On this “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” broadcast, moderated by Nancy Cordes:
- Kevin Hassett, director of White House National Economic Council
- Sen. Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland
- Reps. Josh Gottheimer , Democrat of Maine, and Mike Lawler, Republican of New York
- Dr. Deborah Birx, former White House coronavirus response coordinator
- Lt. Col. William Swenson (Ret.) and Master Sgt. Matthew Williams (Ret.), Medal of Honor recipients
Click here to browse full transcripts from 2026 of “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”
NANCY CORDES: I’m Nancy Cordes in Washington.
And this week on Face the Nation: U.S. negotiators appear to be nearing a peace agreement with Iran. We will have the latest.
Sources familiar with the talks tell CBS News that the latest proposal to end the war, which is now in its 13th week, includes a process to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the unfreezing of some Iranian assets held in foreign banks, and a continuation of negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program.
We will talk to the president’s top economic adviser, Kevin Hassett, about the impact of the war on the economy. And we will take a closer look at the outrage on both sides of the aisle this week over the creation of a $1.8 billion anti-weaponization payout fund. Maryland Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen will be with us.
We will also hear from a bipartisan duo working to fight antisemitism in politics, New York Republican Mike Lawler and New Jersey Democrat Josh Gottheimer.
Plus, as the World Health Organization warns that Ebola is spreading rapidly in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, we will talk to Dr. Deborah Birx.
And, finally, a special Memorial Day conversation with two Medal of Honor recipients about the significance of service.
It’s all just ahead on Face the Nation.
Good morning, and welcome to Face the Nation. Margaret is off. I’m Nancy Cordes.
On this holiday weekend, President Trump has been hard at work at the White House to iron out an agreement with Iran. When I spoke to the president on Saturday, he sounded upbeat about the potential for a deal and said that he – quote – “wouldn’t even be talking about an agreement” if it did not prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon, adding – quote – “We’re getting everything we want. I will only sign a deal where we get everything we want.”
But it appears that most of the nuclear decisions would actually be left to the next round of negotiations, and that has some Republicans worried this morning.
We’re going to begin with senior foreign correspondent Imtiaz Tyab reporting from Tel Aviv.
(Begin VT)
IMTIAZ TYAB (voice-over): In New Delhi this morning, Secretary of State, Marco Rubio had this to say about Iran:
MARCO RUBIO (U.S. Secretary of State): I will leave it to the president to make further announcements on it. Suffice it to say that some progress has been made.
IMTIAZ TYAB: On Saturday, President Trump held a conference call with leaders of several Arab and Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt, Turkey, the UAE, and Pakistan.
In a TRUTH Social post afterwards, the president said: “An agreement has largely been negotiated, subject to finalization between the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
Pakistan’s army chief, Asim Munir, who’s been acting as lead mediator, was in Tehran at the time-, where he met with Iranian leaders as part of attempts to narrow the remaining gaps with Washington.
At a media briefing, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Esmaeil Baghaei, said, over the past week, the process has moved towards reducing the points of disagreement, but there are still issues that need to be discussed through the mediators.
Those points of disagreement include the fate of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s frozen assets in foreign banks, and its nuclear program, which includes a large stockpile of nearly bomb-grade highly enriched uranium, which the president says is his red line.
(End VT)
IMTIAZ TYAB: And after his calls with Muslim and Arab leaders last night, President Trump also spoke to Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Now, a senior Israeli political source has told CBS News the P.M. made it clear to the president that Israel would retain the right to take action against what it sees as threats, including in Lebanon, Nancy, amid reports the potential agreement between the U.S. and Iran would also see an end to the war there.
NANCY CORDES: Imtiaz Tyab, thank you so much.
Some key Republican senators have already weighed in on the early reports about the contours of a possible deal.
Senate Armed Services Chair Roger Wicker said putting off nuclear discussions for later would – quote – “be a disaster” and that “everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught.”
Senator Ted Cruz of Texas said: “If the result of all that is to be an Iranian regime now receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium and develop nuclear weapons, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake.”
We turn now to Maryland Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen.
Senator, thank you so much for being with me.
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-Maryland): It’s good to be with you, Nancy.
NANCY CORDES: So, I want to stress that all of this is still evolving. We’re getting slightly different takes on the terms of the deal from the Americans and the Iranians.
But what do you think about what you have heard so far?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, Nancy, this war against Iran has been a big blunder from the very start.
The president should have stuck to his campaign pledge of keeping us out of war and focused on bringing down prices. He’s done just the opposite. Prices are going up. Interest rates are going up, and we’re mired in this war in Iran.
And when you’re digging a hole, you should stop digging. That’s what this agreement sounds like. It sounds like we will go back to opening the Strait of Hormuz, which, of course, was open before the war started.
I will say, however, it looks like Iran will retain more control over those straits. We also know Iran has an even more hard-line regime in place now, and we’re talking about releasing some of Iran’s frozen assets.
So, look, my view is, as I said, stop digging.
NANCY CORDES: I want to ask you about something that stirred up a lot of controversy on both sides of the aisle on Capitol Hill this week, the DOJ’s new anti-weaponization fund, nearly $1.8 billion set aside for people who say they were treated unfairly by the federal government.
You have been calling it a political slush fund. You are trying to force Republicans to take a vote on placing some guardrails around that fund. What kind of guardrails are you talking about?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, Nancy, first we should get rid of this political slush fund, $1.8 billion of taxpayer money.
But I have been proposing amendments to prohibit, for example, people who rioted on January 6 and assaulted police officers from being eligible for the fund. People who have been convicted of child molestation, they should not be eligible for the fund. Members of Congress should not be eligible for the fund.
And I would hope all Republicans, including Republican candidates, should come out strongly against this slush fund which the president has set up for these purposes.
NANCY CORDES: You pushed the acting attorney general this week on that question of whether people who attacked police officers would be eligible for the fund. I asked the president about that this week as well. He did not say that those people would be ineligible.
Senate Republicans were very angry about this, and they really gave it to the attorney – acting attorney general behind closed doors this week. Do you think that there is an appetite for trying to get rid of this fund in Congress, and how would that even work?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, I hope so, Nancy.
I think most Republicans are more upset about the fact that this interrupted their effort to pass this reconciliation bill with another $70 billion of taxpayer funds for ICE. I think that’s what upset them the most.
And they decided to leave town because they didn’t want to have to vote on these amendments that I have proposed and others have proposed. So we will see how this all turns out. We should get rid of this political slush fund altogether, and we will insist on having these votes when we get back.
NANCY CORDES: I have been told by a senior administration official that there are now some urgent efforts under way to address the concerns that Republicans have raised about this fund.
But they continue to insist they have got the right to do this and that, in fact, they already have the ability to make these payouts, and, if anything, they’re making the process more transparent by coming up with rules, by appointing commissioners, and all the rest.
What do you think of that argument?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, that’s absurd, and this is really corrupt from the start.
I mean, this is essentially President Trump negotiating with President Trump through the acting attorney general, who was Trump’s former personal lawyer. They have set it up so they have complete control over the five members of this commission that can be selected. President Trump can fire any of them whenever he wants.
And so this is completely under their control, a slush fund. And they have not committed, Nancy, to being completely transparent. The acting attorney general refused to say that they would disclose the names of all the people who receive these taxpayer funds.
So let’s be clear. This is a corrupt deal. And, in the process, the president, of course, got a complete get-out-of-free – get-out-of-jail- free card with respect to any taxes that he has due and owing, another corrupt part of this deal.
NANCY CORDES: I want to ask you about a case that you have been heavily involved in. And there was a big development this week. A judge threw out the federal human smuggling charges against Kilmar Abrego Garcia of your home state, Maryland.
You visited him in El Salvador after he was wrongfully deported to that country, placed in the Supermax prison CECOT. The judge said that DOJ’s prosecution of him was vindictive, and DOJ now says it plans to appeal.
Have you spoken to him or his family? How are they feeling about this decision?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Nancy, I have spoken to him and his wife, Jennifer, and they’re, of course, pleased that the court system have applied the law.
This was absolutely a vindictive prosecution. The judge called it essentially an abuse of power, because the Trump administration brought these new charges against him because he decided to exercise his due process and constitutional rights.
They had admitted that they had wrongfully disappeared him to El Salvador, and he contested that. And, of course, he is now back. They’re still trying to deport him. But he filed his claims under the Constitution.
And so this case is not about Kilmar Abrego Garcia alone. This is really about the rights of each and every one of us. And when the Trump administration decided to vindictive – vindictively prosecute him for that, they were further threatening the rights of all of us.
NANCY CORDES: We have got about a minute left, but I want to ask you about this election autopsy that was finally released by the Democratic National Committee this week.
Do you feel like you got any answers from that autopsy on why the Democrats lost in 2024? And do you believe that the head of the DNC should resign over this?
SENATOR CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Well, Nancy, this is a very shoddy piece of work. It’s an incomplete piece of work. And I can understand why Ken Martin was reluctant to release it earlier.
But, as he has said, he owns this problem. He should have ripped the Band- Aid off earlier and put it out. No, we’re six months from a very important election, and we…
Add Comment