Tom Homan, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Sen. Thom Tillis

Summary

Face the Nation, February 15, 2026: Detailed Episode Summary

Overview

This episode of Face the Nation delves into three major issues shaping American politics and international relations in early 2026:

• The ongoing partial government shutdown over immigration enforcement – a standoff rooted in debates over ICE’s practices and the funding of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
• The fallout from the release of the Epstein files, congressional oversight of the Justice Department, and transparency in high-profile investigations.
• America’s standing in the world, transatlantic relations at the Munich Security Conference, and internal Republican perspectives on NATO and trade.

Guests:

• Tom Homan (White House Border Czar)
• Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (House Minority Leader, D-NY)
• Rep. Robert Garcia (Top Dem, House Oversight Committee)
• Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC)
• Host/moderator: Ed O’Keefe (substituting for Margaret Brennan)

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Immigration & Government Shutdown

Tom Homan: Law Enforcement Practices and Enforcement Surge

[02:17–12:54]

• Homan denies the existence of racial profiling by ICE, emphasizing operations match legal requirements and officer safety is a priority.
  • “When they say stop racial profiling, that’s just not occurring.” (Tom Homan, 02:51)
  • Masks: Officers wear them due to an “8,000% increase in threats,” highlighting doxxing and harassment, not to shield identity arbitrarily.
    • “The director of ICE, his wife was filmed walking to work. His home address has been doxxed…” (Homan, 04:50)
• On demands for judicial warrants (“no-knock” entries):
  • Stresses ICE operates under congressionally approved statutes using administrative warrants.
  • If Congress wants the law changed, “they can legislate.” (Homan, 05:35)
• Discusses the Metro Surge operation in Minnesota – the largest in ICE’s history.
  • Operation is reportedly winding down, with most agents to leave soon, except for those on ongoing fraud and church investigations.
    • “We already removed well over 1000 people…” (Homan, 06:55)
  • Lessons for sanctuary cities: Cooperation makes communities safer and enforcement more efficient.
• Responds to incidents undermining ICE trust (questionable shootings and disputed claims):
  • Praises ongoing investigations by Internal Affairs and FBI, stressing, “people will be held accountable.” (Homan, 10:24)
• On allegations of dysfunction within DHS leadership:
  • Admits disagreements with Secretary Kristi Noem and Corey Lewandowski but insists these are routine; touts record deportations and calls current border “the most secure... in history.” (Homan, 12:07)

Hakeem Jeffries: Demands for ICE Reform

[13:35–22:13]

• Reiterates Democrats’ demands for DHS funding: “Taxpayer dollars should be used to make life more affordable... not brutalize or kill them as we horrifically saw in Minneapolis with the cold blooded killings…” (Jeffries, 14:09)
  • Requires dramatic change at ICE for future funding – including body cameras, ID, no masks, ban on racial profiling, and judicial warrants.
  • “These are common sense things.” (15:15)
  • Particular emphasis: “Judicial warrants should be required before ICE agents can storm private property or rip everyday Americans out of their homes.”
• Expresses flexibility only on body cameras, as they’re being gradually implemented.
• Criticizes ICE for “lawlessness, violence and brutality” (17:03); claims ICE is “totally out of control.”
• On the impact of the shutdown: Expresses hope for a solution before the State of the Union, but holds Republicans and the administration responsible for prioritizing “the president’s agenda over vital agencies.”
• Asserts: ICE should focus on violent felons, not “law-abiding immigrant families.”
• Notable statistics: Only 14% of those detained had violent criminal records (C, 16:29).

---

2. Oversight: Epstein Files Fallout

Rep. Robert Garcia: Transparency and Accountability

[24:46–34:34]

• Garcia accuses the White House and DOJ of “a massive cover up,” claiming half of all Epstein files remain unreleased or overly redacted.
  • “The fact that 50%... have not been released…and those that have…are overly redacted.” (Garcia, 27:26)
• Criticizes exposure of survivor names while shielding “billionaires” and potential “co-conspirators.”
  • Blames “the White House and Pam Bondi” for protecting powerful men (28:32).
• Details ongoing committee review of documents and interviews with survivors, promises congressional hearings, and demands all files: “Until we actually get the full set…this is not going to be a complete investigation.”
• Key focus areas:
  • Full exposure of “men that... terrorized and brutalized women and children.”
  • Investigating the finances of Jeffrey Epstein (notably, Les Wexner interview upcoming).
  • Why locations like Mar-A-Lago were allegedly used for trafficking.
  • Queries why the FBI and DOJ (across multiple administrations) failed to act long ago.
    • “Why was this investigated?...This is an issue not just in Republican administrations, but also ones led by Democrats.” (Garcia, 31:25)
• Wants testimony from Prince Andrew (UK cooperation) and other notable names.
• Calls for public hearings with Clinton, supports full transparency: “The more we can have these conversations in public, I think it’s better for the American people.” (Garcia, 34:04)

---

3. America’s Global Standing & NATO: Munich Security Conference

Sen. Thom Tillis: Reassuring Allies, Critiquing White House

[35:39–46:49]

• NATO Commitments:
  • Acknowledges frustration with White House rhetoric, but blames Europe’s $2 trillion shortfall in NATO defense spending for current strains.
    • “You have to give the administration and the President some latitude to point to the fact that a $2 trillion shortfall over two decades…” (Tillis, 35:39)
  • Emphasizes the importance of NATO as “the most important alliance in the history of mankind” – Congress remains staunchly pro-NATO.
  • Pushes back against the idea that U.S. support is “in a more limited, focused fashion”: “I would not have used those words.”
• New Arctic Mission & Greenland:
  • Welcomes a new NATO Arctic Sentry mission; calls for modernization of U.S. agreements in Greenland, respectful cooperation with Denmark/Canada.
• World Order Changes:
  • Rejects the notion the world order is ending: “Only if the Chancellor allows it to. Look, if...NATO countries...would just admit that...was a mistake and then double their...efforts…”
• Trade and Tariffs:
  • Advocates for a “surgical,” not blunt, approach: “I still to this day can’t figure out why we have a 50% tariff on Brazil…those sorts of things are irrational.”
  • Open to rolling back tariffs on Canada, with USMCA framework.
• Fed Nominees & DOJ Investigation:
  • Will block all Fed appointments until DOJ probe of Jerome Powell is resolved: “I have no intention of supporting any confirmation…until this is resolved.”
• 2026 Elections & Republican Outlook:
  • Predicts GOP keeps Senate but is less certain about the House, citing redistricting risk and historical challenges.
  • Is critical of Trump advisors Kristi Noem and Stephen Miller, questioning their foresight.

---

Memorable Quotes

• Tom Homan: “The bottom line is we have the most secure border in the history of this nation. We got record numbers of criminal aliens arrested and deported in this country because this is one team, one fight. The results speak for themselves.” (11:29)
• Hakeem Jeffries: “We know, and the American people clearly know that ICE is totally out of control and they need to be reined in because the American people deserve immigration enforcement that is fair, that is just and that is humane.” (14:09)
• Robert Garcia: “This is a massive cover up being led by the White house and the DOJ. The fact that 50%...have not been released to the public and to the Congress...there’s no protection for the survivors yet the names of billionaires...continue to be redacted.” (27:26)
• Thom Tillis: “Now, the NATO alliance is the most important alliance in the history of mankind...The President is trying to get our NATO allies to perform more strongly...But the Congress has their back.” (35:39)
• Tillis on strategy: “We need to be surgical and not use a blunt force object to negotiate trade relationships...” (41:42)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Timestamp | Segment/Topic | Key Guest(s) | |---------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------| | 02:17–12:54 | Immigration shutdown, ICE practices, law enforcement | Tom Homan | | 13:35–22:13 | Democratic demands, ICE reform, shutdown politics | Hakeem Jeffries | | 24:46–34:34 | Epstein files, DOJ transparency, Congressional oversight | Robert Garcia | | 35:39–46:49 | US–NATO ties, tariffs, Munich Security Conference | Thom Tillis |

---

Tone & Takeaways

• Combative and polarized: Immigration dominates, with both sides steadfast—Homan defending ICE, Jeffries demanding sweeping reform.
• Oversight and transparency: Bipartisan pressure on DOJ over the Epstein files, but deep frustration with pace and process.
• International reassurance: Congressional leaders seek to calm allies, even as White House rhetoric fuels uncertainty abroad.
• Partisan divides: Skepticism over midterm prospects; warnings about both Republican overreach and Democratic claims to momentum.

---

For Listeners Who Missed the Episode

This episode provides a comprehensive, sometimes contentious examination of the top issues in Washington:

• The political and moral stakes in the immigration shutdown, and just how far apart the two parties remain.
• The ongoing struggle to bring accountability and full disclosure in the Epstein case—mixing sensational names with serious oversight questions.
• How America is perceived abroad as allies nervously watch a changing White House, mitigated (or not) by a divided Congress.
• Major partisan divides remain, but also a sense that critical questions about checks and balances, investigative independence, and America’s place in the world are still up in the air.

Face the Nation underscores the complexity, stakes, and personalities driving the headlines—offering deeper context for every major issue facing the country in 2026.

Transcript

[A]

Hey, Sal.

[B]

Hank, what's going on? We haven't worked a case in years.

[A]

I just bought my car at Carvana and it was so easy.

[C]

Too easy.

[B]

Think something's up?

[A]

You tell me. They got thousands of options, found a great car at a great price, and

[C]

it got delivered the next day.

[B]

It sounds like Carvana just makes it easy to buy your car, Hank.

[C]

Yeah, you're right.

[A]

Case closed.

[D]

Buy your car today on Carvana.

[C]

Delivery fees may apply. I'm Ed o' Keefe in Washington. And this week on Face THE Nation, funding for the Department of Homeland Security is on hold as negotiations over immigration enforcement are at a standstill two months into the new year. And part of the government is shut down yet again as disputes over President Trump's deportation policy leave lawmakers unable to fund the Department of Homeland Security. Caught in limbo, TSA agents, the Coast Guard, FEMA employees, and thousands of others, many working without pay. We'll ask White House border czar Tom Homan and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries where negotiations stand. Then the fallout from the release of the Epstein files grows as Attorney General Pam Bondi is grilled on Capitol Hill for her department's handling of the investigation. We'll ask the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, California's Robert Garcia, what more he wants to see from the Justice Department as lawmakers review unredacted files for the first time. And finally, as world leaders gather at an annual annual security conference in Munich. We'll hear all about that and about America's standing in the world with North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Tillis. It's all just ahead on FACE THE Nation. Good morning and welcome to FACE THE nation. Margaret is off today. Washington is waking up to another funding standoff, and it's unclear at this point when it could end as Congress is on recess for another week. So for more on the debate over immigration enforcement tactics, we're joined by White House border czar Tom Homan. Mr. Homan, thank you so much for joining us.

[A]

Thanks for having me.

[C]

I want to begin, of course, with negotiations over reopening the Department of Homeland Security. They center around some specific policy changes Democrats demand in how immigration agents conduct operations. Among other things, they'd like to require immigration agents to show identification, wear body cameras, take off their masks, stop racial profiling, and seek judicial warrants to enter private property. Which, if any of those asks is the president. Are you willing, consider or willing to consider adopting?

[A]

Well, I'm not a part of those negotiations. That's being done up on the Hill between Senate and the House and the White House, I'm not really part of those negotiations. But. But look, you know, when they say stop racial profiling, that's just not occurring. I mean, and you know, ICE will detain, briefly detain and question somebody based on reasonable suspicion, has nothing to do with racial profiling. As far as the mask, look, you know, I don't like the masks either, but because threats against ISIS officers, you know, are up over 1,500%. Actual assaults and threats are up over 8,000%. These men and women have to protect themselves. As far as identifying themselves, they all have placards identifying themselves as ice, ero, hsi, dea, FBI. So they all have placards on them. So I'll let the White House and members of Congress, you know, fight that out. But I think some of the asks are just. I think they're unreasonable because there is no racial profiling. There is identifying marks, but masks, you know, why don't they talk about maybe passing legislation to make it illegal to dox agents or something like that? But the mask right now are for officer safety reasons.

[C]

There are federal laws, of course, against injuring, harming, threatening federal authorities. So there is that. And I think one of the things that people get hung up on is the idea that the cop on the street in their neighborhood, a state police officer, other federal agents will identify themselves with their name on their lapel. And yes, they're employing agency, but why should these immigration agents be any different? And when it comes to the masks as well, you know, cops go out every day, I don't know, everywhere across the country gets hurt in one way or another. But why have to wear all that and protect themselves when there are others out there wearing badges that don't have to do that?

[A]

Well, again, they are wearing badges. They're wearing placards to identify what agency

[C]

they're from, but their name isn't on it. Right.

[A]

I don't know of another law enforcement agency in the country that has an 8,000% increase in threats. Just yesterday, the director of ICE, his wife was filmed walking to work. His home address has been doxed. His kids have been doxed and filmed. So I don't know of another agency in this country that has an 8,000% increase. And look, let's remember why we're here. Editing. We're here because the last four years, over 10 million illegal aliens crossed that border, were leased in this country, unvetted. ICE has to do a law enforcement response to deal with the last four years of open border where they claimed the border was secure every day and it wasn't.

[C]

What's so wrong about obtaining a judicial warrant to enter private property?

[A]

That's not what the federal law requires. Congress themselves wrote the Immigration Nationality act that gave power on administrative warrant to arrest somebody. And that's what's set up in federal statutes. So if Congress wants that change, then Congress can legislate. But right now ICE is acting within the framework of federal statutes enacted by Congress and signed by a president.

[C]

Well, as I recall you have previously said that you thought judicial warrants were necessary for searches. There's been this change in policy in that. Now ICE can go with these administrative warrants that are issued by ICE personnel. Why your change of heart? I mean clearly there at one point at least you agreed that was necessary.

[A]

No, I don't have a change heart. What I understand and I wasn't part of the discussion is that DOJ interpreted that law saying in certain circumstances administrative warrant on somebody that has a final order removal already had a due process issued by a federal judge, they can enter premises. I'm not a part of that discussion. But that's the DOJ guidance.

[C]

Last week you announced the months long operation known as Metro surge in Minnesota is winding down. ICE of course is going to maintain a presence in the state, but not at the levels we've seen in recent weeks. If things keep winding down, when should that surge be over?

[A]

Well, look, about as of, we already removed well over 1000 people and as of Monday or Tuesday we'll remove several hundred more. We'll get back to the original footprint with the exception of the agents there to do the fraud investigation. We'll stay there and continue their work until they're done. The agents investigating the church issue, where the people went into the church, they'll stay and get that work done. But there will be a small force, a security force, what we call RFQs that will our security forces that will respond to when our agents are out and they get surrounded by agitators and things get out of control and they'll remain for a short period of time just to make sure the coordination, the agreements we have with local and state law enforcement stay in place and they respond to a public safety threat when needed. And so hopefully those security forces, security, that small footprint security forces can remove can be removed really fairly quickly. I'm hoping, I think things are going the right direction and I got faith they'll continue that way.

[C]

This was the largest deployment of federal immigration agents in department history. Do you anticipate There'll be others on the scale scene in Minneapolis.

[A]

I think it depends on the situation. I said from day one that, you know, we need to flood the zone and sanctuary cities with additional agents. The number of agents depend on the situation on the ground. How many known criminal targets are out there? Because we know we have a problem with sanctuary cities because we know they're releasing public safety threats in the public. So rather than arrest that one criminal in jail, one agent arresting one criminal alien, the safety and security of a jail, which is safer for the agent, safer for the aliens, safer for the community, they release them in the street. Now we've got to send a whole team or six or seven people. That is a win we had in Minnesota and everybody because now we have agreements and coordination with jails. We can rest that public safety threat and the safety, security of jail, which means we don't have to send six or seven people out to look for them. So I'm hoping other sanctuary cities look at what was. What happened in Minnesota and how we. How we got to the place Red, which I think is a good place. I hope more people pay attention to that. And we work with these states to let our officers in the jail. You can't. A lot of politicians are out there on the left and the Democrats saying, okay, ice, we agree. You should be focusing on public safety threats. You should be focusing on illegal aliens who have committed serious crimes in this country. But they lock us out of the jail. You can't square that. If you really want us to focus on the criminals, then let us send the jail. That's the safest, most secure place to do our work.

[C]

A few other things quickly, if we can. As the surge winds down in Minneapolis, one of the more dramatic incidents now is very much in question. As you know, too, ICE agents now on administrative leave pending an internal investigation because video evidence shows their sworn testimony appears to have been untruthful only hours after that incident occurred. You'll recall DHS had said the ICE officer who shot the migrant they were targeting was being ambushed and feared for his life. That now appears to be untrue. You take that incident, combined with the two deadly shootings in Minneapolis and an incident in Chicago recently where evidence contradicted the government's claim a woman rammed an agent's vehicle. And I wonder if. Does this all just further undermine trust in ICE across the country?

[A]

Well, look, you know, my first press conference in Minnesota, I said I was bringing additional internal affairs agents in just to make sure officers in the field was doing the Right thing. And every one of those instances you just talked about were turned over to Internal Affairs. I know the FBI is investigating the cases also, so we'll see where those investigations lead. But as the ICE director said on Friday, people will be held accountable and they'll be fully investigated. And however that investigation comes out, then disciplinary action or prosecutions will occur.

[C]

Right. A Wall Street Journal report published in recent days, I'm sure you've seen it details widespread concerns with the leadership of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and her chief advisor, Corey Lewandowski. The report says you rarely speak with the secretary or Lewandowski, despite the fact that you oversee immigration issues as well from the White House perspective and that you've repeatedly complained to the White House about them. What is your concern with Secretary Noem and Corey Lewandowski?

[A]

Look, it's one team, one fight. I'm not playing in that media. They're trying to divide this administration. They want to attack the men and women who work in this administration. Look, do me and Secretary Noem agree on everything? No. That's why we have discussions. That's why every day we have a multi agency conference call and meeting. We discuss going forward. And we have different opinions. Well, those different opinions are worked out and we move forward. The bottom line is we have the most secure border in the history of this nation. We got record numbers of criminal aliens arrested and deported in this country because this is one team, one fight. The results speak for themselves.

[C]

But you don't dispute. You've had disagreements with them at times. Even if they've been resolved.

[A]

I have a disagreement with. We got many federal agencies and it's not like an out of control disagreement. I want to do it this way. Someone wants to do it this way. Then we talk about what works best in this situation. We all come to agreement in the end, but it's a discussion of different ideas. I've been doing this for 40 years. We have Rodney Scott that runs CBP, has been doing it for 30 years. So we all come to the table, we come up with different ideas, but we settle on a mission. And I think the results of this mission speaks for themselves again. The most secure border in history of this nation because of our collaboration. And record numbers of criminal aliens being arrested and deported. Results speak for themselves.

[C]

Tom Holman, the White House border czar, thank you for spending some of your Sunday with us. We appreciate it. Face THE Nation. We'll be back in one minute. Stay with us.

[E]

Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile. I don't know if you knew this. But anyone can get the same Premium Wireless for $15 a month plan that I've been enjoying. It's not just for celebrities. So do like I did and have one of your assistant's assistants switch you to Mint Mobile today. I'm told it's super easy to [e-mail]

[D]

Switch upfront payment of $45 for 3 month plan equivalent to $15 per month Required intro rate first 3 months only

[F]

then full price plan opt taxes and fees extra. See full [e-mail] we turn now to

[C]

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who joins us this morning from New York City. Leader Jeffries, thank you for being here.

[G]

Good morning. Great to be with you.

[C]

So as this shutdown continues, I want to remind our viewers what it is exactly. Congressional Democrats are seeking to reopen the Department of Homeland Security. You want immigration agents to show IDs, to wear body cameras, take off their masks, stop racial profiling and seek judicial warrants to enter private property. Talks between the White House and Congressional Democrats are continuing. Are you willing to compromise to let any of these go to get the government reopened?

[G]

Well, our value proposition is simple. Taxpayer dollars should be used to make life more affordable for the American people, not brutalize or kill them as we horrifically saw in Minneapolis with the cold blooded killings of Renee Nicole Goode and Alex Preddy. We know, and the American people clearly know that ICE is totally out of control and they need to be reined in because the American people deserve immigration enforcement that is fair, that is just and that is humane. And so we need dramatic change at ice, including, but not limited to the types of things that you laid out before any DHS funding bill moves forward,

[C]

with the exception of some flexibility on body cameras because they're starting to spend some money to get those out there. Some Republicans have rejected this list of policy reform proposals. You guys still seem miles apart. So when conceivably will we see this resolved? And again, I ask you, are there any of these points that you're willing to let go in order to get the government reopened?

[G]

Well, we're willing to have a good faith conversation about everything. But fundamentally, we need to change. That is dramatic, that is bold, that is meaningful, and that is transformational. And these are common sense things. For instance, judicial warrants should be required before ICE agents can storm private property or rip everyday Americans out of their homes. We need to make sure that there are actual independent investigations so that if state and local laws are violated, in many cases violently violated, that state and Local authorities have the ability to criminally investigate and criminally prosecute anyone who has violated the law. Because we cannot trust Kristi Noem or Pam Bondi to conduct an independent investigation. We believe that sensitive locations should be off limits, sensitive locations like houses of worship, schools, hospitals or polling sites, and that fundamentally ICE should be targeting violent felons who are here unlawfully as opposed to violently targeting law abiding immigrant families, which is completely inconsistent with what Donald Trump promised the American people he would do.

[C]

Right. And we, of course, this past week reported that about 14% of those detained had violent criminal records. About 60% of them were wanted on criminal records overall. But it was that 14% violent criminals. Again, I just, it sounds like this is going to go on a while because Tom Homan wasn't terribly flexible on anything, especially on the issue of warrants and masks. You're not ceding any ground. So there's a few things coming up here. For example, the State of the Union is scheduled for a week from Tuesday. Should it be held if the Department of Homeland Security is shut down?

[G]

Well, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. It's certainly my hope is in advance of it. Well, here's the thing. The administration and Republicans have made a clear decision that they would rather shut down fema, shut down the Coast Guard and shut down TSA than enact the type of dramatic reforms necessary so that ICE and other DHS law enforcement agencies are conducting themselves like every other law enforcement professional in the country. For instance, police officers don't use masks. County sheriffs don't use masks. State troopers don't use masks. Why is it that ICE agents who are untrained are being unleashed on American communities with this type of lawlessness, violence and brutality? Unacceptable, unconscionable, and it's un American.

[C]

Yeah. And we went over this with Tom Homan a little earlier. Of course, they point out that assaults against ICE officers have gone up over 1,300% this past year from about 275 compared to 19 the year before. So there are some legitimate concerns about those agents being targeted. But your broader point about whether or not law enforcement should behave the same as other law enforcement is heard.

[G]

Yes. And we're going to continue, of course, to encourage the American people to exercise their constitutional rights, their freedom of assembly and their freedom of speech and their freedom of expression peacefully, as we saw overwhelmingly done in Minneapolis.

[C]

All right. Well, we'll stay tuned on the shutdown negotiations. And let me ask you a few other things while we have you. First of all, you're a member of the Gang of Eight who gets briefed on national security matters. The Pentagon is reportedly planning for the possibility of sustained weeks long operations against Iran if diplomacy fails and the President opts to attack. What do you know about those plans? Or what would you want to learn as a member of the Gang of Eight?

[G]

Well, the administration, as has been the case since the very beginning of this presidency, has been slow to provide information both to the Gang of Eight members of Congress, the legislative leadership and the top Democrats and Republicans on the Intel Committee and certainly hasn't provided a significant amount of information to Congress in general. These people within the administration, the extremists, they don't seem to believe that Congress is a separate and co equal branch of government. We are in fact, the power to declare war is exclusively given to Congress in Article 1 of the United States Constitution. Now, the American people want Donald Trump and Republicans to actually keep their promise and focus on driving down the high cost of living and fixing our broken health care system. There was Donald Trump who promised in fact, that costs would go down on day one. Costs haven't gone down. We're in the midst of an affordability crisis that hasn't been resolved. Perhaps the President should focus on making life better for the American people, period, full stop.

[C]

I hear you on that. I want to remind our viewers of the current TikTok tight margins in the House. You've got to net at least three seats to take the majority. At this point, I want to play for you part of what you had to say about the 2026 elections when you were asked this past Thursday, take a listen.

[G]

We only need to net 3. It's happening. Democrats are going to take back control of the House and the only question is what's the margin?

[C]

Right now the Democratic Congressional campaign committee considers 44 of the 435 seats in the House in play, including, you just added five new ones this past week. South central Virginia, district in South Carolina, southern Minnesota, central Colorado and the at large seat of Montana, parts of the country where Democrats don't normally win elections, we should point out. So if the election were held today, at minimum, at minimum, how many seats do you see Democrats winning?

[G]

Well, if the election were held today, we're taking back control of the House of Representatives and I'm not convinced that it would necessarily be close. But these are battles that are going to be waged district by district by district. We know we're winning seats now in deep red territory. We saw that in Miami in December, where we won the mayor's race for the first time in 30 years by 20 points. And then in January, of course, we flipped a seat in the Texas state Senate that Donald Trump had just won by 17 points. The Democratic candidate won it by 14. That was a 31 point over performance. And then just last weekend in Louisiana, we flipped the House seat that Trump had won by 14. We won that or 13. So you won that by 24 points. That was a 37 point over performance. My point is we're winning across the country in blue states and purple states and red states because the American people know we're the only ones focused on driving down the high cost of living, fixing our broken health care system and making sure that immigration enforcement is fair and just.

[C]

You've got to get at least three 20 to 25 seats, all 44 seats. What do you think right now? Give me a number.

[G]

Well, I'm not in the prediction business. I'm in the let's win on behalf of the American people so we can end this national nightmare business.

[C]

All right, Leader Jeffries, to be continued on the shutdown and on the midterms. We appreciate you spending some time with us this morning. We'll talk to you soon. And we'll be right back with a lot more FACE THE nation. Stay with us tonight. Maryland Governor Wes Moore joins Norah o' Donnell to kick off our new CBS News town hall series, THINGS that Matter. Here's a preview. President Donald Trump won the presidency in 2024, promising this immigration crackdown that we are witnessing. The Biden administration allowed over 4 million migrants into the country through the southern border during his term in office. Are Democrats to blame for this immigration crisis that we're witnessing?

[H]

Well, I definitely think that the former president did not have this right. Oh, yes. And we needed to do more. I don't think anyone can argue that we had the system worked out under President Biden that immigration was worked out. But actually, I would argue that we have not had the system worked out amongst multiple administrations. Immigration has been an issue that we as a country have punted on for a very long time because the people who can uniquely fix immigration is Congress. And this is the frustrating thing for me with this Congress right now, where I feel we're just watching a continued abdication of responsibility where if the speaker, the ironic thing is right now the president has then the president's party has the presidency, the House and the Senate. If the president wanted immigration reform done right now, do you know what he could do? He would call up the speaker of the House and he said, I need a bill on my desk by next week. And do you know what will be on his desk next week? A comprehensive immigration bill reform, because they have the votes and that's not happening.

[C]

The full conversation airs tonight at 8pm Eastern, 7 Central and will also stream on Paramount. We'll be right back with a lot more FACE THE nation. Stay with us. Welcome back to FACE THE nation. We turn now to the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, California Congressman Robert Garcia, who joins us this morning from Long beach where he used to be the mayor. Congressman, good to see you. Thank you for being with us.

[I]

Sure thing. Thank you.

[C]

I want to start real quick because you are on the committee that essentially has oversight of the entire government. You're Democrats. You don't have control of the panel. You've held some unofficial hearings on ICE operations nationwide. I'm curious if you're talking to the Republicans at all about doing anything to investigate allegations of wrongdoing of ICE and the Border Patrol as they continue to carry out immigration enforcement operations.

[I]

Look, I think it's just been very recently we actually see more and more Republicans actually speak out and begin to show some level of courage. Ice, cbp, DHS is completely out of control, we have heard, not just in hearings, but certainly in looking at what's happening across this country and folks talking and telling their stories. We're talking about U.S. citizens that are being shot. We're talking about U.S. veterans that are being detained for no reason, children that are being deported as young as four or five years old, sending detention in other cases, as we've seen. And so I think you're beginning to see some Republicans actually show concern. But right now, DHS is causing terror across this country. And Donald Trump has turned not just dhs, but ICE specifically, which we now know is larger than it's ever been, into his own personal police force.

[C]

But you know of no Republican committee chairman currently planning to investigate all these allegations, Right. So what you're saying, oh, and there's

[I]

no chairman out there that have come out publicly. Now you begin to hear some Republicans show some concern, but they need to show more courage. I mean, Mike Johnson, at the end of the day, does whatever Donald Trump wants him to do.

[C]

Yeah.

[I]

And Republicans need to go out there and start speaking the truth, what's happening on the street.

[C]

So the big reason I wanted to speak with you this morning is, of course, you're now trying to conduct a pretty aggressive review of the Epstein documents as they've now been released by the Justice Department. There have been about three and a half million documents released. And based on a CBS News review so far, there doesn't appear to be enough evidence to criminally charge anyone else. Saturday night the Department of Justice released this legally required list of all government officials and politically exposed persons in the Epstein files. More than 300 names on the list, which they acknowledge are people who are here listed in a wide variety of contexts. DOJ says they're doing as asked because it was part of the law. It lists everyone from Beyonce to Joe Biden, George W. Bush, Princess Diana, Michael Jackson, Barack Obama, Mike Pence, the Trumps, Mark Zuckerberg, among others. Because they came up in one way or another in the documents. A few questions. Why was this asked for and are you aware yet of any names being not on this list that should be on the list?

[I]

Well, we're reviewing that list, of course, but let's be really clear. This is a massive cover up being led by the White house and the DOJ. The fact that 50% half of the Epstein files have not been released to the public and to the Congress. And of those that have been released, the actual files that have been out in the public or that we've seen, they're overly redacted. Many of the survivors and victims, their names are actually appearing. So there's no protection for the survivors yet. The names of billionaires, the names of folks that could be co conspirators that helped fund Jeffrey Epstein, that could have actually been involved in the terror and rape, as we know, abuse of women and children, some of those names continue to be redacted and protected. Why won't the DOJ actually follow the law, not just of what was passed by Congress, but the subpoena that was put in place by the Oversight Committee during the summer. And so this continues to be a coverup and the American public understanding that they continue to hide and protect and deflect. Why does Donald Trump, the president, continue to, in our opinion, to protect these powerful men? We're not going to stop until we get justice for the survivors.

[C]

The Justice Department says they've released everything they can and the rest are protected by attorney privilege, contain victim information or contain child sexual assault material. I know there's been a back and forth in recent days about a handful of names that were redacted, should have been unredacted. Turns out they didn't have anything to do with it. They just happened to be in an event or in a photo with Jeffrey Epstein, basically. But I want to ask you about your investigation, a congressional investigation. You told the Attorney General on Friday it would take more than seven years for members to check the redactions on those 3 million pages, which sounds unrealistic, but is it your intent to review all of those documents to see what other information is there, what other names are either mentioned or missing?

[I]

Absolutely. Look, we have a great team on the committee that's reviewing right now every single document, going through all the files that are available to the public, looking at redactions, trying to understand and piecing together an investigation. And it's not just the documents. We're interviewing survivors, we're talking to key witnesses.

[C]

Right.

[I]

We're going to be holding hearings in the future as well. So all of that is part of this. But at the end of the day, they have not given us all the documents. So until we actually get the full set of files, this is not going to be a complete investigation. And the COVID up that's being led by the White House and Pam Bondi is continuing and the American public see this and so they need to release all of the files.

[C]

All right, well, working with what you've got so far, what are you looking for specifically? Are there names, are there events, are there situations to clarify that they've been released or that they're out there? What is it you're looking for?

[I]

Look, there's a variety of things. I think number one is we want to ensure that all the names of the men that either were co conspirators, those that themselves terrorized and brutalized women and children. Those people need to be exposed. That work has begun. An additional piece of this is who was financing Jeffrey Epstein. So for example, this upcoming week we'll be interviewing Les Wexner, who likely have been the single largest benefactor and providing financial support to Jeffrey Epstein. Where did he get all of his money and for what and where was that money going? That is another critical part of this investigation. We've subpoenaed also the bank records, so we're going through all those. And that information is critical to our investigation. And then of course is who was involved in the trafficking of girls and women? It wasn't just Ghislaine Maxwell. Why were there so many women being attacked in places across the country? Whether it was New York, but also Palm Beach. You look at Mar A Lago, why was Mar A Lago a location where women continue to be trafficked from? So these are questions that we need to ask. We have questions for President Trump and the broader, I think the broader Issue here is why wasn't this investigated? When these, when these, when these accusations and these stories actually were heard by the FBI years ago, where was the investigation? Where was the doj? And this, by the way, is an issue not just in Republican administrations, but also ones led by Democrats. We have to get answers.

[C]

You mentioned Wexler, who you're interviewing this coming week. Have you heard back yet from the man formerly known as Prince Andrew?

[I]

We have not, but we absolutely have sent letters. We want to actually talk to Prince Andrew. And it's not just Prince Andrew, former Prince Andrew.

[C]

Right.

[I]

I mean, what's happening right now across, you know, over in the UK is pretty stunning. And it's actually a show of what is what happens when the government listens to the public. There are actually things happening to those have been involved. That example that's happening over there in other parts of the world needs to happen in our country. And the fact that the White House continues to cover up for these files and for these men, I think is shameful. Release all the files today. And last thing, they keep claiming that, oh, well, there is a, you know, there's some attorney client privilege or there's interagency communication we can't put out to the public that might be true in the Epstein Transparency act, but is not true in the subpoena that asked for the exact same documents that was passed last July and August. And so there is no reason why Congress shouldn't have all of the documents in front of us right now.

[C]

Let me ask you about a few more specific names. I've heard about the COVID up that you're alleging by the White House. Let's work through some of these names. Peter Mandelson, the former British ambassador, you heard back from him yet?

[I]

We have not. We absolutely want to talk to him.

[C]

Commerce Secretary Howard Ludnick, he had said in an interview last year he hadn't seen Howard Lutnick in years. Turns out he went to see his island off the US Virgin Islands with his family back in 2012, and he had business interests with him in 2014. Are you working with Republican Chairman Jim Comer to bring Howard Lutnick in for questioning?

[I]

We have asked Jim and Comer to bring in Howard Lutnick and we have yet had no response. Not only did he visit the island, he had tons of communication with Jeffrey Epstein after it was already known that Jeffrey Epstein was essentially convicted for preying on children. So it is shameful that he's actually in our government. He should not be the Commerce Secretary. He should Come talk to the Oversight Committee.

[C]

The Oversight Committee also voted last month to hold Bill and Hillary Clinton in contempt of Congress for failing to show up for similar testimony. They're now scheduled to appear later this month for closed door testimony. What's the point of having them come in?

[I]

Look, we've said from day one that we're willing to talk to anybody, whether they're Republicans or Democrats, whoever they are, whatever, how powerful they are. If you have information about Jeffrey Epstein, we want to talk to you. We've been saying that about Bill, about President Clinton for a while. I'm glad that he's coming in. Look, the one thing I'll say, I think both President Clinton and Secretary Clinton have also added that they would like those hearings to be public.

[C]

Right.

[I]

That's something that we absolutely support. We have questions for, for, for President Clinton. We'll be asking those in New York in the weeks ahead, as you know. But there's a lot of people that we need to speak with and the more that we can have these conversations in public, I think it's better for the American people. It's what they want to see and they want to understand what was the truth about Epstein, who he knew, where he got his money from, and why has there been a constant focus on covering up his crimes by so many in government.

[C]

Congressman Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, thank you for spending part of Sunday with us. We appreciate it. And we'll be right back.

[D]

Starting a business can seem like a daunting task unless you have a partner like Shopify. They have the tools you need to start and grow your business. From designing a website to marketing, to selling and beyond, Shopify can help with everything you need. There's a reason millions of companies like Mattel, Heinz and Allbirds continue to trust and use them. With Shopify on your side, turn your big business idea into sign up for your $1 per month [e-mail] specialoffer.

[C]

Secretary of State Marco Rubio left the annual Munich Security Conference after offering some reassurance to European allies wary of the Trump administration's posture on NATO, but remained firm on the administration's ambitions to reshape the transatlantic alliance. North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Tillis was among the group of American lawmakers attending the conference. We spoke with him Friday and began by asking whether the US Is still a reliable partner for Europe.

[B]

Well, you know, in some ways I hope that we're going to enter an era where our reliance on Europe is improved. Look, I've got a challenge with some of the things coming out of the White House. But a lot of that frustration, frustration comes from a $2 trillion shortfall in investing in our mutual defense by far too many NATO allies. Now they're, they're making right now. But you have to give the administration and the President some latitude to point to the fact that a $2 trillion shortfall over two decades, what has that done to our readiness? What has that done to our innovation? What's that done to our military industrial base and manufacturing capacity? You know, we could be scaling up latent capabilities that would have been serving that $2 trillion to better serve Ukraine and better modernize their own weapons. So let's make sure that people look at this with balance and understand that a part of the reason why we are where we are is because we had that deficit in the 20 years, in the first 20 years of this century. Now, the NATO alliance is the most important alliance in the history of mankind. And the article one branch Congress believes that, and they believe it in large numbers. So we're going to commit, I'm here in Munich to basically remind everybody that we have three co equal branches of government. The President is trying to get our NATO allies to perform more strongly and have some level of independence. But the Congress has their back.

[C]

Yeah. So when the Defense Secretary sends the Pentagon's number three to a NATO defense meeting this week and tells the rest of the alliance the U.S. s support for NATO will continue, but, quote, in a more limited, focused fashion, is that the message that Europe should be receiving right now is that the way the administration should approach it?

[B]

I would not have used those words. I think what we want to do is be stronger and represent the deterrent capabilities of our alliance. The United States could possibly go it alone, but the reality is our alliance is what makes us the world's superpower, what keeps this world safer. We're going to have malign actors for the. We've had them throughout history. We will continue to. Putin is a liar and a murderer. He should be expelled from Ukraine. I'll accept a peace agreement if Vladimir Zelensky wants one. But we need to make sure that our adversaries, unless they change profoundly, are viewed as adversaries that we have to coexist with, but not appease. At the same time, Europe needs to step up, not let this be episode that they're now starting to contribute to their mutual defense, their own capabilities, incidentally. It's not like they're writing a check and send it to the US this is building up their capabilities, their interoperability, their ability to work with NATO allies if a conflict occurs. So, you know, it's an emotional time. I've got a philosophy that nothing is ever as good, as bad as it seems. I think people coming to Munich thinking that this is the end of NATO are being a bit alarmist and that we just need to get things right and learn from the past mistakes of our allies or learn from the past mistakes of people who have come up short. But the rhetoric about NATO somehow being a second tier sort of alliance going forward is clearly being spoken by somebody who doesn't really understand the brilliance and the power of the NATO alliance.

[C]

On NATO, one of the things the alliance announced in recent days is this plan for a new Arctic sentry mission to strengthen security across the Arctic region. That decision, of course, comes in the wake of the President in the last few weeks urging NATO to do more for Arctic security, dropping his threats of military invasion of Greenland. Is this new operation exactly what you're talking about, what you want to see the alliance doing? And is it also the answer to the President's concerns about Greenland?

[B]

Well, you know, we talked in Davos. The reality is, to me, it was irresponsible to go anywhere other than figuring out how we modernize the nineteen 1951 agreement where Greenland and Denmark agreed to more or less give us unfettered access in Greenland to project power in the Arctic. So now let's, now that the temperatures have cooled, show a little bit of respect to Denmark and to Greenland, figure out what part of Greenland we need to upfit our space base. The only instance of US Presence in Greenland now to the north, take a look at a base that they offered to us for a dollar, and come up with a fiscally sound, sustainable way to project power in the east by working with Canada and their icebreakers, which are necessary for us to navigate there, working with Denmark and our Scandinavian and Arctic allies to really project the kind of power we need to deter China and Russia.

[C]

The German Chancellor at the start of this conference suggested that the world order as we know it is over. I know you were talking about hyperbole there at the start of this. Would you agree, though, with the Chancellor that things are changing that rapidly?

[B]

Only if the Chancellor allows it to. Look, if, if the NATO countries who came up short for decades would just admit that that was a mistake and then double their. Redouble, their efforts. I think that this goes just like the. The hyperbolic language around Greenland is now almost. It's, it's unbelievable. That was Only three weeks ago, but it's almost in the distant past. I think we have to look ahead and recognize that the American people, the American Congress, and I believe the administration is behind it. But they're not wrong to point out the deficiencies of the past. Look, I've been in meetings where people talk about some of our social programs and how we should really step up with the European world, and then at the same time, they're funding some of those programs at the expense of their own defense. So let's just have an honest discussion with family members and get the family right.

[C]

Let's work through a few other issues here. European leaders this week also suggested that they're not taking retaliatory tariffs off the table. Back here at home, the House voted to essentially reject the president's tariffs on Canada after a bunch of Republicans joins with Democrats to make that happen in the House, if that ever comes up in the Senate. Are you someone who would agree with that, that the tariffs against Canada should be stripped away?

[B]

Well, I've looked at what I think we need to do is get the USMCA modernization, the agreement on the table and address that in the context of strengthening our relationship with Canada and Mexico. Look, we're a very important trading bloc and we should build on our successes. As I'm sure you know, a lot of the tariffs, there's a lot of exemptions because of the existence of usmca. I think we ought to get in a room and start. I've expressed publicly concerns with a lot of the tariffs that were imposed. I still to this day can't figure out why we have a 50% tariff on Brazil when we have a trade surplus with Brazil. Those sorts of things are irrational to me. In other cases, I can justify it based on past behaviors of countries that we have a deficit with. But we need to be surgical and not use a blunt force object to negotiate trade relationships, particularly with China and Mexico. I'm sorry, with Canada and Mexico.

[C]

Should your party be distancing itself more from the president, though, on tariffs, especially the closer it gets to November when the American public is not necessarily a fan of these moves?

[B]

See, I don't think it's a matter of distancing ourselves. That's what's wrong with Washington. We've gotten into this mode now to where we have some sort of a loyalty or fealty test because we either disagree. Oftentimes it's not even the what, it's the how, I do think the what of holding countries that have. We have had Chronic trade deficits with accountable is necessary. And if tariffs are required to get their attention, fine. But the how is a very surgical approach, not a blanket approach, not one that actually creates froth and uncertainty, because that's not good for business. And the U.S. if anything else, is really good when we're at our best on certainty.

[C]

You reiterated this week you're going to block any confirmation hearings for new Federal Reserve chairman or board member until the Justice Department's investigation of Jerome Powell is, as you put it, resolved. But will there be confirmation hearings for Kevin Warsh even if this DOJ investigation into Powell is continuing?

[B]

Well, let's make the distinction between a confirmation hearing and then a confirmation markup. Mr. Walsh is going to have to decide whether or not he wants to go through with this because as I'm sure you know, once the nominee is put forward, there are certain restrictions on what he can do in his business life. But I've tried to make it very clear that I have no intention of supporting any confirmation of any Fed board member, chair or otherwise to fill the Coogler seat. For example, until this is resolved. I think we had a young US Attorney with a dream trying to get the President's attention, not even consulting with the administration and big DOJ on some something that maybe they thought they'd get brownie points for. It's not cute. And if this is only about two minutes of discussion that came before Chair Powell, that prosecutor should listen to the seven members, Republican members, who said they didn't see any criminal intent or activity. And more importantly, the prosecutor should understand that the protocol normally would be a referral from the chair or a member of the committee to say we think a crime was committed here. Here we've got a crime scene where seven Republican members say no crime was committed. How hard is that to understand?

[C]

But when the Treasury Secretary said Friday there's a deal to at least hold confirmation hearings for Kevin Warsh to serve as the next chairman of the Federal Reserve. Is he misguided on that?

[B]

Well, that's not a deal. That's a decision that the chair makes unilaterally in his capacity as chair. The decision I get to make is whether or not I allow a markup, and if I do allow markup, how I vote. And I'm saying that until the matter is solved, I'm a no.

[C]

Understood. And when you say resolved, when you want this investigation resolved, does that mean everything dropped by the Justice Department and other entities?

[B]

Well, keep in mind, everything is an investigation. About two minutes of commentary right even for this guy, that's not hard to figure out.

[C]

You have been quite critical of the administration on a suite of issues, whether it's tariffs, how it's engaging Europe, as you mentioned earlier, concerns about homeland security and whatnot. And you've said that it runs the risk of hurting your party going into November. So I'm curious, if the elections were held today, would Republicans hold on to the House and the Senate?

[B]

I think that we hold on to the Senate. I have questions about the House, and some of that comes from what I believe may have been a little bit of overreach with respect to redistricting. Plus, you have the historic challenge of a midterm election after a presidential election, a lot of complexities in it. But, you know, we've got work to do. And again, my beef almost always relates to what I consider to be how things are being done. And I think the president has some advisers around him. You've heard me talk about Stephen Miller. You know my opinion about Kristi Noem. These are people that don't look around corners and are not taking care of this president's legacy. And I intend to. And if I have to speak bluntly, that's what I'm going to do in my remaining time in the Senate.

[C]

Well, we appreciate you speaking bluntly with us this morning from the Munich Security Conference. Senator Tillis, thank you for your time.

[B]

Thank you.

[C]

And we'll be right back. That's it for us today. Thank you for watching, Margaret. We'll be back next week. Until then, for FACE THE nation, I'm Ed Okey. Today's guests were White House borders are Tom Holman, House Minority Leader Hakim, California Democratic Congressman Robert Garcia and North Carolina Republican Senator Thom Tillis. The senior executive producer of Face THE Nation is Mary Haggard Laird. The executive producer of Face THE Nation is Ann Hsu. This broadcast was directed by Shelly Schwartz. Face THE Nation originates from CBS News in Washington. For more FACE THE Nation, we're [e-mail] and on YouTube. We're also rebroading on our CBS News 24. 7 streaming network at 12:30 and 2:00pm on Sundays. It's available through our apps CBS News and Paramount.

[F]

Plus, a lot of short daily news podcasts focus on just one story. But right now you probably need more on up first from NPR, we bring you three of the world's top headlines every day in under 15 minutes because no one story can capture all that's happening in this big crazy world of ours on any given morning. Listen now to the UPVERSE podcast from npr. It is my great honor to welcome you all to Starfleet Academy.

[C]

There's never been a better time to enroll in Star Trek.

[F]

It's our job to prepare you for the unimaginable.

[C]

To the Night Cadet. In high pressure situations, positive reinforcement is crucial to one's success. You're doing a great job. This is what we train for.

[F]

These friends of mine, they all live

[C]

for something bigger than themselves, and that's Starfleet. Starfleet Academy, new series now streaming on Paramount plus.