On this “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” broadcast, moderated by Major Garrett:
- CBS News justice correspondent Scott MacFarlane
- House Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana
- CBS News business analyst Jill Schlesinger
- Sens. Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware, and James Lankford, Republican of Oklahoma
- Robert Pape, University of Chicago professor and founding director of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats.
Click here to browse full transcripts from 2025 of “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”
MAJOR GARRETT: I’m Major Garrett in Washington.
And this week on Face the Nation: What will America do after the killing of political activist Charlie Kirk? Is the assassination of a high- visibility and effective conservative thought leader and vote mobilizer a moment when national divisions begin to close or will attitudes harden?
(Begin VT)
ERIKA KIRK (Widow of Charlie Kirk): To everyone listening tonight across America, the movement my husband built will not die.
(End VT)
MAJOR GARRETT: The criminal investigation continues, as does the quest to deduce a motive. Charges will be filed later this week.
House Speaker Mike Johnson joins us on the path ahead and a range of issues facing Congress, from avoiding a government shutdown to Russian sanctions.
And a conversation with Democratic Senator Chris Coons and Republican Senator James Lankford, longtime advocates both of finding common ground and minimizing political strife.
Also, University of Chicago Professor Robert Pape, one of the country’s foremost researchers on political violence, with a warning about where things stand.
Then: As consumers turn gloomy and the job market freezes up, high expectations for a Federal Reserve rate cut. CBS News business analyst Jill Schlesinger will break it all down.
It is all just ahead on Face the Nation.
Good morning, and welcome to Face the Nation. Margaret is on assignment for “60 Minutes.” I’m Major Garrett.
We have a lot to get to today, and I want to begin with justice correspondent Scott MacFarlane with the latest on the assassination of political activist Charlie Kirk and the ongoing investigation.
Utah Republican Governor Spencer Cox has been the most authoritative voice in this matter since it happened, Scott. We have some new comments from him this morning.
SCOTT MACFARLANE: It sounds like they have a lot to work with to start.
First of all, as the weekend began, they executed a search warrant on the family home in Washington County, Utah. It’s about three or four hours from the site of the shooting. The governor, though, says multiple people are talking here, including the roommate of the suspect, who he describes as incredibly cooperative.
The roommate, he says, had no idea this was happening, and he also says the roommate may have been in a romantic relationship with Tyler Robinson, may have been gender transitioning, but the governor says there’s no indication or no idea yet if that’s at all relevant to this case.
As for Robinson, he’s in the Utah County Jail, the one where Utah Valley University is. He’s in a special watch area. He’s inmate 460956. A special watch means they’re ensuring he’s not harmed or can do any self-harm. It doesn’t mean there’s a mental health issue, Major, but the severity of the crime, commonly in correctional facilities across the country, puts you in a special watch.
MAJOR GARRETT: State charges due to be filed later this week. And because of Utah’s approach to state charges, this will be a high-visibility prosecution when it comes.
SCOTT MACFARLANE: Yes, the district attorney is Jeff Gray. We expect him to speak Tuesday. The probable cause statement already submitted for this arrest indicates the possible charges, aggravated murder, felonious discharge of a firearm. Those are possible come Tuesday in Utah County Court.
Whether the feds get involved, whole different issue. There may not be a foothold for federal charges here for the U.S. Department of Justice, unless they see something in the firearms or in the motives here that makes it federal, though we saw in Charlotte last week they brought federal charges in the alleged murder of a Ukrainian refugee.
In that case, they found mass transit system foothold to bring the federal case.
MAJOR GARRETT: Scott, as you well know, in instances like this, authorities struggle to stay with the facts as they are known and as they evolve.
But there is rampant online speculation, rumormongering about motive. Authorities still very early in the stages of trying to identify one, if it exists…
SCOTT MACFARLANE: And the F…
MAJOR GARRETT: … and can properly characterized.
SCOTT MACFARLANE: And it’s happening at a moment of change inside the U.S. Department of Justice. The FBI has new leadership, and this really is a first big test for the new FBI leadership.
And the grades are incomplete right now. It was the father who seems to have turned in his son in this case, and the FBI director was called on some social media posts that were conflicting with other information, saying a subject was in custody, then a subject was released.
And the FBI director also posted this weekend: “Against all law enforcement recommendations, we released that video of the suspect.” Governor of Utah today said: “We certainly never recommended against releasing video.”
So there’s some questions to answer for the FBI as this week begins.
MAJOR GARRETT: Little bit of tension there.
Scott MacFarlane, thank you very much.
We turn now to the speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, who joins us this morning from Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Mr. Speaker, it’s good to see you. I appreciate your time.
The burdens of speakership are always manifold. You know that. Previous speakers I have covered know that, but they feel particularly heavy after the events of this week. I just want to ask you, Mr. Speaker, how are you doing?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE JOHNSON (R-Louisiana): I’m doing OK, Major. Thanks for asking it.
No question, it was a difficult week for the country. Certainly, it was felt on Capitol Hill. There’s a mixture of anger and sadness and fear, frankly, on the part of a lot of people. It cast a large shadow across the country and the nation’s capital.
But what I do know, Major, is that my good friend Charlie would not want any of us to be consumed by despair. He would want us to go forward boldly. That was his message, and to do it in love. And I think that, I hope, is the message that continues in the days ahead.
MAJOR GARRETT: It’s not common for this show to pick up on something said by Connecticut’s Young Democrats and Connecticut’s Young Republicans, but they put out a statement that has gotten quite a bit of attention on the Internet, saying, as follows: “There is no place in our country for such acts, regardless of political disagreements.”
Do you believe, on Capitol Hill, there will be a method to forge any sort of bipartisan remembrance of Charlie Kirk?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE JOHNSON: There will be.
We had a moment of prayer and silent reflection on the floor on Wednesday, within an hour of his passing. There will be – I participated in a large vigil here in Baton Rouge at LSU, my alma mater, on Friday night. Tonight, we will have a big, I hope, bipartisan prayer and reflection vigil in Capitol Hill, at the Kennedy Center.
There will be a members reflection and prayer moment that I will lead on Monday night. This will continue. I think that the country needs to see leaders in Congress and leaders with platforms all around the country speaking truth and bringing calm to the situation.
We should appeal, as Lincoln reminded us so many years ago, to the better angels among us all. And I think this is a real moment for Amer (AUDIO GAP) affirmatively. And I think one of the ways to do that, Major, is to adopt the manner of Charlie Kirk, because while he loved vigorous debate and he believed in the free marketplace of ideas and advancing truth boldly, he also was motivated by love for his fellow man, because he never hated the person on the other side of the table.
And I think everyone would do well to be reminded of that model.
MAJOR GARRETT: Mr. Speaker, you mentioned the word fear a moment ago. It is on the lips of members of Congress in ways I have never experienced before. They are talking openly. They already have canceled events.
Other members are talking about whether or not it’s proper, and there are family conversations, to seek reelection. How do you feel this particular space of anxiety for your membership, Republican and Democrat?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE JOHNSON: Yes.
Well, I have been talking with a lot of them over the last few days about that and trying to calm the nerves to assure them that we will make certain that everyone has the level of security that’s necessary, that the resources will be there for their residential security and their personal security.
We’re evaluating all the options for that, but also to be reminded that it does take a certain measure of courage to step out and to lead. I mean, our first responders do it every day. Our members of the military do it every day and political figures as well.
But I think, if we all adopt these practices together and we turn down the rhetoric, we cease with this idea that policy disputes are somehow an existential threat to democracy or the republic, we stop calling one another names – I mean, calling people Nazis and fascists is not helpful.
Look, there are some deranged people in society. And when they see leaders using that kind of language so often now, increasingly, it spurs them on to action. We have to recognize that reality and address it appropriately.
And I’m heartened to know, Major, and to see that many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle are stepping up and saying that and addressing it. I think this could be a turning point, frankly, to use Charlie’s term, for the country. And I hope that’s true.
MAJOR GARRETT: Would that turning point, from your vantage point, Mr. Speaker, because I know you had a long conversation with President Trump, extend to the White House itself?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE JOHNSON: Well, of course.
Look, the president knew Charlie very well. He was like a family member to the Trumps. Many of us felt that close association with him. And he admired Charlie’s approach to public debate. And you have heard him say that publicly. He was – Charlie was a good man.
And I think the best way we honor his memory is to continue to do that very thing and not shy away from debate, to keep the free marketplace of ideas going, but to work on the tone of those debates, because I think that serves the best of our principles, our Judeo-Christian heritage as a nation, our civil discourse, and we got to return to that.
MAJOR GARRETT: Mr. Speaker, several issues pending before Congress, not the least of which is keeping the government open.
I know you prefer a seven-week clean C.R., but there is a press for other issues, extending Obamacare tax subsidies. There’s been a push this weekend for Russia sanctions backed by Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, in the Senate. Will either of those, from your vantage point, get into something to keep the government open?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE JOHNSON: Well, listen, we have been working very hard in the House to restore regular order in the appropriations government funding process, and that’s something that no one’s really seen for a long time on Capitol Hill.
But I’m encouraged that, in a bipartisan fashion, our House Appropriations Committee has passed all 12 of the annual appropriations bills through the committee. We have got three off the House floor. The Senate’s passed a few. And then last week we voted to move into a conference…
MAJOR GARRETT: OK, Mr. Speaker, I believe there’s a technical glitch that has forced us to lose your audio.
We’re going to take a quick break, and we will come right back to House Speaker Mike Johnson in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, in just a moment.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: Welcome back to Face the Nation.
Because technical gremlins lurk everywhere, they got in between my conversation with House Speaker Mike Johnson.
Mr. Speaker. I’m glad to have you back.
You were in the middle of answering about Obamacare tax subsidies, possible sanctions against Russia and a government funding mechanism. Please continue.
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE JOHNSON: Yes, sorry about the interruption there.
Listen, we’re very encouraged that we have been able to restore the regular appropriations, regular order process in the House.
MAJOR GARRETT: Right, but are we going to get this done? Are those two other things going to be added to the process, Mr. Speaker?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE JOHNSON: We will have to see.
I have got to build consensus around all of it, but I think we will need a short-term funding measure, a clean C.R. that will allow more time to figure all this out. And we certainly hope that Democrats will go along on that, because, if not, they really have no excuse.
If they shut the government down, it would be their unilateral decision to do so.
MAJOR GARRETT: And when Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, says, as he did this weekend, now is the time for Russia sanctions, President Trump opened the door on tariffs against India and China as a way to create economic leverage to end the war in Ukraine, where do you stand on all that?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE JOHNSON: Well, listen, I do believe that desperate times call for desperate measures.
And I think appropriate sanctions on Russia are far overdue. I mean, I think there’s a big appetite for that in Congress. So we’re willing to work with the White House and our Senate colleagues in the House to get that done, and I’m anxious to do it personally.
MAJOR GARRETT: Are you waiting for the president to give you the green light, or might Congress act on this on its own volition?
REPRESENTATIVE MIKE JOHNSON: Well, Congress really can’t do this on its own volition, because, of course, the president would need to sign whatever you do into law. So it has to be a partnership.
But we have defer to the commander in chief. I mean, the president is a strong and bold leader on the world stage. He has brokered peace around the world in other conflicts in a way that no one before him has been able to do. And so we’re trusting that he can use that same force and that same approach to bring about finally an end to this war in Ukraine.
Everyone in America wants that bloodshed to end, and President Trump is forcing that. And I certainly…
MAJOR GARRETT: OK, Mr. Speaker, I’m told that the technical difficulties keep arising, so a bit prematurely, we’re going to end our conversation here to spare you and spare our audience from continued mayhem by technical gremlins.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time. Thank you for joining us on Face the Nation very much.
Jill Schlesinger joins now – joins us now. She’s CBS News business analyst. She’s on Long Island, as she often is when we talk.
Jill, I’m pleased to see you.
Look, everyone expects the Federal Reserve to cut rates this coming week. That’s not a mystery. I guess the only mystery is, is it 25 basis points or 50 basis points? And if it’s 50, how much more of a difference might that make?
JILL SCHLESINGER: Well, I think it’s more likely to be a quarter-of-a- percentage point, at least for this meeting.
And, remember, what is the Fed’s job? It’s got – they have got to keep into balance two big priorities. And these are big. One is to make sure the economy grows enough to create jobs for anyone who wants a job. And the other priority is to kind of keep a lid on prices, to control inflation or deflation.
Right now, if you look at the Fed’s job, it’s a real tough one, because the job market is weakening at the same time that inflation is reaccelerating. Now, remember, we are not going back to scary post-pandemic inflationary surge, but inflation is starting to move in the wrong direction.
But I think the Fed’s outlook is, hey, it’s the job market that is getting slower, faster. We have got to concentrate on that. I think they go a quarter-of-a-percentage point, rather than a half-of-a-percentage point, at least to get things restarted.
Major, it was exactly a year ago when they began their rate cuts. Back in September of last year, they cut by a half-a-percentage point because they felt like inflation was moving down very quickly. I don’t think that’s the case this time.
MAJOR GARRETT: Jill, the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, frequently says the Fed and he are data-dependent. That’s probably a virtue, except when the data is messy and cloudy and full of conflicting signals.
That seems to be prevalent right now.
JILL SCHLESINGER: Well, I think there is a real problem, in that, if you look at the last five years, our data is all over the place. The pandemic really did create a doozy of a problem on the economy, but also the way we track the economy.
And I know people got really freaked out about those preliminary estimates to the revisions to all that data for the 12 months through March of this year. That preliminary revision showed 911,000 fewer jobs than we originally thought. Now, this is always part of an annual process. We will get the final number in February.
But what I guess is important is, there are so many different aspects to what’s going on in the economy right now. The crosscurrents are really difficult. So, yes, we know the labor market is weakening, but we’re not seeing widespread job losses, thank goodness. There is no evidence that we are in a recession currently.
The economy is growing. But we do have that niggling problem of prices starting to rise again. And I think that that price increase, because of those tariffs, because of certain aspects, even the service economy, I think that’s a real crosscurrent.
And, to be clear, the Fed, the amazing people who work there, the amazing economists that are out there doing the research, so many of them say to me, you know what, this is the most difficult time to judge the next steps of the economy in the last 40 years.
MAJOR GARRETT: Jill, as you know, there’s a phrase going around describing the job market, and it goes as follows: “No fire, no hire.”
What does that mean practically for somebody in the job market or just graduating from college trying to break in?
JILL SCHLESINGER: Yes, this is a very difficult labor market. I mean, granted, we are – again, we are not like we are in a recession. We are not seeing widespread layoffs, thank goodness. There are pockets of layoffs that are happening in different sectors. We are seeing contractions. We’re seeing people who are retiring and those jobs not being refilled.
But I think that if anyone who has a job right now, when I talk to H.R. people, they basically say to me, hey, you know what? Tell people to stay where they are. Don’t fly off the handle, the job-hugging, staying engaged with your boss, engaged with the company, very important right now.
If you are seeking a job, you know, where the jobs are right now, we see the most activity in health care, health services. So, you’re – if you’re somebody who is trained to do one job, try to find a job in the sector at least that is adding positions. I might be a programmer and I might not have an ability to get a job at a big tech company.
Maybe I go to a big hospital chain. These are the kinds of things. We have to kind of get outside of ourselves. The adaptable candidate is going to be the one that wins in this economy.
MAJOR GARRETT: Jill, let’s talk about tariffs, because it is a conversation and a way of trying to assess that this country has no recent experience with, at least 50 or 60 years, of trying to assess what a tariff does when it is widespread throughout the global economy.
So a lot of us are trying to get used to this. Economists are trying to get used to it. Policymakers are trying to get used to it. Our trading partners are trying to get used to it. What is the story of tariffs so far, and has it been fully written?
JILL SCHLESINGER: Nothing fully written, so very important here, because when those tariffs were announced in April, and then they were moved higher, and then they were frozen for a while, the tariff story was an uncertain one.
I think it is that cloud of uncertainty that was really hanging over the labor market over the past four months. But, right now, what we do know is that the industries most directly impacted by tariffs are not hiring as much. We know that. We know that they are losing some jobs. We also know that tariffs are creeping into the economy, and not in a huge way yet.
But what we are clear about is that prices are set to rise over the next, say, six months or so. Not great for holiday shopping, I know. But what we also know is that we consumers, we are very canny. Once those prices go up, we will switch and make different choices.
So that is why economists believe that this kind of tariff regime is one where we will see prices rise, but not keep rising. Now, that does not really help you if you are going out and shopping. I understand that. But maybe the best news that I can have is that you are not going to feel like you did from the year 2021 to 2022, where it just felt like prices were going up, up, up, up, up.
It is likely to be that prices and the Consumer Price Index, from the way that the Fed looks at this, the PCE index, these measures of inflation will start to rise over the next few weeks – few months. Then they will kind of steady.
But the problem, Major, is that consumers are going to be stuck with price levels that are higher. And I think that is going to be very hard to swallow for anyone who is in the lower to middle earning category.
MAJOR GARRETT: Jill, one other part of the economic scenario I want to discuss with you, because when people talk about inflation, they say, just tell me what energy cost is and I will tell you what inflation is going to be.
But yet there is a dual reality there.
JILL SCHLESINGER: Yes.
MAJOR GARRETT: Natural gas and prices at the pump are down, but electricity paid for by consumers, either businesses or at home, are up.
JILL SCHLESINGER: Yes.
I mean, the great news is that prices at the pumps, OK, totally happy with that. Everyone’s good. The price of crude oil sort of in the low 60s, no problem. That electric – the electricity story is a story of artificial intelligence, because, to build artificial intelligence, it needs a lot of energy in the term – in terms of electricity or in the form of electricity.
That’s why you are seeing those prices go up. But, again, what I have come back to over this process of the last few years, the last five years of the – all these different impacts on the economy, we have never been here before. And so what I want to try to emphasize is that we can’t hang our hat on what has happened in the past.
Right now, I can look at a lot of different companies and say, wow, these companies are making a ton of money, big technology companies. We are seeing the S&P 500, the Nasdaq, the Dow all at all-time highs. And you have to reckon with the problem, the other side of that, which is, consumers feel burdened.
And I think that’s going to be the story of this year and next. How will consumers get out of this? If the labor market weakens from here, I think that’s a problem. If we see a resumption of growth and the labor market starts to strengthen, the average worker will be able to afford what’s going on in the economy.
But it does come down to that labor market.
MAJOR GARRETT: Jill, deeply unfair, 40 seconds. What has A.I.’s influence been on the labor market?
JILL SCHLESINGER: You know, hard to say. In 40 seconds, what I can tell you is, not yet. That’s the major takeaway, because we know that there are some areas where there’s a lot of hiring within A.I.
There are companies that are using A.I. to increase their productivity. But there is no evidence yet that A.I. is taking everybody’s job, so whew, whew. We have got a few minutes to worry about that.
MAJOR GARRETT: A few minutes to worry about that, among many other things.
Jill Schlesinger, always a pleasure. Thank you so much for joining us.
And we will be right back with a lot more Face the Nation. I invite you to please stay with us.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: For a daily dose of political news, analysis, and so much more throughout the week, please join me for The Takeout. We’re on every weeknight at 5:00 p.m. on our CBS News 24/7 streaming channel, also available on our apps, CBS News and Paramount+.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: We will be right back with Senators Chris Coons and James Lankford for a bipartisan conversation on uniting America, plus the leading researcher on political violence, University of Chicago Professor Robert Pape.
Please stay with us.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: Welcome back to “FACE THE NATION.”
For a look at how Congress may, may help bridge political divisions the country presently, we turn to a couple of lawmakers with a lot of experience in that space. Democratic Senator Chris Coons, who joins us from Wilmington, Delaware, Republican Senator James Lankford, who joins us from Oklahoma City.
Gentlemen, you have a well-earned reputation both for preaching bipartisanship, taking the rhetorical temperature in Washington and nationwide down a notch or two.
Senator Coons, I want to start with you. After the events of this week, do you feel that’s harder than ever to achieve?
SENATOR CHRIS COONS (D-DE): It is. And, Major, thank you for a chance to be on with you and with my friend, Senator Lankford.
The brutal assassination of Charlie Kirk, while he was in the middle of a debate on a college campus, goes to the very heart of what it means to be American, of the importance of the First Amendment of free speech. And someone like Charlie Kirk, who was a nationally known figure, who dedicated himself to debate, to engagement with his political adversaries, should not have paid with his life for the opportunity to speak out. No matter how much I might deeply disagree with his political views, the idea that he would be killed in such a grotesque and public way has to bring all of us to reflect about how hard it’s getting because the internet is an accelerant. It is driving extremism in our country. It’s driving us apart left and right. And leaders like Senator Lankford, Governor Cox have an obligation and an opportunity to join with leaders from my party in urging folks to set aside any thought of political violence and to respect each other, even as we keep advancing our political differences through discourse.
MAJOR GARRETT: Senator Lankford, do you ever, at times, feel as if your appeals for better angels, calmer rhetoric, more bipartisanship is shouting into an internet void?
SENATOR JAMES LANKFORD, (R-OK): It is because the algorithm pushes people to the most extreme. The algorithm is all – on social media is always pushing, who’s the angriest, who’s the loudest, who says the craziest things. That’s what gets repeated over and over and over again. So, any time that there is cogent dialogue or an issue on something where people may disagree, but they’re having a – a civil conversation on it, that gets pushed aside towards someone that’s just angry and – and focused.
This is somewhat human nature to be able to say we disagree. We find areas where we disagree, and we try to be able to solve those. The best way to be able to solve those is through words, talking it out, finding an opportunity to be able to do it. But I would tell you, this kind of anger is as old as Cain and Abel, to be able to go back and say, I’m mad at you, so I’m going to try to destroy you. Whether it’s destroy you online or to try to humiliate you or to cancel you or to, in this case, try to murder you publicly. It is – it is painful to be able to see that part of humanity. And it is better for us to be able to push better angels.
MAJOR GARRETT: Senator Lankford, first to you, then Senator Coons.
Senator Lankford, are you afraid for your own security right now?
SENATOR JAMES LANKFORD: I am – I am attentive to my own security, how about that, for myself and for my family. My staff and I have to – have to talk through each public event. But we’ve had to do that for a while.
As you may know well, there have been 14,000 threats against members of Congress just this calendar year. This is not new. But it continues to be able to rise. as we’ve seen Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota, in their own home, have a home invasion and be murdered in their home. As we’ve seen a governor in Pennsylvania have his home set on fire. It’s not just public events, it’s also in our private spaces as well that we’re keenly aware that there are people that are irrational, that do irrational acts.
MAJOR GARRETT: Senator Coons?
SENATOR CHRIS COONS: I agree that for all of us who serve in public life, whether it’s leading a non-profit or a church, teaching in a school, or being a public advocate, someone engaged in public debate, as Charlie Kirk was, the risk is getting higher. And to have to worry about the safety of your own family, if you step forward to serve as a judge, if you write editorials, if you lead a non-profit or if you serve in Congress or run for president, to have to worry not just about your own physical safety but the safety of your spouse and children, I think, weakens our ability to have good and robust debates, to have a well-led nation and to demonstrate to the world that we’re a nation committed to free speech, but where we reject political violence.
So, of course, anyone in public life today is more concerned about the tragedy in Utah, about the incidents that Senator Lankford just referenced, the attempt to kidnap the governor of Michigan, to assault Speaker Pelosi’s husband, the shooting of Steve Scalise and the shootings at other members of Congress. The recent incidents have gotten worse and worse, and I think I know the reason. It’s principally because the internet is fueling and accelerating those deep-seated inclinations towards violence and seeing others as enemies, that James was referencing, and there are steps we can and should take in Congress to address that.
MAJOR GARRETT: The administering this weekend, as I’m sure you two are both aware, putting before Congress $58 billion in security for members of Congress, the judiciary and the like.
Senator Coons, you believe Congress will be disposed to agree to that?
SENATOR CHRIS COONS: I hope that we will step up and invest more. I just hosted a bipartisan event last week on protecting state judges, and we had state judicial leaders from across the country, from Delaware and Texas and many other states, talk about harrowing incidents and tragic killings of the members of the judiciary. I hope we will invest in securing our public life because incidents like this tragedy in Utah, like the murder of Melissa and her husband, Mark Hortman, in Minnesota, frankly, fuel further anger in our country. And the ways in which folks are then taking the horrific images of these incidents and propagating them on the internet adds fuel to the fire.
We can and should pass bills, as we just did, Senator Cruz and Senator Klobuchar worked together to pass, and President Trump signed into law, the Take It Down Act, to remove some of the most harmful pornographic revenge porn images from the internet. And we have a bill right in front of us, the Kids Online Safety Act, that’s broadly bipartisan, that we should pass to help reduce some of the risks and harms to our families and our country from the internet.
MAJOR GARRETT: Senator Lankford, I misspoke, that’s $58 million, not $58 billion, but it’s a substantial sum.
SENATOR JAMES LANKFORD: Yes, it is a substantial sum. What was funny was I was going to actually correct you on that, let you know it’s an “m” not a “b” on that particular one. But it is something to be able to set aside and say, what are we doing? It’s not – it is about the person and their family, but it’s also about the title. It’s about the task. Because that person represents that state, that – that part of the nation, that particular task.
My wife and I often talk about the fact that I have this title of senator for a season. Someone else had it before me. Someone else will have it after me. But while I have it, I’m a steward of that task and that responsibility. And so, when we’re talking about protecting judges and protecting individual, it’s not just their personal safety, it is really declaring to the nation that we believe that these tasks are hard, that they should be intense debate, that we have very difference perspective. Chris Coons and I are very close friends, but have very different ideas on some things, but we have the ability to represent our individual states and set of ideas and to be able to talk those two things out and to be able to bring things together and say, I know areas where we disagree. Where do we agree? How can we solve it? That is where we are at our best as Americans is to say, we don’t oppress each other. We try to be able to find common ground and to be able to move forward as we can.
But as Chris has mentioned, the Oline Kids Safety Act is a great piece of legislation to be able to protect our kids. We are seeing people radicalized online on social media and through the internet in the United States by other Americans and by the algorithm that’s there. And I will tell you, as recently as just a couple of weeks ago, I was in a school in Oklahoma, that now Oklahoma schools have banned all cellphones from bell to bell at school. You cannot have a cellphone on your – on your – on from bell to bell on campus. And the principals and the teachers all talk about how dramatically different the environment is on campus right now because people are looking up, people are interacting, people are talking again. They’re not just staring at their phone. They’re not getting fed all this vitriol all day long. And so, it changes the mood of everything just by looking at each other in the face and saying, let’s see if we can work this out.
MAJOR GARRETT: Senator Lankford, I’m going to bring up something that’s playing out through the country right now, and it’s making all the things you and Senator Coons have talked about more difficult, which is, people who have posted about Charlie Kirk have jobs and are being fired because what they posted online has been viewed by their personnel directors or leaders as inappropriate. At any governmental level or in the private sector, are you comfortable having someone fired for an utterance about Charlie Kirk’s death?
SENATOR JAMES LANKFORD: Yes, this is about protecting the individual businesses. And what people are seeing is, in this cancel culture that still persists, that if you voice something that becomes a big pushback from the community, the employer will step up and say, hey, you’re about to kill our business based on what you’re saying online. Everyone has to understand what they say privately online can get connected to their business.
We have a veterinarian clinic in Oklahoma City right now that – that one of the veterinarians posted something just absolutely horrific about now we’re culling out the sick ones right after Charlie Kirk was murdered, that now there’s been big pushback through that veterinary clinic because people are say, OK, this is the person – do I want to do business with that person if they have that belief?
So, this is part of the challenge that we have with social media and with employments. Employers are going to say, don’t hurt our business based on the foolish things that you choose to say to be able to say online.
MAJOR GARRETT: Senator Coons, how about within the federal government?
SENATOR CHRIS COONS: Well, the way James put it there, I think, is a good balance between, it’s OK to have codes of conduct, to say to an employee, you shouldn’t be speaking out on behalf of this company or this department of the federal government. Where your role, for example, requires that you be trusted, and that you not take partisan political positions. One of the challenges of the intersection of the line between social media and one’s conduct on behalf of the government is that today we can see into your internal views.
But it’s not that new. So, let’s imagine that you’re a career federal prosecutor or you’re a judge. Historically, there have been clear rules against engaging in partisan politics while you are performing those functions. The internet just makes it easier for folks to police and punish those who make statements that are considered extreme or out of the mainstream.
Cancel culture is a real challenge to us, to balancing free speech with positions of responsibility. And we have to find our way through this together in a way that offers some grace and humility while celebrating the free speech that is the foundation of our republic and urging people to think twice before they post things that are outrageous online.
MAJOR GARRETT: Senator Lankford, the country’s going to look to Congress here in the next couple of weeks to avert a government shutdown, also possibly extend soon to expire Affordable Care Act subsidies that help afford insurance. In this climate, and with those eyes on the nation upon Congress, how do you expect that to play out?
SENATOR JAMES LANKFORD: I expect us to be able to solve the budget issues, which the American people expect to be able to do as well. These are hard issues. We’re sent to be able to do hard things. We should do hard things on it. We should not, first and foremost, have a government shutdown. We have $37 trillion in debt right now. We should have hard conversations about debt and deficit, but they shouldn’t be during a government shutdown.
What we’re currently arguing right now about is a seven-week extension on the current budget spending to say, we’re not changing anything, but for the seven – next seven weeks, let’s just hold it until we get a longer budget agreement and can actually come to agreement. What has been floated is a $300 billion requirement by some of my Democratic colleagues to say, if we don’t spend an additional $300 billion, we’re not going to keep the government open the next seven weeks. This is also a subsidy, an insurance subsidy, that was put in place during Covid, and just after Covid to say, due to the health care issues around Covid, we’re going to extend additional insurance coverage that’s there.
Covid and the crisis of Covid is now past on it. It’s difficult to say we should spent an additional $300 billion just to stay open the next seven weeks due to a Covid emergency at this point.
So, yes, we’ll have – we’ll have hard conversations. But let’s have it. Let’s – let’s talk it out and let’s figure it out.
MAJOR GARRETT: Senator Coons, you’re going to get the last word. Respond to Senator Lankford on that.
SENATOR CHRIS COONS: Well, this is an area where Senator Lankford and I disagree. We are both appropriators. We both want to find a way to work together, to keep the government open. But the Republican-only bill that was passed earlier this year, the so-called big, beautiful bill, threatens to raise rates for health care for millions of Americans and to throw millions more off of health care.
I think there are ways we can reduce the harm to Americans’ health care through the appropriations process. The bill that we both voted for in our committee in July would restore many of the proposed deep cuts to the National Institutes of Health, for example, one positive step forward. We have to find a way to resolve these issues and reduce or reverse some of the harm that’s being done to Americans’ health care.
MAJOR GARRETT: Senator Chris Coons, Delaware Democratic, James Lankford, Oklahoma Republican, thank you both. I appreciate it.
And we’ll be right back.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: Welcome back.
We’re going to take a closer look at the problem of political violence in America. And we’re joined now, I’m glad to say, by University of Chicago Professor Robert Pape. He is the founding director of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats.
Professor, it’s great to have you with us. Thanks for joining us.
What are the trend lines and what is the key terminology you want my audience to understand?
ROBERT PAPE (Professor of Political Science, University Of Chicago): We are now in a watershed moment for what I call the era of violent populism in America. This era is defined, first and foremost, by two factors. Number one, a rising tide of political violence on both the right and the left. And just think, and I’ll only go back to 2002. Just think of the attack – the assassination attempt on Nancy Pelosi, Democratic leader of the House. Missed her. Almost killed her husband. The attempt on Brett Kavanaugh, conservative Supreme Court justice. Two attempts on Republican candidate Donald Trump. And then the – in Minnesota, just a few months ago, not just attempts, but actual assassinations of Democratic leaders. Josh Shapiro, governor of Pennsylvania. And now we see Charlie Kirk assassinated. And what we are seeing is this clear rising trend in numbers of attacks.
Side by side with that, though, we are also seeing a rising tide, a groundswell of support for political violence on both the right and the left that corresponds with this rising trend of political violence on both the right and the left.
Our center at the University of Chicago Project on Security and Threats, we have been conducting highly reliable national surveys on political violence – the support for political violence among Americans for over four years. We started this in the summer of 2021. Our most recent survey in May found higher levels of support for political violence on both the right and the left than we have ever seen. And that’s one of the reasons why I rang the alarm bell with that big op-ed in “The New York Times” in June, saying, we’re on the cusp of major political violence. And I’m sorry to say, we’re now right in the grip of violent populism.
MAJOR GARRETT: And in that survey data, is it that people who respond to your surveys say to reconcile myself to the political outcome I want, I will be willing to resort to violence. Is that the key connection point?
ROBERT PAPE: The key connection is the particular political grievance. So, we asked, just give you an example, 39 percent of Democrats say they agree that the use of force is justified to remove Donald Trump from the presidency. When we go deeper to probe, what do they mean by use of force? Fifty-five percent are talking about assassinations. They’re talking about lethal uses of force. That’s why we use that term.
On the right, we also asked – very same survey, we found 24 percent of Republicans agree that Donald Trump is justified in using the U.S. military to suppress Democratic protesters. So, these are very specific questions. We have a whole slew of these questions so that we really can speak with great precision about what are the grievances that people want to say use of force is justified. We know what the meaning of that term is. And then we can see, Democrat, Republican in the cross tabs.
MAJOR GARRETT: Does your research buttress the point that both Senator Lankford and Senator Coons made, which is, the internet is an accelerant and amplifier?
RICHARD PAPE: It’s an accelerant, but it’s not the root cause. So, studying this problem now for five years, I have found that, just as around the world, big, social change drives political violence. We see this in other countries around the world. But the details of the change vary.
We are now moving, for the first time in our country’s 250-year history, from a white majority democracy to a white minority democracy. In 1990, we were 76 percent non-Hispanic white. Today, we’re 57 percent non-Hispanic white. It will be another ten years, maybe 15 if we deport a lot of those undocumented illegal immigrants, before we make the transition to a truly white minority democracy.
Well, this generational change is happening – it started about ten years ago where the real tipping point generation and corresponds with the rise of Donald Trump, why his issue of immigration is meteoric, why it’s morphed from immigration, meaning stop people costing the border, to now deporting mass numbers of people because there are people on the right who want to stop or reverse this, and also the virulent reaction to Donald Trump on the left, on parts of the left, who want to keep this going. This is really the taproot, and that’s why we need to expect – this, left to its own devices, will get worse and be with us for ten years.
MAJOR GARRETT: So, this is a demographic story that is creating a political backlash that gets amplified and accelerated online? Do I have that right?
RICHARD PAPE: Yes. You’ve got it exactly right. And these are why – it’s not the internet is not important, it’s a reinforcing factor. And there is a –
MAJOR GARRETT: In other words, it’s too simplistic to say it’s the internet?
RICHARD PAPE: Exactly, because that’s what – a few years ago, people challenged my findings and I said, oh, no, no, we’ll just deplatform people. So, the problem here is just the internet, so we’re going to de- platform x, y, and z. We de-platformed x, y, and z. And, you know what, didn’t miss a beat.
And the reason is because, yes, it is an additional – it’s like throwing gasoline on the fire, but the internet is not the fire itself. There’s something going on, which is really radicalizing our politics. And I’m sorry to say, this is a story that we see around the world, in other countries, other times, and so this is – this is the social change leading to radicalized politics that changes winners and losers in our society for real, and that’s leading to political violence.
MAJOR GARRETT: Professor, it has always been a hallmark of this country, we have sort of thought about ourselves as having this experiment that has lots of differences of opinion, spasms of violence, but in the end we reconcile and move forward. Are you any more or less optimistic about that and that underlying assumption about the core ability of America than you were previously?
RICHARD PAPE: The future is in our hands. This is not locked in with destiny. That said, if we do nothing, this will keep getting worse. The number one thing we have to do is we need our political leaders to step up. And we just saw an instance of that, just previously, where we have senators from both sides of the aisle making a joint video appearance. Well, that’s really quite – to condemn violence. That’s important because the leaders can restrain their own constituents. When they bad-mouth the other side’s constituents, our data shows, that makes everything worse. That’s the worst of all possible worlds because it produces defiance. We need to step that up. What would step that up? A summit between President Trump, Governor Newsom and Governor Pritzker, a public session where they all together condemn political violence.
MAJOR GARRETT: Professor Pape, I am very glad you’re here. Modeling behavior matters in many contexts in life, political and otherwise. Thank you very much.
We’ll be back in just a moment.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MAJOR GARRETT: That is it for us today. Thank you very much for watching. Margaret will be back next week. For “FACE THE NATION,” I’m Major Garrett.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)