: Well, when you see this level of outbreak, ever since COVID, I can understand why people are worried.
But, remember, DRC has had 17 or 18 of these outbreaks in the last 20, 30 years. So this is actually fairly commonplace, although this is a large one.
I think we learned from COVID how to be much more proactive about preventing the virus getting to the country. Ever since we had those cases almost a decade ago, what we did is, we really strengthened hospitals. Now we have biocontainer facilities in multiple hospitals, so we’re prepared if it ever happens or someone enters the country.
But it’s important that we are proactive, like they have been. And when you have a travel ban, you have to really enforce it. And it’s what they did when they diverted the plane.
NANCY CORDES: Is this travel ban the right answer, people from the Congo…
DR. DEBORAH BIRX: The travel ban – yes. Yes.
NANCY CORDES: … from a couple other countries not being able to come into the U.S., even green card holders, if they’ve been in that area over the past 21 days or so?
DR. DEBORAH BIRX: You know, I – it’s part of a comprehensive response, which it is, and I don’t think it’s getting that much coverage, but within four days, the U.S. sent a DART team.
A lot of the USAID people who are no longer in the USAID building are now in the State Department and have been part of Ebola responses, the 2014 and 2018 response. They’re already on the ground. There’s a CDC group that was in Kinshasa, is permanently in Kinshasa. They’re responding.
And so, when it’s part of a comprehensive funding response, yes, not as a – – an only one solution.
NANCY CORDES: As you know, in the past year-and-a-half, the Trump administration has largely dismantled USAID. It has withdrawn from the World Health Organization. It cut funding to the Congo and Uganda.
Do you think that those moves contributed to the delay in reporting this outbreak? And are they contributing to the lack of supplies in dealing with the outbreak in the Congo?
DR. DEBORAH BIRX: Well, when I look what the administration has done recently, I think they put $50 million to $100 million out there immediately, and sent people, that’s part of the response.
I think the bigger question to me is, a lot of us in the global community invested extensively in creating the African CDC for this very reason, for this very response. Hundreds of millions of dollars went into building laboratory capacity in the DRC, at the African CDC. And, for some reason, that failed us.
And so what we need to do is figure out, why didn’t we detect this earlier? Why didn’t the institutions that we all stood up as a global community effectively control this outbreak early, so that it didn’t spread as far and wide as it has within the DRC?
I understand it’s a conflict area, but we have to do better. We owe it to the people in the DRC.
NANCY CORDES: I hear what you’re saying about the fact that the money is now flowing from the U.S. to the region, but we talk to aid workers in the region as well who said that a lot of local programs were terminated after USAID was dismantled, programs aimed at Ebola preparedness and response, and so they just don’t have the same capacity as they did before.
DR. DEBORAH BIRX: I think it’s a great question, and we need to really look at that.
I know CDC’s Global Health Security program was retained, and a lot of that funding retained. I know we had people in Kinshasa as part of the CDC. If you look at the Uganda funding – now, I’m looking at it from the HIV side, which really built a lot of the laboratory capacity. This year, they’re getting over $400 million, so maybe there was a 5 percent cut.
But I think the American people were thinking that these programs had been slashed. If you look at the MOUs of the agreements that the U.S. government have been made, I have actually been reassured by the numbers that are there on paper.
NANCY CORDES: The U.S. right now does not have a confirmed head of the CDC. It does not have a confirmed head of the FDA, doesn’t have a confirmed surgeon general.
Is the U.S. prepared to deal with an outbreak of Ebola or any other infectious disease if it comes to our shores?
DR. DEBORAH BIRX: I think it’s a great question.
And watching how this plays out will be very important. And I’m watching that. They’ve already created an interagency Ebola response task force. And just to reassure the American public, I was in the federal government for 40-plus years and in the military for 29.
There’s a deep bench. And so, yes, it’s important to have the leads of all of these agencies. I think people have been nominated to at least the CDC.So I think that’s very important. But we do have a deep bench in many of these agencies. And I really – I know them. They’re great people.
I think this interagency response is already putting assets, people, and money on the ground. And I think what we do need – I just keep coming back to African CDC, because that was supposed to be our early mobilizer of protective gear, of testing, of community work. And we just need to figure out how to strengthen that even further.
NANCY CORDES: Got it.
Dr. Deborah Birx, thanks so much for being with us. Thanks for the context. We appreciate it.
And we’ll be back in a moment.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
NANCY CORDES: To commemorate Memorial Day as we approach our country’s 250th birthday, Margaret sat down with two Medal of Honor recipients, retired Army Lieutenant Colonel William Swenson and retired Army Command Sergeant Major Matt Williams.
Here’s part of their conversation.
(Begin VT)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Will, when President Obama presented you the Medal of Honor, he said:
BARACK OBAMA (Former President of the United States): Americans like Will remind us of what our country can be at its best, a nation of citizens who look out for one another, who meet our obligations to one another, not just when it’s easy, but also when it’s hard.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is it a burden to carry expectations like that with you when you enter private life?
LT. COL. WILLIAM SWENSON (RET.) (Medal of Honor Recipient): I think we have to remember that the crucible of war is unfair, and it does bring out both the worst of us and the best of us.
In moments of great risk to our own lives, we do things that are inexplicable, and we see things that are almost at the level of miracles. People are coming together as a team to do things that ultimately flies in the face of good decision-making.
But, ultimately, what they’re doing is fighting on behalf of each other and on behalf of their country. And when I recognize that I received individual accolades from the president, one of the things that we have to remember, specifically as Medal of Honor recipients, is that we’re the ambassadors to other people’s stories.
We’re ambassadors to those whose stories were not told. We’re ambassadors to those who were with us on the battlefield, Johnson, Johnson, Kenefick, Layton, and Westbrook, and they didn’t come home. Their stories are part of our story.
We wear this medal as a representation of service, not as a representation of ourselves, and that is a weight that we as recipients of this award have to remember is, our responsibility is to continue telling the stories, not just of us, but of everyone we served with and everyone who will serve.
MARGARET BRENNAN: That feels heavy. It feels like you will always be part of public service after going through something like this.
LT. COL. WILLIAM SWENSON (RET.): I would say, as Medal of Honor recipients, we are a very fair representation of America. We’re a snapshot of this country. We come from towns, cities, all walks of life, different political views.
And, ultimately, we are a very democratic representation of the values of this country. But, as recipients of this award, we have to take those backgrounds, some humble, some not, and, with that, continue to try to lead lives that are emblematic of what this award represents.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And I understand both of you are continuing to try to – to help and to serve, particularly with veterans.
Matt, President Trump said of you:
DONALD TRUMP (President of the United States): We salute your unyielding service, your unbreakable resolve and your untiring devotion to our great nation.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you think of those words as a – as a burden or as an assignment for the rest of your life? How do you think of it?
COMMAND SGT. MAJ. MATT WILLIAMS (RET.) (Medal of Honor Recipient): Yes.
I think it’s probably a little of both, but I will kind of frame it a bit differently. You know, to me, it’s a privilege, because not everybody gets the opportunity to put this medal on.
Well over 50 percent of the medals that have been awarded have been awarded posthumously. To – so to be able to stand there in front of the nation, in front of your family, in front of your peers, in front of your team, and have the president of the United States of America present an award to you that you can never feel like you actually ever earned, because it’s just impossible, you know, is extremely heavy.
And it is a burden, at the end of the day. And, you know, one of our – my friends and fellow recipients, you know, Kyle Carpenter says it all the time. He calls it a beautiful burden. And I agree with him, to a point, but I also – I also think it’s a privilege, at the end of the day.
It’s a privilege to be able to continue to serve, serve our country, serve our people, serve our fellow recipients, and serve the fellow service members that are out there across the globe today.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Another key anniversary is Afghanistan. There has been so much scrutiny in this country over the war that ended five years ago this August. Hard to believe.
COMMAND SGT. MAJ. MATT WILLIAMS (RET.): Yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: America’s longest war.
I wonder how that sits with you, since you both served on that battlefield. What do you think of those who sacrificed in that conflict? It’s spoken about in so many different, heated ways. But, for you, when you think of that war, how do you make sense of America’s experience?
LT. COL. WILLIAM SWENSON (RET.): As military service members, we were asked by our country to go serve overseas on behalf of the defense of the nation. It’s as simple as that. We did our jobs. We did our jobs honorably, and we did our jobs to the measure that we left some of ours behind.
There was loss of life because we believed in the mission. And, ultimately, as service members, that’s what we do. We serve to the best of our ability when our nation calls us to serve.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is it difficult to hear people talk about the war?
LT. COL. WILLIAM SWENSON (RET.): Our war is part of our history. Our service overseas is part of our history. If we don’t tell these stories, we as a nation don’t know how to always improve.
We are an imperfect nation that’s always trying to improve, and it’s through our history as a lens that we look forward on how to do better next time.
MARGARET BRENNAN: How do you feel about conversation about America’s longest war? I mean, is it painful?
COMMAND SGT. MAJ. MATT WILLIAMS (RET.): You know, I think we have to talk about it. You know, we have to learn from it.
You know, you can – you can love it or hate it or agree with or disagree with it, and that’s all fine, and that’s your prerogative. And that’s – that’s part of living in a free country. You know, that’s why we did what we did, so that you can disagree or like or hate or whatever. It doesn’t matter.
You know, I think about it a little bit differently. I know what I did over there. I know what I saw people do over there. My experiences have grow – made me grow as a husband, a father, as a man.
And I think all those things are extremely important. I know what I served for. I know what I did. I know what we accomplished together as a team and as an ODA and as a Special Forces community writ large. And I’m very proud of that. I’m very proud of my service to Afghanistan.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We are coming up on this 250th anniversary of the American experience. What specifically makes you optimistic? Because this country, at times, can feel dark, these days. There’s a lot of darkness. What makes you feel optimistic?
LT. COL. WILLIAM SWENSON (RET.): Well, ultimately, because we’re in Washington, D.C., and everything revolves around politics, we have to remember that politics aren’t everything.
American lives continue on. Children are born. Children go to school. Lives are achieved. Dreams are achieved. This country is a great place. It’s not politics. It’s not just what’s the news bites coming off of media. Ultimately, we continue forward as a country, continually imperfect, continually evolving forward, always trying to achieve a more perfect union.
That’s what’s important to remember, what we can achieve aspirationally. No other place in history, time or on this planet have ever gotten to where we are today. We need to be proud of that, and we need to remember that is what we stay focused on, what we can be.
MARGARET BRENNAN: What we can be, and the promise of it.
What makes you optimistic?
COMMAND SGT. MAJ. MATT WILLIAMS (RET.): It’s so important to remember who we are as a country and take an opportunity to celebrate that, and think about all the – the challenges that we’ve overcome, how far we’ve actually come.
You know, I think, if you – if you frame it that way, you think very deeply about our trials and tribulations from beginning to today, we’ve made tremendous strides. Our country is – you know, we’re a super – global superpower. Our economy is doing well. All those things are great.
And – and take politics aside, out of this whole conversation. Be grateful for what you’ve got and the great – the opportunity that was provided for you. And, if you do that, I don’t see how you can’t be optimistic about our future.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, thank you. Thank you both, and thank you for your service.
COMMAND SGT. MAJ. MATT WILLIAMS (RET.): Thank you.
(End VT)
NANCY CORDES: Two of America’s best. The full conversation is on our Web site and on our YouTube channel.
We will be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
NANCY CORDES: That’s it for us today. Thanks for watching. Margaret will be back next week.
On behalf of all of us here at Face the Nation, to our military, our veterans, and their families, thank you for your service.
For Face the Nation, I’m Nancy Cordes.
发表回复