In First Interview AS VP, JD Vance DISMANTLES CBS’s Margaret Brennan

Jorge Bonilla
January 26th, 2025 5:56 PM

Text to Speech

00:00 00:00
Font Size

When CBS announced that it landed the first post-inaugural interview with Vice President JD Vance, with Margaret Brennan on Face the Nation, many conservatives questioned why Vance would even give the time of day to hateful “legacy” media. Within minutes, we had our answer.

The interview wasn’t very wide-ranging, with Brennan honing in on those spots where she could try to put Vance on his back foot. The first question set the tone:

MARGARET BRENNAN: Pete Hegseth, it was a tie, bipartisan opposition, smallest margin since the job was created. You had to break that tie. If the nominee can't unite your party, how is he going to lead three million people?

VICE PRESIDENT JD VANCE: Well, look, I think Pete is a disrupter, and a lot of people don't like that disruption, but, Margaret, that disruption is incredibly necessary. If you think about all of those bipartisan massive votes, we have to ask ourselves, what did they get us? They got us a country where we fought many wars over the last 40 years, but haven't won a war about as long as I have been alive. They've got us a military with a major recruitment crisis, a procurement price crisis that's totally dysfunctional, where we buy airplanes for billions and billions of dollars, terrible cost overruns. The delivery dates are always delayed. So we need a big change. Now, admittedly, there are people who don't like that big change, but it is necessary, and it's explicitly what Donald J. Trump ran on and I think part of the reason why the American people elected him their 47th President.

The question was intended to inflame by tying two nonsequiturs together. It is unclear what uniting a Senate conference has to do with leading the Department of Defense, but Brennan thought that was a question. Brennan’s follow-up was objectively as bad, but Vance handled both.

VANCE: I would say the main problem is – or – excuse me – the main thing that we want Pete Hegseth to do is to fix the problems at the Department of Defense. And, unfortunately, there are many. We've gotten into way too many wars that we don't have a plan for winning. We've gotten into way too many misadventures that we shouldn't have got into in the very first place. And our procurement process, Margaret, is incredibly broken. We're in an era…

BRENNAN: Those are policy decisions.

VANCE: Well, of course, they're policy decisions, but they're also logistical and implementation decisions. If you look at where we are with the rise of artificial intelligence, with the rise of drone technology and drone warfare, we have to really, top to bottom, change the way that we fund the procurement of weapons, the way that we arm our troops. This is a major period of disruption, and we think Pete Hegseth is the guy to lead the job. Now, there's another element to this, Margaret, too, which is we believe that military morale, at least until the election of President Trump, was historically low. You had the Army missing recruitment goals by tens of thousands of soldiers, and, already, recruitment is starting to pick up because Pete Hegseth is fundamentally a war fighter's leader at the Department of Defense. He is a guy who sees, not through the perspective of the generals or the bureaucrats. He looks at things through the perspective of the men and women that we send off to fight in our wars.

After a brief exchange on Tulsi Gabbard, the conversation shifted to executive orders and food prices. Here again, Vance deflates Brennan’s gotcha attempt:

BRENNAN: You campaigned on lowering prices for consumers. We've seen all of these executive orders. Which one lowers prices?

VANCE: We have done a lot. And there have been a number of executive orders that have caused, already, jobs to start coming back into our country, which is a core part of lowering prices. More capital investment, more job creation in our economy is one of the things that's going to drive down prices for all consumers, but also raise wages, so that people can afford to buy the things that they need. If you look at our slate of executive orders…

BRENNAN: So, grocery prices aren't going to come down?

VANCE: No, Margaret, prices are going to come down, but it's going to take a little bit of time, right? The president has been president for all of five days. I think that, in those five days, he's accomplished more than Joe Biden did in four years. It's been an incredible breakneck pace of activity. We're going to work with Congress. We're, of course, going to have more executive orders, and we're going to try – the way that you – you lower prices is that you encourage more capital investment into our country. And you asked specifically, what executive order is going to help lower prices. All of the stuff that we've done on energy, to explore more energy reserves, to develop more energy resources in the United States of America. One of the main drivers of increased prices under the Biden administration is that we had a massive increase in energy prices. Donald Trump has already taken multiple executive actions that are going to lower energy prices, and I do believe that means consumers are going to see lower prices at the pump and at the grocery store, but it's going to take a little bit of time. Rome wasn't built in a day.

BRENNAN: Yes.

VANCE: And while we've done a whole lot, we can't undo all of the damage of Joe Biden's presidency in four days.

BRENNAN: Well, there were a lot of things that contributed to higher energy prices. And there was record oil and gas production.

VANCE: Yes, Joe Biden did many…

BRENNAN: But the price of eggs…

VANCE: … many terrible things to…

BRENNAN: … the things that people see…

VANCE: … lead to an increase in prices. I agree, Margaret.

BRENNAN: No, but all the things you experience at the grocery store are what people touch and feel. That's what – you were talking about bacon on the campaign trail.

VANCE: Of course. Of course.

BRENNAN: Those things, when do consumers actually get to touch and feel a difference in their lives?

VANCE: Well, but, Margaret, how does bacon get to the grocery store? It comes on trucks that are fueled by diesel fuel. If the diesel is way too expensive, the bacon is going to become more expensive. How do we grow the bacon? Our farmers need energy to produce it. So, if we lower energy prices, we are going to see lower prices for consumers, and that is what we're trying to fight for.

BRENNAN: Well, the flurry of executive orders, most of them weren't about the economy. Many of them…

VANCE: Many of them were, though, Margaret. We had – I think we've had – we've taken over…

BRENNAN: You had a promise of tariffs by February 1.

VANCE: We've taken over 200 executive actions, some executive orders, other executive actions. Again, this is in less than a week, and a lot of them were focused on the economy, bringing investment into our country and lowering energy prices. We've also focused on safety, restoring public safety, ending weaponization of the Department of Justice. We've done a lot. And I think the president is to be commended for actually coming in and doing something with this incredible mandate the American people gave him. He's not sitting in the Oval Office doing nothing. He's doing the American people's business. And I think they're going to see a lot of good effects from it.

After getting stuffed on executive orders, Brennan moves on to FEMA- which I will note no one asked Kamala Harris or the absent Joe Biden about while people slogged through flood-ravaged Appalachia. 

BRENNAN: The president did say he wants to do something with an executive order in relation to federal emergency response. He said he may reform or eliminate FEMA. Instead of sending emergency responders, he may start to send a percentage of money to states to take care of themselves. But you know FEMA has specialized expertise that some of these states just don't have…

VANCE: Oh, Margaret, I…

BRENNAN: … in their arsenal.

VANCE: I wish that they…

BRENNAN: And how will states who are – who are lower-income states, the Mississippis, the Kentuckys, the Alabamas, be able to do this for themselves without federal help?

VANCE: Well, the president, to be clear, is not saying we're going to leave anybody behind. He's saying that, in the way that we administer these resources, some of which is coming from the federal level, some of which is coming from the state level, we've got to get the bureaucrats out of the way and get the aid to the people who need it most.

BRENNAN: But these are the first responders.

VANCE: Let's be honest, Margaret. You talk about the expertise from FEMA. FEMA in North Carolina, in California, in Florida with some of the hurricanes has often been a disaster. And it's not because we don't have good people at FEMA. It's because bureaucratic red tape and garbage prevents the rapid deployment of resources to the people who need it the most.

BRENNAN: But the states are now going to have to do this themselves?

VANCE: The president is trying to encourage us to reform the way that we deliver emergency response in a way that gets resources to people who need it.

BRENNAN: So, don't take him literally, is what you're saying?

VANCE: No, we should take the president at his word that FEMA needs desperate reform, because it does. Margaret, when I went to North Carolina as V.P.-elect, but before we were sworn in, people would talk about how FEMA would get resources, food, medicine, water to a warehouse, but then would have no plan to get it from the warehouse to the people in the mountains who were literally starving and thirsting to death. We can do so much better. And, under Donald Trump's leadership, we will.

BRENNAN: But they work with the state and local officials. So, now…

VANCE: They often don't work well enough. And, again, that's not because of the…

BRENNAN: … it's going to be on the state and local officials?

VANCE: They – no, the FEMA management officials don't work well enough with state and local officials to get resources to the people who need it. We should expect – and this is, I think, one of the fundamental premises of President Trump's leadership. The American people should expect more of their government. When there's a terrible disaster, they should expect food, medicine and water to get to the people who need it. When there's a terrible fire in California, the fire hydrants ought to actually turn on. I am sick of the American people having such low expectations for their government. They should demand more of us, because it's the greatest country in the world, and that's what Donald Trump's leadership promises to bring back.

BRENNAN: So still count on the federal government, but watch that space. 

Brennan immediately pivots to immigration, using the statement by the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops as an appeal to authority against Vance:

BRENNAN: Let me ask you about another area that you campaigned on quite a lot, and there was a flurry of activity on. And that has to do with immigration.

VANCE: Sure.

BRENNAN: The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops this week condemned some of the executive orders signed by President Trump, specifically those allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement to enter churches and to enter schools. Do you personally support the idea of conducting a raid or enforcement action in a church service, at a school?

VANCE: Well, let me – let me address this. Of course, if you have a person who is convicted of a violent crime, whether they're an illegal immigrant or a non-illegal immigrant, you have to go and get that person to protect the public safety. That's not unique to immigration. But let me just address the – this particular issue, Margaret, because, as a practicing Catholic, I was actually heartbroken by that statement. And I think that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops needs to actually look in the mirror a little bit and recognize that when they receive over $100 million to help resettle illegal immigrants, are they worried about humanitarian concerns, or are they actually worried about their bottom line? We're going to enforce immigration law. We're going to protect the American people.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.

VANCE: Donald Trump promised to do that. And I believe the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, if they're worried about the humanitarian costs of immigration enforcement, let them talk about the children who have been sex-trafficked because of the wide-open border of Joe Biden.

BRENNAN: So, you – you personally support them going into schools and churches?

VANCE: Let them talk about people like Laken Riley, who were brutally murdered. I support us doing law enforcement against violent criminals, whether they're illegal immigrants or anybody else, in a way that keeps us safe. Let me ask this question, Margaret.

BRENNAN: But the…

VANCE: Let's separate the immigration issue. If you had a violent murderer in a school, of course I want law enforcement…

BRENNAN: Of course.

VANCE: … to go and get that person out.

BRENNAN: Of course.

VANCE: So, then what's the point of the question?

BRENNAN: You changed the regulation this week. That's the point of the question.

VANCE: Exactly, to…

BRENNAN: Giving the authority to go into churches…

VANCE: Yes, exactly.

BRENNAN: … and go into schools.

VANCE: We empowered law enforcement to enforce the law everywhere to protect Americans.

BRENNAN: But that also has a knock-on effect, a chilling effect, arguably, to people to not send their kids to school.

VANCE: I – I desperately hope it has a chilling effect…

BRENNAN: In the churches…

VANCE: … on illegal immigrants coming into our country.

BRENNAN: You think the U.S. Conference of Catholics Bishops is – are actively hiding criminals from law enforcement?

VANCE: I think the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has, frankly, not been a good partner in commonsense immigration enforcement that the American people voted for. And I hope, again, as a devout Catholic, that they'll do better.

Brennan follows that appeal to authority with an appeal to the authority of Ronald Reagan, who appointed the judge who ruled against the Trump executive order on birthright citizenship:

BRENNAN: There are five legal challenges already to one of the other immigration actions, the order on birthright citizenship. A federal judge, appointed by Ronald Reagan, who I think you'd agree has some conservative credentials…

VANCE: Sure.

BRENNAN: … paused the order to end birthright citizenship, calling it blatantly unconstitutional. How do you reconcile this challenge to the 14th Amendment to the Constitution?

VANCE: So, I obviously disagree with that judge. And these things, some of them will be litigated. That's the nature of our constitutional system. But here's the basic idea of President Trump's view on this. If you are a lawful permanent resident or a legal immigrant who plans to stay, your children, of course, should become American citizens. But let's say you're the child of an ambassador. You don't become…

BRENNAN: But that's not part of it.

VANCE: Well, that's an important principle.

BRENNAN: There's already a carve-out having to do with kids of diplomats.

VANCE: But we're saying that that carve-out should apply to anybody who doesn't plan to stay here. f you come here on vacation and you have a baby in an American hospital, that baby doesn't become an American citizen. If you're an illegal alien and you come here temporarily, hopefully, your child does not become an illegal – American citizen by virtue of just having been born on American soil. It's a very basic principle in American immigration law that, if you want to become an American citizen, and you've done it the right way, and the American people in their collective wisdom have welcomed you into our national community, then you become a citizen. But temporary residents, people who come in here, whether legally or illegally, and don't plan to stay…

BRENNAN: Yes.

VANCE: … their children shouldn't become American citizens. I don't know any country that does that, or why we would be different.

BRENNAN: Well, but this is a country founded by immigrants.

VANCE: Well, this is a country founded by…

BRENNAN: This is a unique country.

VANCE: This is a very unique country, and it was founded by some immigrants and some settlers. But just because we were founded by immigrants doesn't mean that, 240 years later, that we have to have the dumbest immigration policy in the world. No country says that temporary visitors, their children will be given complete access to the benefits and blessings of American citizenship.

From there Brennan pivots to refugees, and receives the most brutal smackdown of the interview:

BRENNAN: I want to ask you about refugee admissions, which were just suspended by the president. That has nothing to do with the U.S. border. Refugee screening takes 18 to 24 months to go through. They are heavily vetted. Left literally at the airport this week were thousands of Afghans who – some of whom had worked with the United States government and were promised to come here. When you talked to us in August, you said: "I don't think we should abandon anybody who's been properly vetted and helped us." Do you stand by that?

VANCE: Well, Margaret, I don't agree that all these immigrants, or all these refugees have been properly vetted. In fact, we know that there are cases of people who allegedly were properly vetted and then were literally planning terrorist attacks in our country. That happened during the campaign, if you may remember. So, clearly, not all of these foreign nationals have been properly vetted.

BRENNAN: No, but there are 30,000 people in the pipeline, Afghan refugees. Do you stand by it?

VANCE: But my primary concern as the vice president, Margaret, is to look after the American people.

BRENNAN: So, no.

VANCE: And now that we know that we have vetting problems with a lot of these refugee programs, we absolutely cannot unleash thousands of unvetted people into our country. It's not good.

BRENNAN: These people are vetted. These people are vetted.

VANCE: Just like the guy who planned a terrorist attack in Oklahoma a few months ago? He was allegedly properly vetted, and many people in the media and the Democratic Party said that he was properly vetted. Clearly, he wasn't.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes, the…

VANCE: I don't want my children to share a neighborhood with people who are not properly vetted. And because I don't want it for my kids, I'm not going to force any other American citizens' kids to do that either.

BRENNAN: No. And that was a very particular case. It wasn't clear if he was radicalized when he got here or while he was living here, but…

VANCE: I don't really care, Margaret. I don't want that person in my country, and I think most Americans agree with me.

At that point, Brennan went to commercial break. Upon returning, she asked the January 6th question:

BRENNAN: Two weeks ago, you were on FOX News, and you said: "If you protested peacefully on January 6 and had Merrick Garland's Department of Justice treat you like a gang member, you should be pardoned. If you committed violence on that day, obviously, you shouldn't be pardoned." Did you counsel the president against these blanket pardons for 1,500 people…

VANCE: Well, Margaret, I notice that you…

BRENNAN: … including those who committed violence?

VANCE: Margaret, I notice that you cut off the thing that I said immediately after that. The full quote is that, of course, there are gray areas. And here's the nature of the gray area. Merrick Garland's Department of Justice denied constitutional protections in the prosecutions. There were double standards in how sentences were applied to the J6 protesters versus other groups. What the president said consistently on the campaign…

BRENNAN: Case-by-case basis.

VANCE: … is that he was going to look at a case-by- case basis…

BRENNAN: This is blanket.

VANCE: And that's exactly what we did. We looked at 1,600 cases. And the thing that came out of it, Margaret, is that there was a massive denial of due process of liberty, and a lot of people were denied their constitutional rights. The president believes that. I believe that, and I think he made the right decision.

BRENNAN: Daniel Rodriguez used an electroshock weapon against a policeman who was dragged out of the defensive line by plunging it into the officer's neck. He was imprisoned, sentenced to 12 years, seven months. He got a pardon. Ronald McAbee hit a cop while wearing reinforced brass-knuckle gloves, and he held one down on the ground as other rioters assailed the officer for over 20 seconds, causing a concussion. If you stand with law enforcement, how can you call these people unjustly imprisoned?

VANCE: Margaret, you're separating – there's an important issue here. There's what the people actually did on January the 6th, and we're not saying that everybody did everything perfectly. And then what did Merrick Garland's Department of Justice do in unjustly prosecuting well over 1,000 Americans in a way that was politically motivated?

BRENNAN: Is violence like that against a police officer ever justified?

VANCE: Violence against a police officer is not justified. But that doesn't mean that you should have Merrick Garland's weaponized Department of Justice expose you to incredibly unfair process, to denial of constitutional rights, and, frankly, to a double standard that was not applied to many people, including, of course, the Black Lives Matter rioters who killed over two dozen people and never had the weight of a weaponized Department of Justice come against them. The pardon power is not just for people who are angels or people who are perfect. And, of course, we love our law enforcement and want people to be peaceful with everybody, but especially with our good cops. That's a separate issue from what Merrick Garland's Department of Justice did. We rectified a wrong, and I stand by it.

The interview closes out with the “oligarchy” narrative, which Vance disarms with humor:

BRENNAN: I'm being told we're out of time, but I want to quickly ask you.

VANCE: Sure. Please.

BRENNAN: The richest men in the world were at that Capitol on Inauguration Day, heads of Amazon, Google, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook. In August, you told us Google and Facebook are too big. "We ought to take the Teddy Roosevelt approach. Break 'em up. Don't let them control what people are allowed to say." They've now donated to the Trump inauguration. Are you still going to break up big tech?

VANCE: So, you know who else was at the inauguration was my mom, and a lot of people who just supported the president and fought every single day to get – get his election and to make it…

BRENNAN: They gave $1 million each to the inauguration.

VANCE: … and to make it – and to make it possible. And there were a lot of people who didn't give a million dollars to the inauguration who were on that…

BRENNAN: They got pretty good seating.

VANCE: … who were on that – who were on that stage, Margaret. They didn't have as good of seating as my mom and a lot of other people who were there to support us. But, look, we believe fundamentally that big tech does have too much power, and there are two ways they can go about this. They can either respect America's – Americans' constitutional rights, they can stop engaging in censorship, and, if they don't, you can be absolutely sure that Donald Trump's leadership is not going to look too kindly on them.

BRENNAN: So they're still on notice?

VANCE: They're very much on notice.

Brennan never so much as laid a glove on Vance, who disarmed her questions with humor and logic. Those wondering why the Vice President would grant interview time to a media that hates him now have their answer. Think of an elite cage fighter who has to grapple and spar in between big-money fights, and you’ll understand.

Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned interview as aired on CBS Face the Nation on Sunday, January 26th, 2025:

CBS FACE THE NATION

1/26/25

10:31 AM

MARGARET BRENNAN: Pete Hegseth, it was a tie, bipartisan opposition, smallest margin since the job was created. You had to break that tie. If the nominee can't unite your party, how is he going to lead three million people?

VICE PRESIDENT JD VANCE: Well, look, I think Pete is a disrupter, and a lot of people don't like that disruption, but, Margaret, that disruption is incredibly necessary. If you think about all of those bipartisan massive votes, we have to ask ourselves, what did they get us? They got us a country where we fought many wars over the last 40 years, but haven't won a war about as long as I have been alive. They've got us a military with a major recruitment crisis, a procurement price crisis that's totally dysfunctional, where we buy airplanes for billions and billions of dollars, terrible cost overruns. The delivery dates are always delayed. So we need a big change. Now, admittedly, there are people who don't like that big change, but it is necessary, and it's explicitly what Donald J. Trump ran on and I think part of the reason why the American people elected him their 47th President.

BRENNAN: So, the main objective is changing all of that, that it's going to be Pete Hegseth alone?

VANCE: I would say the main problem is – or – excuse me – the main thing that we want Pete Hegseth to do is to fix the problems at the Department of Defense. And, unfortunately, there are many. We've gotten into way too many wars that we don't have a plan for winning. We've gotten into way too many misadventures that we shouldn't have got into in the very first place. And our procurement process, Margaret, is incredibly broken. We're in an era…

BRENNAN: Those are policy decisions.

VANCE: Well, of course, they're policy decisions, but they're also logistical and implementation decisions. If you look at where we are with the rise of artificial intelligence, with the rise of drone technology and drone warfare, we have to really, top to bottom, change the way that we fund the procurement of weapons, the way that we arm our troops. This is a major period of disruption, and we think Pete Hegseth is the guy to lead the job. Now, there's another element to this, Margaret, too, which is we believe that military morale, at least until the election of President Trump, was historically low. You had the Army missing recruitment goals by tens of thousands of soldiers, and, already, recruitment is starting to pick up because Pete Hegseth is fundamentally a war fighter's leader at the Department of Defense. He is a guy who sees, not through the perspective of the generals or the bureaucrats. He looks at things through the perspective of the men and women that we send off to fight in our wars.

BRENNAN: Both "The Wall Street Journal" and "The National Review," conservative publications, as you know, have been critical of Tulsi Gabbard. "The Review" called her an atrocious nominee who deserves to be defeated. They compared her defense of Edward Snowden, the fugitive, to – who stole U.S. secrets, to an attorney general who thinks the mob gets a bad rap. Her refusal to accept U.S. intelligence findings that Assad gassed his own people, they said was like a nominee for OMB director not being able to count. Does any of this give you pause putting her in charge of the U.S. intelligence community, yes or no?

VANCE: No, Margaret, look, these are publications that attacked Donald J. Trump obsessively, but those publications don't determine who the president is. The American people do.

BRENNAN: And ultimately supported him.

VANCE: And Donald J. Trump is the person who determines who his cabinet is, not these publications that I think, frankly, have lost relevance. Here's…

BRENNAN: The Senate will ultimately decide.

VANCE: Here's Tulsi Gabbard's – well, the Senate will provide advice and consent, as is its constitutional obligation, but I feel confident that Tulsi Gabbard will ultimately get through.

Two things that are important to know about Tulsi. First of all, she is a career military servant who's had a classification at the highest levels for nearly two decades. She has impeccable character, impeccable record of service, and she also is a person who I think is going to bring some trust back to the intelligence services. The bureaucrats at our intelligence services have gotten completely out of control. They've been part of the weaponization of our political system, the weaponization of our justice system. We need to have good intelligence services who keep us safe, but part of that is restoring trust in those services, and we think Tulsi is the right person to do it. That's why the president…

BRENNAN: She doesn't trust those intelligence services.

VANCE: She recognizes the bureaucrats have gotten out of control, and we need somebody there who's going to rein them in and return those services to their core mission of identifying information that's going to keep us safe.

BRENNAN: You campaigned on lowering prices for consumers. We've seen all of these executive orders. Which one lowers prices?

VANCE: We have done a lot. And there have been a number of executive orders that have caused, already, jobs to start coming back into our country, which is a core part of lowering prices. More capital investment, more job creation in our economy is one of the things that's going to drive down prices for all consumers, but also raise wages, so that people can afford to buy the things that they need. If you look at our slate of executive orders…

BRENNAN: So, grocery prices aren't going to come down?

VANCE: No, Margaret, prices are going to come down, but it's going to take a little bit of time, right? The president has been president for all of five days. I think that, in those five days, he's accomplished more than Joe Biden did in four years. It's been an incredible breakneck pace of activity. We're going to work with Congress. We're, of course, going to have more executive orders, and we're going to try – the way that you – you lower prices is that you encourage more capital investment into our country. And you asked specifically, what executive order is going to help lower prices. All of the stuff that we've done on energy, to explore more energy reserves, to develop more energy resources in the United States of America. One of the main drivers of increased prices under the Biden administration is that we had a massive increase in energy prices. Donald Trump has already taken multiple executive actions that are going to lower energy prices, and I do believe that means consumers are going to see lower prices at the pump and at the grocery store, but it's going to take a little bit of time. Rome wasn't built in a day.

BRENNAN: Yes.

VANCE: And while we've done a whole lot, we can't undo all of the damage of Joe Biden's presidency in four days.

BRENNAN: Well, there were a lot of things that contributed to higher energy prices. And there was record oil and gas production.

VANCE: Yes, Joe Biden did many…

BRENNAN: But the price of eggs…

VANCE: … many terrible things to…

BRENNAN: … the things that people see…

VANCE: … lead to an increase in prices. I agree, Margaret.

BRENNAN: No, but all the things you experience at the grocery store are what people touch and feel. That's what – you were talking about bacon on the campaign trail.

VANCE: Of course. Of course.

BRENNAN: Those things, when do consumers actually get to touch and feel a difference in their lives?

VANCE: Well, but, Margaret, how does bacon get to the grocery store? It comes on trucks that are fueled by diesel fuel. If the diesel is way too expensive, the bacon is going to become more expensive. How do we grow the bacon? Our farmers need energy to produce it. So, if we lower energy prices, we are going to see lower prices for consumers, and that is what we're trying to fight for.

BRENNAN: Well, the flurry of executive orders, most of them weren't about the economy. Many of them…

VANCE: Many of them were, though, Margaret. We had – I think we've had – we've taken over…

BRENNAN: You had a promise of tariffs by February 1.

VANCE: We've taken over 200 executive actions, some executive orders, other executive actions. Again, this is in less than a week, and a lot of them were focused on the economy, bringing investment into our country and lowering energy prices. We've also focused on safety, restoring public safety, ending weaponization of the Department of Justice. We've done a lot. And I think the president is to be commended for actually coming in and doing something with this incredible mandate the American people gave him. He's not sitting in the Oval Office doing nothing. He's doing the American people's business. And I think they're going to see a lot of good effects from it.

BRENNAN: Well, a lot of these announcements have yet to take effect.

VANCE: Sure.

BRENNAN: The president did say he wants to do something with an executive order in relation to federal emergency response. He said he may reform or eliminate FEMA. Instead of sending emergency responders, he may start to send a percentage of money to states to take care of themselves. But you know FEMA has specialized expertise that some of these states just don't have…

VANCE: Oh, Margaret, I…

BRENNAN: … in their arsenal.

VANCE: I wish that they…

BRENNAN: And how will states who are – who are lower-income states, the Mississippis, the Kentuckys, the Alabamas, be able to do this for themselves without federal help?

VANCE: Well, the president, to be clear, is not saying we're going to leave anybody behind. He's saying that, in the way that we administer these resources, some of which is coming from the federal level, some of which is coming from the state level, we've got to get the bureaucrats out of the way and get the aid to the people who need it most.

BRENNAN: But these are the first responders.

VANCE: Let's be honest, Margaret. You talk about the expertise from FEMA. FEMA in North Carolina, in California, in Florida with some of the hurricanes has often been a disaster. And it's not because we don't have good people at FEMA. It's because bureaucratic red tape and garbage prevents the rapid deployment of resources to the people who need it the most.

BRENNAN: But the states are now going to have to do this themselves?

VANCE: The president is trying to encourage us to reform the way that we deliver emergency response in a way that gets resources to people who need it.

BRENNAN: So, don't take him literally, is what you're saying?

VANCE: No, we should take the president at his word that FEMA needs desperate reform, because it does. Margaret, when I went to North Carolina as V.P.-elect, but before we were sworn in, people would talk about how FEMA would get resources, food, medicine, water to a warehouse, but then would have no plan to get it from the warehouse to the people in the mountains who were literally starving and thirsting to death. We can do so much better. And, under Donald Trump's leadership, we will.

BRENNAN: But they work with the state and local officials. So, now…

VANCE: They often don't work well enough. And, again, that's not because of the…

BRENNAN: … it's going to be on the state and local officials?

VANCE: They – no, the FEMA management officials don't work well enough with state and local officials to get resources to the people who need it. We should expect – and this is, I think, one of the fundamental premises of President Trump's leadership. The American people should expect more of their government. When there's a terrible disaster, they should expect food, medicine and water to get to the people who need it. When there's a terrible fire in California, the fire hydrants ought to actually turn on. I am sick of the American people having such low expectations for their government. They should demand more of us, because it's the greatest country in the world, and that's what Donald Trump's leadership promises to bring back.

BRENNAN: So still count on the federal government, but watch that space. Let me ask you about another area that you campaigned on quite a lot, and there was a flurry of activity on. And that has to do with immigration.

VANCE: Sure.

BRENNAN: The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops this week condemned some of the executive orders signed by President Trump, specifically those allowing Immigration and Customs Enforcement to enter churches and to enter schools. Do you personally support the idea of conducting a raid or enforcement action in a church service, at a school?

VANCE: Well, let me – let me address this. Of course, if you have a person who is convicted of a violent crime, whether they're an illegal immigrant or a non-illegal immigrant, you have to go and get that person to protect the public safety. That's not unique to immigration. But let me just address the – this particular issue, Margaret, because, as a practicing Catholic, I was actually heartbroken by that statement. And I think that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops needs to actually look in the mirror a little bit and recognize that when they receive over $100 million to help resettle illegal immigrants, are they worried about humanitarian concerns, or are they actually worried about their bottom line? We're going to enforce immigration law. We're going to protect the American people.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.

VANCE: Donald Trump promised to do that. And I believe the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, if they're worried about the humanitarian costs of immigration enforcement, let them talk about the children who have been sex-trafficked because of the wide-open border of Joe Biden.

BRENNAN: So, you – you personally support them going into schools and churches?

VANCE: Let them talk about people like Laken Riley, who were brutally murdered. I support us doing law enforcement against violent criminals, whether they're illegal immigrants or anybody else, in a way that keeps us safe. Let me ask this question, Margaret.

BRENNAN: But the…

VANCE: Let's separate the immigration issue. If you had a violent murderer in a school, of course I want law enforcement…

BRENNAN: Of course.

VANCE: … to go and get that person out.

BRENNAN: Of course.

VANCE: So, then what's the point of the question?

BRENNAN: You changed the regulation this week. That's the point of the question.

VANCE: Exactly, to…

BRENNAN: Giving the authority to go into churches…

VANCE: Yes, exactly.

BRENNAN: … and go into schools.

VANCE: We empowered law enforcement to enforce the law everywhere to protect Americans.

BRENNAN: But that also has a knock-on effect, a chilling effect, arguably, to people to not send their kids to school.

VANCE: I – I desperately hope it has a chilling effect…

BRENNAN: In the churches…

VANCE: … on illegal immigrants coming into our country.

BRENNAN: You think the U.S. Conference of Catholics Bishops is – are actively hiding criminals from law enforcement?

VANCE: I think the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has, frankly, not been a good partner in commonsense immigration enforcement that the American people voted for. And I hope, again, as a devout Catholic, that they'll do better.

BRENNAN: There are five legal challenges already to one of the other immigration actions, the order on birthright citizenship. A federal judge, appointed by Ronald Reagan, who I think you'd agree has some conservative credentials…

VANCE: Sure.

BRENNAN: … paused the order to end birthright citizenship, calling it blatantly unconstitutional. How do you reconcile this challenge to the 14th Amendment to the Constitution?

VANCE: So, I obviously disagree with that judge. And these things, some of them will be litigated. That's the nature of our constitutional system. But here's the basic idea of President Trump's view on this. If you are a lawful permanent resident or a legal immigrant who plans to stay, your children, of course, should become American citizens. But let's say you're the child of an ambassador. You don't become…

BRENNAN: But that's not part of it.

VANCE: Well, that's an important principle.

BRENNAN: There's already a carve-out having to do with kids of diplomats.

VANCE: But we're saying that that carve-out should apply to anybody who doesn't plan to stay here. f you come here on vacation and you have a baby in an American hospital, that baby doesn't become an American citizen. If you're an illegal alien and you come here temporarily, hopefully, your child does not become an illegal – American citizen by virtue of just having been born on American soil. It's a very basic principle in American immigration law that, if you want to become an American citizen, and you've done it the right way, and the American people in their collective wisdom have welcomed you into our national community, then you become a citizen. But temporary residents, people who come in here, whether legally or illegally, and don't plan to stay…

BRENNAN: Yes.

VANCE: … their children shouldn't become American citizens. I don't know any country that does that, or why we would be different.

BRENNAN: Well, but this is a country founded by immigrants.

VANCE: Well, this is a country founded by…

BRENNAN: This is a unique country.

VANCE: This is a very unique country, and it was founded by some immigrants and some settlers. But just because we were founded by immigrants doesn't mean that, 240 years later, that we have to have the dumbest immigration policy in the world. No country says that temporary visitors, their children will be given complete access to the benefits and blessings of American citizenship. America should actually look out for the interests of our citizens first, and that means, again, if you're here permanently and lawfully, your kid becomes an American citizen. If you're not here permanently, if you're not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States…

BRENNAN: Yes.

VANCE: … and don't plan to be, why would we make those people's children American citizens permanently?

BRENNAN: I want to ask you about refugee admissions, which were just suspended by the president. That has nothing to do with the U.S. border. Refugee screening takes 18 to 24 months to go through. They are heavily vetted. Left literally at the airport this week were thousands of Afghans who – some of whom had worked with the United States government and were promised to come here. When you talked to us in August, you said: "I don't think we should abandon anybody who's been properly vetted and helped us." Do you stand by that?

VANCE: Well, Margaret, I don't agree that all these immigrants, or all these refugees have been properly vetted. In fact, we know that there are cases of people who allegedly were properly vetted and then were literally planning terrorist attacks in our country. That happened during the campaign, if you may remember. So, clearly, not all of these foreign nationals have been properly vetted.

BRENNAN: No, but there are 30,000 people in the pipeline, Afghan refugees. Do you stand by it?

VANCE: But my primary concern as the vice president, Margaret, is to look after the American people.

BRENNAN: So, no.

VANCE: And now that we know that we have vetting problems with a lot of these refugee programs, we absolutely cannot unleash thousands of unvetted people into our country. It's not good.

BRENNAN: These people are vetted. These people are vetted.

VANCE: Just like the guy who planned a terrorist attack in Oklahoma a few months ago? He was allegedly properly vetted, and many people in the media and the Democratic Party said that he was properly vetted. Clearly, he wasn't.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes, the…

VANCE: I don't want my children to share a neighborhood with people who are not properly vetted. And because I don't want it for my kids, I'm not going to force any other American citizens' kids to do that either.

BRENNAN: No. And that was a very particular case. It wasn't clear if he was radicalized when he got here or while he was living here, but…

VANCE: I don't really care, Margaret. I don't want that person in my country, and I think most Americans agree with me.

BRENNAN: We will be back in one minute with more of our interview with Vice President Vance.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BRENNAN: We're back with more from our conversation with the vice president.

Two weeks ago, you were on FOX News, and you said: "If you protested peacefully on January 6 and had Merrick Garland's Department of Justice treat you like a gang member, you should be pardoned. If you committed violence on that day, obviously, you shouldn't be pardoned." Did you counsel the president against these blanket pardons for 1,500 people…

VANCE: Well, Margaret, I notice that you…

BRENNAN: … including those who committed violence?

VANCE: Margaret, I notice that you cut off the thing that I said immediately after that. The full quote is that, of course, there are gray areas. And here's the nature of the gray area. Merrick Garland's Department of Justice denied constitutional protections in the prosecutions. There were double standards in how sentences were applied to the J6 protesters versus other groups. What the president said consistently on the campaign…

BRENNAN: Case-by-case basis.

VANCE: … is that he was going to look at a case-by- case basis…

BRENNAN: This is blanket.

VANCE: And that's exactly what we did. We looked at 1,600 cases. And the thing that came out of it, Margaret, is that there was a massive denial of due process of liberty, and a lot of people were denied their constitutional rights. The president believes that. I believe that, and I think he made the right decision.

BRENNAN: Daniel Rodriguez used an electroshock weapon against a policeman who was dragged out of the defensive line by plunging it into the officer's neck. He was imprisoned, sentenced to 12 years, seven months. He got a pardon. Ronald McAbee hit a cop while wearing reinforced brass-knuckle gloves, and he held one down on the ground as other rioters assailed the officer for over 20 seconds, causing a concussion. If you stand with law enforcement, how can you call these people unjustly imprisoned?

VANCE: Margaret, you're separating – there's an important issue here. There's what the people actually did on January the 6th, and we're not saying that everybody did everything perfectly. And then what did Merrick Garland's Department of Justice do in unjustly prosecuting well over 1,000 Americans in a way that was politically motivated?

BRENNAN: Is violence like that against a police officer ever justified?

VANCE: Violence against a police officer is not justified. But that doesn't mean that you should have Merrick Garland's weaponized Department of Justice expose you to incredibly unfair process, to denial of constitutional rights, and, frankly, to a double standard that was not applied to many people, including, of course, the Black Lives Matter rioters who killed over two dozen people and never had the weight of a weaponized Department of Justice come against them. The pardon power is not just for people who are angels or people who are perfect. And, of course, we love our law enforcement and want people to be peaceful with everybody, but especially with our good cops. That's a separate issue from what Merrick Garland's Department of Justice did. We rectified a wrong, and I stand by it.

BRENNAN: I'm being told we're out of time, but I want to quickly ask you.

VANCE: Sure. Please.

BRENNAN: The richest men in the world were at that Capitol on Inauguration Day, heads of Amazon, Google, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook. In August, you told us Google and Facebook are too big. "We ought to take the Teddy Roosevelt approach. Break 'em up. Don't let them control what people are allowed to say." They've now donated to the Trump inauguration. Are you still going to break up big tech?

VANCE: So, you know who else was at the inauguration was my mom, and a lot of people who just supported the president and fought every single day to get – get his election and to make it…

BRENNAN: They gave $1 million each to the inauguration.

VANCE: … and to make it – and to make it possible. And there were a lot of people who didn't give a million dollars to the inauguration who were on that…

BRENNAN: They got pretty good seating.

VANCE: … who were on that – who were on that stage, Margaret. They didn't have as good of seating as my mom and a lot of other people who were there to support us. But, look, we believe fundamentally that big tech does have too much power, and there are two ways they can go about this. They can either respect America's – Americans' constitutional rights, they can stop engaging in censorship, and, if they don't, you can be absolutely sure that Donald Trump's leadership is not going to look too kindly on them.

BRENNAN: So they're still on notice?

VANCE: They're very much on notice.

BRENNAN: And we will be right back with a lot more Face the Nation.

Stay with us.

 

Donor Privacy Policy