Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Governor Wes Moore, Rep. Debbie Dingell, Steve Witkoff
54:45 Share

If you don't know about flyer deals on Instacart, this message is for you. Flyer deals are like strolling through your favorite store looking for deals. But you're scrolling your phone, and maybe you're in bed. Because getting delivery doesn't mean you have to miss deals like you get at the store. Like the one creamer that doesn't make your stomach hurt, or the pasta sauce you can't not buy when it's on sale. So download the Instacart app, shop flyers, and never miss a deal on one of your favorites. Plus, get delivery in as fast as 30 minutes.

I've been working with a nurse dietitian for the last six months, and it's been life-changing. I've lost weight, healed my relationship with food, and have way more energy. Working with a dietitian online to create a personalized nutrition plan was so easy thanks to Nourish. The best part? I pay $0 out of pocket because Nourish accepts hundreds of insurance plans. 94% of patients pay $0 out of pocket. Find your dietitian at usenourish.com. That's usenourish.com.

I'm Margaret Brennan in Washington and this week on Face the Nation, with economic turmoil at home, President Trump looks abroad. Russia's Vladimir Putin responds to a U.S. ceasefire proposal in Ukraine, plus the U.S. launches military strikes throughout Yemen.

American bombs rained down on dozens of Iran-backed Houthi militant targets in Yemen Saturday in an attack ordered by President Trump. How long will this campaign last and what kind of a response should we expect from Tehran? Secretary of State Marco Rubio will join us exclusively. Plus... I'm getting from the standpoint about a ceasefire and ultimately a deal.

Some pretty good vibes coming out of Russia. Special Presidential Envoy Steve Witkoff is back from Russia and his meeting with Vladimir Putin. Is there a chance for peace talks between Russia and Ukraine? We'll ask him.

South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham will also join us. And finally, Maryland Democratic Governor Wes Moore weighs in on the impact of cuts to the federal payroll and Michigan Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Dingell on the ripple effects of Trump's trade war with some of America's closest partners. It's all just ahead on Face the Nation. ♪♪♪

Good morning and welcome to Face the Nation. As we come on the air, U.S. forces are in the midst of President Trump's most significant military campaign thus far in his second term. Let's get straight to it this morning with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who joins us from Miami, Florida. Mr. Secretary, I'm

For our audience just to explain this Red Sea area is a really important transit point for global shipping The Houthis out of Yemen have been disrupting transit there for some time President Trump cited these concerns when he announced the strikes I'm wondering how long will this campaign last and will it involve ground forces?

Well, first of all, the problem here is that this is a very important shipping lane. And in the last year and a half, the last 18 months, the Houthis have struck or attacked 174 naval vessels of the United States, attacking the U.S. Navy directly 174 times. And 145 times they've attacked commercial shipping. So we basically have a band of pirates with guided precision anti-ship weaponry.

And if the exact exacting a toll system and one of the most important shipping lanes in the world, that's just not sustainable. We are not going to have these people controlling which ships can go through and which ones cannot. And so your question is, how long will this go on? It will go on until they no longer have the capability to do that. Well, what does U.S. intelligence tell us at this point? Because the U.S. had been conducting strikes for some time, but.

has not stopped the Houthis. So what's going to be different right now? Do you have more fidelity in the intelligence that would make this more successful? Well, those strikes were retaliation strikes. So they launched one missile, we hit the missile launcher, or we sent something to do it. This is not a message. This is not a one-off. This is an effort to deny them the ability to continue to constrict and control shipping. And it's just not going to happen.

that we're not going to have these guys, these people with weapons able to tell us where our ships can go, where the ships of all the world can go, by the way. It's not just the U.S. We're doing the world a favor. We're doing the entire world a favor by getting rid of these guys and their ability to strike global shipping. That's the mission here, and it will continue until that's carried out. That never happened before. The Biden administration didn't do that. All the Biden administration would do is they would respond to an attack. These guys would launch one rocket. We'd hit the rocket launcher.

That's it. This is an effort to take away their ability to control global shipping in that part of the world. That's just not going to happen anymore. And it could continue until that's finished. It could involve ground raids.

Well, those are military decisions to be made, but I've heard no talk of ground raids. I don't think there's a necessity for it right now. I can tell you that as of last night, some of the key people involved in those missile launches are no longer with us. And I can tell you that some of the facilities that they use are no longer existing. And that will continue. Look, it's bottom line, easy way to understand it, okay? These guys are able to control what ships can go through there. They've attacked the U.S. Navy.

174 times they've attacked the United States Navy. We're not going to have people sitting around with the missiles attacking the U.S. Navy. It's not going to happen, not under President Trump. The president also referenced Iran in his statement. Iran provides some support for the Houthis, as you know. Put this in context for me, because U.S. intelligence has been suggesting for some time that Israel,

has the desire and intent to conduct an attack on Iran's developing nuclear program in the coming months. President Trump has extended an offer for negotiations. Have you heard anything back from Iran? Is this strike in Yemen a signal to Iran?

This strike in Yemen is about their ability, the ability of the Houthis to strike global shipping and attack the U.S. Navy and their willingness to do it. 174 times against the U.S. Navy, 145 sometimes against global shipping. That's what the strike is about. What we can't ignore, and the reason why the president mentioned Iran, is because the Iranians have supported the Houthis. They've provided them intelligence. They've provided them guidance. They've provided them weaponry. I mean, there's no way the Houthis, okay, the Houthis,

would have the ability to do this kind of thing unless they had support from Iran. And so this was a message to Iran, don't keep supporting them because then you will also be responsible for what they are doing in attacking Navy ships and attacking global shipping. - They also get support from Russia potentially, which you leveraged sanctions in regard to. But I wanna ask you about tariffs because you were just in Canada this past week. China is Canada's second biggest export market, Mexico's third.

In this ongoing trade back and forth the U.S. is having, isn't there a risk that China will ultimately be the winner? If it's too costly to deal with the United States, won't they benefit?

Well, actually, China and Canada are involved in a mini trade war right now. In fact, the Chinese have imposed a bunch of tariffs, reciprocal or retaliatory tariffs on Canada after Canada imposed tariffs on them. So here's the way everyone needs to understand this. The president rightfully believes that the balance of global trade is completely off kilter. For 30 or 40 years, we have allowed countries to treat us unfairly in global trade.

Much of it during the Cold War because we wanted them to be rich and prosperous because they were our allies in the Cold War. But now that has to change. You look at the European Union. The European Union's economy is about the same size as ours. It's not a low-wage economy. It's very comparable to ours in terms of its composition and so forth.

Why do they have a trade surplus with us? So what the president is saying is two things. Number one, there are critical industries like aluminum, like steel, like semiconductors, like automobile manufacturing that he rightfully believes, President Trump rightfully believes the U.S. needs to have a domestic capability. And the way you protect those industries and build that capability is by ensuring that there's economic incentives to produce in the United States. The second is global.

And that is, we are going to put tariffs on countries reciprocal to what they impose on us. And so this is a global, it's not against Canada, it's not against Mexico, it's not against the EU, it's everybody. And then from that new baseline of fairness and reciprocity, we will engage potentially in bilateral negotiations with countries around the world on new trade arrangements that make sense for both sides.

Fairness, but right now it's not fair. We're gonna reset the baseline and then we can enter into these bilateral Agreements potentially with countries so that our trade is fair What's not going to continue is of course these so this is all just about leverage to get bilateral not free trip not North American trade deals

No, no, it's not leverage, it's fairness. It's resetting baseline fairness. And then from there, we can work on deals and so forth, because they'll have products we don't make, we have products they don't make. That's where trade works the best. It has to be free, but it has to be fair. And right now, it's only free on one side, and it's not fair for the other side. It's an unsustainable position. The ad hoc nature of these policy announcements and pullbacks are causing

concern in the marketplace, as we saw this past week. So I heard you describe what seemed like a strategy to get to negotiations on a bilateral front. You also seem to negotiate, you say this was national security minded. But then we also see comments by the president of like 200 percent tariffs on champagne. That's not a critical industry for the United States. That seems more emotional.

No, that's called retaliation. That's what happens in these trade exchanges. They're going to increase tariffs on... They already have high tariffs. They're going to add more to their tariffs? Fine. Then we'll have to find something to... I mean, you tell me. I mean, Canada's going after whiskey and orange juice and... In retaliation. You know what I mean?

Yeah, exactly. So that sounds pretty petty to me as well. So what's the difference? The point is, I get it. I understand why these countries don't like it, because the status quo of trade is good for them. It benefits them. They like the status quo. We don't like the status quo. We are going to set a new status quo and then we can negotiate something if they want to. That is fair for both sides. But what we have now cannot continue. We have just deindustrialized this country.

de-industrialized the United States of America. There are things we can no longer make and we have to be able to make in order to be safe as a country and in order to have jobs. That's why we had a Rust Belt. That's why we've suffered all these important jobs that once sustained entire communities, wiped out by trade that basically sent these factories, these jobs, this industrial capability to other places. That cannot and will not continue. I don't know, President Trump, this is no mystery. He's been talking about this

since the 1980s actually, even before he was a political figure. This is going to happen and it's going to happen now. I want to ask you about Russia. You said envoy Steve Witkoff's meeting with Vladimir Putin that happened last week would answer the fundamental question of whether we're moving towards a ceasefire or whether Putin is using a delay tactic. You spoke with Sergei Lavrov, the foreign minister, yesterday. Is this a delay tactic?

Well, I think that was a promising meeting. As I've said repeatedly, we're not going to negotiate this in the public. Hopefully we'll have something to announce at some point fairly soon. I can't guarantee that. But I certainly think the meeting was promising. The exchange was promising. I don't take away from Steve's meeting, from Ambassador Woodcroft's meeting, negativity. There are some challenges. This is a complex issue.

three-year war that's been ongoing along a very long military front with a lot of complexity to it. So no one's claiming that it's easy, but I want everyone to understand here's the plan. Plan A is get the shooting to stop so that we can move to Plan B, Phase 2, which is have

everybody at a table, maybe with some shuttle diplomacy, to figure out a way to permanently end this war in a way that's enduring and respects everybody's needs and so forth. No one is saying that that second part is easy, but we can't get even to that second part until we get past the first part. It's hard to negotiate an enduring end to a war as long as they're shooting at each other.

And so the president wants a ceasefire. That's what we're working on. Assuming we can get that done, that won't be easy in and of itself. We move to the second phase, which is negotiating something more enduring and permanent. That will be hard. It will involve a lot of hard work, concessions from both sides, but it has to happen. This war cannot continue. The president has been clear about that, and he's doing everything he can to bring it to an end.

We'll talk about that later in the program as well with Envoy Witkoff. I want to ask you about a decision you made to revoke a student visa for someone at Columbia University this past week. The Wall Street Journal editorial board writes, the administration needs to be careful. It's targeting real promoters of terrorism, not breaking the great promise of a green card by deporting anyone with controversial political views.

Can you substantiate any form of material support for terrorism, specifically to Hamas, from this Columbia student? Or was it simply that he was espousing a controversial political point of view? Well, not just the student. We're going to do more. In fact, every day now we're approving visa revocations. And if that visa led to a green card, the green card process as well. And here's why. It's very simple.

When you apply to enter the United States and you get a visa, you are a guest. And you're coming as a student, you're coming as a tourist, or what have you. And in it, you have to make certain assertions. And if you tell us, when you apply for a visa, I'm coming to the U.S. to participate in pro-Hamas events, that runs counter to the foreign policy interests of the United States of America.

It's that simple. So you lied. You came, if you had told us that you were gonna do that, we never would have given you the visa. Now you're here, now you do it. So you lied to us, you're out. It's that simple. It's that straightforward. - But is there any evidence of a link to terrorism or is it just his point of view?

Yeah, they take over, I mean, do you not, I mean, you should watch the news. These guys take over entire buildings. They vandalize colleges. They shut down colleges. I'm asking about the specific justification for the revocation of his visa. Was there any evidence of material support for terrorism? The negotiator, negotiating on behalf of people that took over a campus?

that vandalize buildings negotiating over what that's a crime in and of itself that they're involved in the main negotiator the spokesperson this that the other we don't want we don't need these people in our country that we never should have allowed him in in the first place if he had told us I'm going over there and I'm going over there to become the spokesperson and one of the leaders of a movement that's gonna turn one of your allegedly elite colleges upside down people can't even go to school library buildings being vandalized we never would have let him in we never would have let him in to begin with

and now that he's doing it is here he's going to leave and so are others and we're gonna keep doing it we're and by the way I find it ironic that a lot of these people out there defending the First Amendment speech alleged free speech rights have these Hamas sympathizers they had no problem okay pressuring social media to censor American political speech

So I think it's ironic and hypocritical. But the bottom line is this. If you are in this country to promote Hamas, to promote terrorist organizations, to participate in vandalism, to participate in acts of rebellion and riots on campus, we never would have let you in if we had known that. And now that we know it, we're going to leave. Is it only pro-Palestinian people who are going to have their visas revoked or are other points of view as well?

No, I think anybody who's here in favor, look, we want to get rid of Trenadagua gang members. They're terrorists, too. The president designated them, asked me to designate, and I did as a terrorist organization. We want to get rid of them as well. We don't want terrorists in America. I don't know how hard that is to understand. We don't want people in our country that are going to be committing crimes and undermining our national security or the public safety. It's that simple, especially people that are here as guests.

That is what a visa is. I don't know where we've gotten it in our head that a visa is some sort of birthright. It is not. It is a visitor into our country. And if you violate the terms of your visitation, you are going to leave. Okay. Secretary Rubio, I'd like to have you back, talk to you about a lot more on your plate another time, but we have to leave it there. Thank you. Face the Nation will be back in a minute.

Hey, I'm Andy. If you don't know me, it's probably because I'm not famous. But I did start a men's grooming company called Harry's. The idea for Harry's came out of a frustrating experience I had buying razor blades. Most brands were overpriced, over-designed, and out of touch. At Harry's, our approach is simple. Here's our secret. We make sharp, durable blades and sell them at honest prices for as low as $2 each. We care about quality so much that we do some crazy things, like buy a world-class German blade factory.

Obsessing over every detail means we're confident in offering 100% quality guarantee. Millions of guys have already made the switch to Harry's, so thank you if you're one of them. And if you're not, we hope you give us a try with this special offer. Get a Harry's starter set with a five-blade razor, weighted handle, shave gel, and a travel cover. All for just three bucks, plus free shipping. Just go to harrys.com and enter code MAN at checkout.

That's harrys.com, code MAN. Enjoy!

And it makes a huge difference. According to Indeed data, sponsored jobs posted directly on Indeed have 45% more applications than non-sponsored jobs. Plus, with Indeed sponsored jobs, there are no monthly subscriptions, no long-term contracts, and you only pay for results.

And listeners of this show will get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility at Indeed.com slash listen. Just go to Indeed.com slash listen right now and support our show by saying you heard about Indeed on this podcast. Indeed.com slash listen. Terms and conditions apply. Hiring? Indeed is all you need.

We go now to President Trump's special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, who joins us this morning from Miami Beach. Welcome back to Face the Nation, Ambassador. Thank you. Thank you, Margaret. Thanks for having me.

So you just heard Secretary of State Rubio talk about these efforts to broker a ceasefire. You were the man face to face with Vladimir Putin. I wonder what your answer to the question is in regard to whether this is a delay tactic or whether Vladimir Putin is sincere in seeking a ceasefire.

Well, I was there for quite some time, Margaret, and I agree with the Secretary's assessment. We made a lot of progress in that meeting. It was a meeting that was

It could have been as long as four hours, but it was certainly at least three. We talked about a lot of specifics. And I point to the large gap that existed between Ukraine and Russia prior to the inauguration and where we are today. We have narrowed the issues between both of these parties, making a lot of progress, in my opinion. And I think that meeting underscores that.

So I heard you say on another program this morning that you do expect Presidents Trump and Putin to speak this week. Is that a decision-making call or is this just next steps?

Well, I would assume that, you know, they have a real relationship from the president's first term. They've talked already after the first visit that I had with President Putin. And I think this is going to be a very positive and constructive call between the two men, between the two presidents.

And decisions will be made on whether to move forward with this 30-day ceasefire that the U.S. and Ukraine have agreed to, but Russia at least publicly has not?

Well, President Trump is the ultimate decision-maker, our decision-maker, and President Putin for the country of Russia is their decision-maker. I think it's a very positive sign that the two of them will be talking at some point. I think that's showing that there's positive momentum, that there's an inclination on the part of both countries. And, by the way, this includes Ukraine as well.

to get to a long-term, durable piece here.

Well, France's president publicly said yesterday that in his country's view, Russia is not genuine in seeking peace. They're intensifying the fighting. We saw Vladimir Putin on television this week dressed in military fatigues. He made public comments about wanting to resolve root causes of the war. How different was his message in private?

Well, look, I don't know what President Macron said. I think it's unfortunate when people make those sort of assessments and they don't have necessarily firsthand knowledge. But I'm not going to comment on what he said because I don't know what he said. I know what I heard, the body language I witnessed. I saw a constructive effort over a long period of time.

to discuss the specifics of what's going on in the field. There's a 2,000-kilometer border between these two countries, and they are shooting each other and facing each other across that 2,000-mile border. That's a very, very complicated ceasefire. And yet everybody is committed to have that discussion. Here we are in the throes of having that discussion.

with the Russians talking about sending technical teams, the United States sending technical teams, a meeting in Saudi Arabia with our national security advisor, Mike Walts, and Secretary of State Rubio that had a lot of positivity attached to it, my meeting, which I regard as promising. I think those are all very, very good trends and hopefully inform on the possibility of a near-term peace agreement.

So beyond the ceasefire, a peace agreement, you're already talking about technicalities in terms of territory that would be given up?

Well, what I'm saying, the technical, what I'm saying is that a ceasefire involves how to get people to not be fighting with each other over a 2,000-kilometer border. That's 1,200 miles. Right. Nor does that include a main area of confrontation, which is Kursk. And so there's different battlefield conditions. We've got to discuss that. There are regions that we all know the Russians are focused on.

There is a nuclear reactor that supplies quite a bit of electricity to the country of Ukraine. That's got to be dealt with. There's access to ports. There's the Black Sea potential agreement. There's just so many elements, Margaret, to the implementation of a ceasefire here. And I compare it sometimes to Gaza.

Gaza is a finite, defined space as compared to where the battle is being fought in Ukraine-Russia. So this is a much more complicated situation, and yet no one's throwing their hands up in the air. What they're doing is they're digging in, and everybody is committed, all stakeholders, including the Europeans, to doing everything we need to do to get to a successful resolution here.

You mentioned Gaza. I want to ask you what specifics you are looking at when it comes to relocating the two million Palestinians in Gaza. In the past, you've mentioned Egypt. You've mentioned Jordan. Are you talking to other countries at this point about resettling?

I mean, I think we're exploring, Margaret, all alternatives and options that leads to a better life for Gazans and, by the way, for the people of Israel. So we're exploring all of those things. But right now, what's right in front of us is coming to some sort of resolution on this conflict. And the recent experience that we had at the Arab summit

where we spent seven and a half hours with leaders of various Arab countries, the recent experience we had with Hamas's response was not encouraging. Now, to me, we put a very sensible proposal on the table that was intended as a bridge to get to a final discussion and final resolution here that would have incorporated some sort of demilitarization of Hamas, which must happen.

That's a red line for the Israelis and maybe could have led to a long term peace resolution here. And yet Hamas, Hamas came up with their own construct, essentially disavowed what we discussed. Yeah. And to my mind, that was a pretty poor ending. And I hope they reconsider because the alternative is not so good for them. Understood. Ambassador Witkoff, thank you for your time today.

If you miss an interview or a full episode of Face the Nation, you can go back and watch it on facethenation.com or on YouTube. Just search Face the Nation for our page. We'll be right back with a lot more Face the Nation, so stay with us.

This episode is brought to you by Shopify. Upgrade your business with Shopify, home of the number one checkout on the planet. ShopPay boosts conversions up to 50%, meaning fewer cards going abandoned and more sales going cha-ching. So if you're into growing your business, get a commerce platform that's ready to sell wherever your customers are. Visit Shopify.com to upgrade your selling today.

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever find yourself playing the budgeting game? Well, with the Name Your Price tool from Progressive, you can find options that fit your budget and potentially lower your bills. Try it at Progressive.com. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and Affiliates. Price and coverage match limited by state law. Not available in all states. ♪

Welcome back to Face the Nation. We turn now to the chairman of the Budget Committee, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who joins us this morning from Clemson, South Carolina. Welcome back. Thank you. Near miss with the government shutdown, sir. And I I thought we'd be talking about a lot of domestic policy. But President Trump's point of view seems to be overseas in these in this past week. Certainly a lot of action there.

I looked at the last time we spoke. You were advocating for President Trump to bomb Iran. You said there's a one in trillion chance you'll degrade the Iranian nuclear program through diplomacy. Since then, President Trump has offered negotiations. Are you softening your stance?

Well, I don't mind negotiating as long as we get the outcome that we all desire. They can't have a nuclear bomb. So I think there is a one in three chance the Ayatollah would ever genuinely give up his quest for a nuclear weapon. He wants a nuclear weapon to use it. He wants to destroy Israel, kill all the Jews. He's a religious Nazi. He wants to purify Islam and drive us out of the region. Yeah, I think he's a fanatical religious Nazi who would use a bomb. But let's talk to him. And

If he really is sincere, give up enrichment. There are 40 countries in his world that have nuclear power but don't enrich. There's no commercial purpose for enriching uranium at 60 percent. He has enough to make six bombs at 60 percent. So turn that all over to the international community. We'll pay for it. Get out of the enrichment business, and we'll help you with your nuclear power program. If he'll do all those things, then I will have been proven wrong.

That's a long to-do list, and so far, no indication that he's taking the offer. Not really. If you don't want a bomb, give up enrichment. You don't need enrichment for nuclear power. You do need enrichment to make a bomb. It's not that hard. Understood. We did see additional Russian strikes in Ukraine overnight. You have been an advocate for Ukraine. Yeah. You heard the Secretary of State. You heard Ambassador Wyckoff. Yeah. Is Putin playing for time? Is he playing President Trump?

I don't know yet, but I do know you play President Trump at your own peril. What Trump did to get Ukraine at the table was tough.

And it worked. So if Putin is sincere about wanting peace, accept the ceasefire on the same terms as Ukraine and quit trying to mix the two, ceasefire and peace deal. What I would advise the Trump administration to do is to tell Putin, are you going to accept the ceasefire on the same terms as Ukraine or not? If you not, go back to maximum pressure. I have legislation that will overwhelmingly pass the United States.

SENATE THAT WILL CRUSH THE RUSSIAN ECONOMY, AND I'M WILLING TO MOVE FORWARD IF I HAVE TO. BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CEASEFIRE, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PEACE. WE WEREN'T TALKING ABOUT THAT IN THE LAST ADMINISTRATION. BUT TO ME, PUTIN'S A PREDATOR.

The best way to judge Putin is not in a three-hour meeting, but 30 years of action. And I see no indication that he's going to stop being a predator against Ukraine until the pain is too large. So if he refuses to cease fire, that tells me all I need to know. Do you have any reason to believe that President Trump would sign the legislation you say you can use to put more sanctions on Russia? Because he hasn't put more sanctions on Russia in a significant way at all.

I think he's waiting to see what kind of response he gives from the discussions that Whitkopf have, who I like Steve and I'm glad he's doing what he's doing. I think Trump's going to talk to Putin this week. You can't solve a problem until you talk to the person who's creating the problem. And the problem is Putin. He's a predator toward Ukraine and the region at large.

I hope President Trump can convince Putin to go to the peace table, to engage in ceasefire, and to find a win-win solution for both countries to stop the killing. You'll never know until you try. And there's one person on the planet capable of doing that, and that is President Trump. If Putin is playing Trump, he will regret it. Do you think Vladimir Putin benefits?

from the U.S. decision to try to shutter some of the advocates for the free press and agents of the free press, like Radio Free Europe, Radio Free Asia, and Voice of America. As you know, there was an executive order to try to dismantle them. Yeah.

Yeah, I don't know what value these ideas have in the 21st century. At the end of the day, I'll look and evaluate where the voice of America really is. Radio Free Europe, I know it made a difference in the Cold War. People told us that. So that's something to consider. Is it still worth the price? But I like the idea of putting bad guys on their back foot and giving people hope.

Yeah, you had been an advocate for soft power. I want to ask you about what's happening here at home.

There were more executive orders from the president this week targeting some of the country's most prominent law firms, including Paul Weiss. He wants to restrict business activities of the firm despite a federal judge ruling in a different case that it's unconstitutional. The president suspended security clearances at the firm. He stripped clearances from lawyers over at Covington and Burling as well because they were involved in representing former special counsel Jack Smith.

Do you support this? Yeah, I think all of these things. I think Jack Smith was politically motivated. I think the Russian hoax, a lot of people should have gone to jail and they didn't. I think the idea that President Trump was an agent of Russia was manufactured. The Steele dossier was based on lies and falsehoods.

coming from a source that said he never meant it to be used in the fashion it was used. I think Jack Smith's effort to prosecute President Trump for January 6th was politically motivated and people who engage in trying to destroy President Trump, I don't mind him going after them in a lawful way. I don't mind restricting. Is this good for the U.S. legal system, Senator? Because the president's trying to use government power to punish

private business because he didn't like some of the work they had been doing. Private business aided government power in a fashion to destroy Donald Trump's life. You know,

On our side, nobody in your world gets it, but our people believe that the Justice Department was used as a weapon to destroy Trump's campaign and his business interests and to ruin his family, that they made up bogus charges and they proceeded in a fashion that was designed to destroy him politically and personally. I believe that. If these people involved pay a price, they got nobody but themselves to blame. That's what I believe. But these are lawyers working on cases that...

You're making it sound like the work that they take on is somehow part of a conspiracy and they should be punished for it. Yeah, I think these law firms were pushing legal theories that to me were designed for political outcomes more than legal outcomes. You know, we can have a debate about...

You know, holding a lawyer accountable for his client's actions. I genuinely don't like that. But these law firms--. That's what this sounds like. Jack Smith, using the power of government, incorporating these law firms, in my view, were trying to disrupt and take down the Republican nominee for president.

that this was an orchestrated effort and Biden only regretted they didn't do it sooner. So it was politically motivated and everybody with their fingerprints on it, I hope they pay a price. Senator, I know since you're on the Judiciary Committee. My answer is not going to change. And have that oversight. It's important to get your point of view, but I got to leave it there.

We're joined now by Michigan Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Dingell. Good to have you here and happy early St. Patrick's Day. Top of the morning to you. Congresswoman, I want to talk about the impact of these tariffs and potential tariffs because you're from the manufacturing hub of Michigan. We were looking at the data. Michigan's lost more than 220,000 manufacturing jobs over the past 30 years.

The vice president was out in Michigan this week. He says this entire Trump strategy is about industrial resurgence. Is that landing where you live?

I'm somebody that answers this differently than many. I believe that tariffs are a tool in the toolbox. And if you recall, I said Donald Trump would win in 2016, and nobody believed me, and I was right. And it was one issue. It was trade. NAFTA was one of the worst pieces of trade legislation in the history of this country. It sent tons of jobs overseas.

and president trump came in i worked with him we renegotiated it we have usmca the way that the tariffs are being done now is it's made a ping pong ball of the auto industry i think they're a tool that we can look at we need to be using them against china

But I think they're being selectively applied. The domestic auto companies are complying with USMCA. There's no way that in a month's time when they have such an integrated inventory and production plants where a part will go over the border several times to make the changes that need to happen. So I want to work with this administration.

I think the 25% tariffs are too high. They're placing an unfair burden. The autos are a ping pong ball and a big war. I want to bring manufacturing home. I want to bring supply chains home. We need an industrial policy. Tariffs are part of it. Let's just do it in a

a way that lets everybody plan for it. The automakers, the big three, called President Trump. That was partly how this April 2nd push off of some of these tariffs happened, their persuasion.

Do you have any idea how long it would take to build the kind of plants and to bring all the manufacturing home like President Trump is asking of them? So if everything were to go right, which like in this world, does anything ever go right? It's going to take two to three years. Our

Our suppliers also, there are many, and by the way, we need to immediately renegotiate USMCA. It's time to look at it. And I think we need to be treating Mexico and Canada as different trading partners. You support this idea of, Secretary Rubio was basically saying bilateral, not North America. Totally. Canada would never let China build a plant, China, and then market as a North American vehicle. And we need to make sure that that never happens. I'm totally on board on that. For

But right now, as we're talking about the aluminum and the steel tariffs, 60% of aluminum in this country that's being used is coming in from Canada. You take a 25% tariff on that, the profit on automobiles is very small. It's not a big...

The companies just can't eat that. But we've got to figure it out. I am not against trade policy. We just have to do it in a way that doesn't—I don't believe Donald Trump wants to destroy the domestic auto industry. I think we all got to work together to keep the domestic auto industry strong. And even as we're doing Canada and Mexico, do you realize that Korea and Japan are still able—they brought 2.5 million vehicles in—

Korea with no tariff and Japan with 2.5, not treating everybody equally. S&P Global says there's potential for North American auto production to drop by 20,000 units a day starting this week. That's because of the tariffs. All companies need certainty. Automobiles need certainty. They need to not be a ping pong ball.

Are you talking to the Commerce Secretary or the Trade Representative? Is there any conversation? I have not talked to the Commerce Secretary. I've talked to Bob Lighthizer, who I worked very closely with. The former advisor. The former trade advisor. And I worked very closely with President Trump in Tucson. I totally, I said he would win. Democrats did a lousy job on trade and

Speaking of Democrats and their performance, I want to ask you what happened this past week. We came near a shutdown. Ultimately, Democrats in the Senate did vote with Republicans on this short-term funding deal. Senator Murphy of Connecticut was on another network this morning, and he said it would have been a risk to shut down the government, but it was probably worth taking. Do you agree?

Well, in the House, we were almost united to save one. And there were very strong feelings in the House about what people thought that the Senate should do. But the Senate leader, Chuck Schumer, would say you were able to do that because there was wiggle room on votes. I think he sent out mixed signals.

I think if you are dead, Senator Schumer sent out mixed signals and I've talked to a lot of labor last week. AFG whose employees were going to be impacted the most were very torn about what to do because concerned about their employees who I'm meeting with daily.

when I'm out there, came out against supporting it because they felt like they were already being harmed. There was already just a license for Doge to go ahead and do whatever it wants. They're not including Congress, not abiding with it. People are being hurt.

hurt. But Margaret, people are angry. We've got to move on. Reconciliation is coming up. We have got to be united as Democrats in making sure reconciliation and we protect people from having their health care cut.

Medicaid cut, Social Security cut, or Medicare cut in any way, shape, or form. Can Leader Jeffries actually maintain that kind of unity in the House? He showed you that he could do it last week. And I can tell you that I don't think anybody has been home. If you're home, my town halls look like a Republican town hall. I'm not taking it personally. People

People are scared. They want to see us do something. You mean people are shouting, people are angry, people are upset? They want to see Democrats fighting back, and they're really scared about what's going to happen to them, particularly on seniors. And I went to my asthma doctor, and a woman in a wheelchair with her child started crying with me in the hospital. What are you going to do so my child can still come here? Congresswoman, thank you. We'll have to leave it there for today. We'll be back in a moment.

Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile with a message for everyone paying big wireless way too much. Please, for the love of everything good in this world, stop. With Mint, you can get premium wireless for just $15 a month. Of course, if you enjoy overpaying, no judgments, but that's weird. Okay, one judgment.

Anyway, give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. Upfront payment of $45 for three-month plan, equivalent to $15 per month required. Intro rate first three months only, then full price plan options available. Taxes and fees extra. See full terms at mintmobile.com. I'm William Gouge, a viewer, collaborator, and professional ultra runner from the UK. I love to tackle endurance runs around the world, including a 55-day, 3,064-mile run across the US. So I know a thing or two about performance work.

When it comes to relaxing, I look for something ultra versatile and comfy. The Ponto Performance jogger from Viori is perfect for all of those things. It's the comfiest jogger I've ever worn. And the Dreamknit fabric is why I'll always reach for them over other joggers. Check them out in the Dreamknit collection by going to viori.com slash william, that's V-U-O-R-I dot com slash william, where new customers can receive 20% off their first order

Plus, enjoy free shipping in the U.S. on orders over $75 and free returns. Exclusions apply. Visit the website for full terms and conditions. We go now to the Democratic governor of Maryland, Wes Moore, who joins us this morning from Annapolis. Welcome back to Face the Nation. Thank you. Great to be back.

So you have in your state the port of Baltimore, one of the country's largest ports. The president has put all these tariffs in place, teed them up, and on April 2nd is poised to enact 25 percent tariffs on goods from Canada and Mexico. Do you have any idea when you will see the impact on shipping volume, what the impact on your state's economy will be?

We're already seeing the impacts of these disastrous and frankly not very well thought out policies when it comes to tariffs. You know, tariffs are a tool. They're not an ideology. But this administration is using it like an ideology. And so while these decisions are being made not with us, they're being made to us.

We're already seeing how this is going to have a significant impact on the Port of Baltimore. It is also seeing how the tariff policies are having disastrous impacts on our farmers over in the Eastern Shore and our chicken farmers in the Eastern Shore. This lack of predictability, this erratic behavior,

And the indecisive decision making that's being made is already having very real impact on cost. It's having very real impact on our businesses and our small businesses. It's having a very real impact on our economic engines and American competitiveness as well as our national security. And so these are the type of things, this erratic behavior is the things that people were concerned about and we are now seeing in real time in our states.

So your state was one of 20 that decided to legally challenge the Trump administration on the decision to dismiss 1300 workers at the education department. I'm wondering, as you sit there, how do you choose which issues to fight legally? And is litigation the Democrats only tool here?

Well, it's not. I mean, when you look at the flurry of executive actions and executive orders that have been laid out by this administration thus far, they really fall into three different categories. It's either ineffective, it is performative, or it is illegal.

Right. Those are the three buckets that all of these executive actions are falling under and the ones that are illegal. We are going to take legal action to make sure that there are legal consequences for making these decisions that, frankly, the president of the United States does not have the authority to make unilaterally.

And so when we talk about the different tools that we have just in this past week alone, you know, I signed I signed executive action, executive orders focusing on supporting law enforcement and our police officers and our firefighters and giving them pay raises because on the federal side, we've seen continued attacks on our public servants and our law enforcement in the cutting of first responders like FEMA.

On Friday, President Trump went to the Justice Department and while he was there, he said that the FBI headquarters will no longer be moved from Washington, D.C., out to the state of Maryland. He called Maryland a liberal state and he said he's going to stop it. I know your office thought this was going to bring in 7,500 new jobs. Have you reached out to the White House to try to persuade them not to take it away?

Here's the ironic thing about it. I found out about that announcement from the president via the news.

That goes to show the level of partnership that this administration is, that they have and they would like from our nation's governors and from our nation's chief executives. And so the thing that we know about this is this is a direct attack and a direct assault on law enforcement, a direct attack on the FBI, because Maryland is the place. And we've gone, we went through this process not just for these past couple of years since I've been the governor, but for the past decade where Maryland was

where maryland won this this element this competition fair and square quantitatively where we showed that we could be the place that was the only site ready place to build build ready site so the building is ready to go in the state of maryland but the president has just decided to politicize it by talking about but he doesn't want it to go to a liberal state

We cannot continue to politicize national security when it is too important to the people who are serving us. Have you called him? Have you called the White House? We've tried calling the White House before, and there's no response. And frankly, it just highlights the fact that, again, I found out about this announcement via news break. Do you believe it? I did not find out about this announcement from the White House. Did I believe the announcement? Yeah.

Well, I believe that the President thinks he has the authority to do this. But I also think that that falls into line of a collection of other things that the President does not have the authority to do. Congress is the one who actually allocates the capital towards where federal agencies are going to go. And so I believe the President of the United States thinks that he can do this. But there's one thing that I know, and I say this on a Sunday morning, I know there is a King of Kings and a Lord of Lords, and I know he does not live in the White House.

I want to ask you about a speech you gave last night. You represented your party at the Gridiron Dinner, an annual gathering of journalists here, and you dedicated your marks to federal workers. You said there's dignity in the work that they do. You also spoke about your party, though, and the struggles that it is having. You said Democrats used to be the cool ones. You joked about the advanced age of your party's leaders, saying their staff has to stand around with defibrillators.

I know these are jokes, but you're acknowledging something here. Is the issue with your party age or a lack of vision? And is the reset underway to fix those things? I think we need to be very clear about who we're fighting for.

And I think we need to be very clear about the vision that we are offering. You know, I think about what's happening in this moment, even the conversation around the continued resolution, where we all know that the consequences of a federal government shutdown would have been disastrous on the state of Maryland. But one thing we did not do was offer an alternative.

One thing we did not do was articulate the terms for the American people. And so I think when the American people, when they do not have an option or they're not seeing people fighting on their behalf, then yes, there is going to be a measurement of frustration. We are doing everything in our power to fight for the people. And I think it becomes incredibly important because people are paying attention who their fighters are and who their fighters are not.

There were voices within your party on Capitol Hill who offered alternatives. They just weren't listened to. Do you think there is just no leader in the party? I don't see a difference. I don't see a difference. And frankly, I don't think the American people see a difference.

If they are not hearing an alternative, if they're not hearing an alternative plan, if they're not hearing the plan to push back and fight back, if they're not seeing what we are doing in the streets and in the communities and in the neighborhoods to fight for their best interests, I think for the American people, they just look at it as theater. And that is the frustrating thing. The performative politics, people are done and they're exhausted by it. They just want to see results. And that's exactly what we're trying to provide here in the state of Maryland.

Governor Moore, thank you for your time this morning. Thank you. We'll be right back. That's it for us today. Thank you for watching. Until next week. For Face the Nation, I'm Margaret Brennan. Today's guests were Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Special Presidential Envoy to the Middle East Steve Whitcomb, South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, Michigan Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Dingell, and Maryland Democratic Governor Wes Moore.

The senior executive producer of Face the Nation is Mary Hager, and the executive producer is Ann Hsu. This broadcast was directed by Shelley Schwartz. Face the Nation originates from CBS News in Washington. For more, we're online at facethenation.com and on YouTube. We're also rebroadcast on our CBS News 24-7 streaming network at 1230 on Sundays, and we're available through our apps, CBS News and Paramount+.