The next is the transcript of the interview with Rep. Jim Himes, Democrat of Connecticut, that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on Dec. 7, 2025.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome again to Face The Nation. We flip now to the highest Democrat on the Home Intelligence Committee, Congressman Jim Himes. He joins us this morning from Connecticut. Welcome again to Face The Nation.
REPRESENTATIVE JIM HIMES: Thanks for having me, Margaret.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re one of many few lawmakers proven the categorised model of this September 2 video of the U.S. strikes an alleged drug boat close to Venezuela, 4 strikes in whole, we have now realized. You met with Admiral Bradley, who instructions particular operations as effectively. The President of the US says he’s open to this video being made public. Do you suppose it’s important that it grow to be public, and are you assured it is going to be?
REP. HIMES: I believe it is actually essential that this video be made public. It is not misplaced on anybody, after all, that the interpretation of the video, which you understand, six or seven of us had a possibility to see final week, broke down exactly on social gathering strains. And so that is an occasion wherein I believe the American public wants to guage for itself. I understand how the general public goes to be react- goes to react as a result of I felt my very own response. You already know, I’ve spent years movies of deadly motion taken, usually within the terrorism context, and this video was profoundly shaking- shaken, and I believe it is essential for People to see it. As a result of, look, there’s a specific amount of there’s a specific amount of sympathy on the market for going after drug runners, however I believe it is actually essential that folks see what it appears like when the total pressure the US navy is turned on two guys who’re clinging to a bit of wooden and about to go underneath simply in order that they’ve kind of a visceral really feel for what it’s that we’re doing.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Why was it- why did it shake you a lot? What particularly was bothering you?
REP. HIMES: Effectively, you understand, and that is kind of the excellence, and there is a lot to unpack right here about whether or not that is a certified navy motion, which it isn’t, and proper on down as to whether these had been legitimate- professional targets, they usually weren’t. However let me return to a few of the evaluations I’ve finished of different deadly motion. Oftentimes, when the Division of Protection takes a strike in opposition to a terrorist in Yemen or Pakistan or wherever, you watch a video of men totally armed with AK-47s and sidearms and bombs and also you title it, they usually’re on their method to do one thing horrible. And on this occasion, you’ll have had unhealthy guys, I’ve little doubt that these guys had been concerned within the working of medicine. Now, whether or not they had been working it to the US or Europe is yet one more query. However in that occasion, these guys had been about to die. Had the US simply walked away, their little piece of wooden would have gone underneath the waves. And as many instances as Tom Cotton might say that it does not matter what they had been doing, it issues basically what they had been doing. As a result of underneath the legislation, and should you spent quarter-hour in legislation faculty, you understand this, underneath the legislation, if somebody has been struck and is- continues to interact in hostilities, factors a gun at you, has a gun, they might be a professional goal. But when they’re outdoors of fight, they don’t seem to be and attacking them is a violation of the legal guidelines of battle. And these guys, and this is the reason the American individuals have to see this video. These guys had been, had been barely alive, a lot much less participating in hostilities.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Effectively, the DOD legislation of battle handbook appears to hinge plenty of that on whether or not the particular person is wholly disabled from preventing, and that’s the place the Secretary of Protection has used language saying they’re about to return to the battle. I will play for you what Secretary Hegseth stated on the Reagan Discussion board Saturday. He described what was occurring with these 4 strikes on the alleged drug working boat.
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PETE HEGSETH ON TAPE: A pair hours later, I used to be informed, hey, there needed to be a reattack, as a result of there have been a pair of us that would nonetheless be within the battle. Entry to radios, there was a hyperlink up level of one other potential boat, medication had been nonetheless there, they had been actively interacting with them. Needed to take that reattack. I stated, Roger, sounds good.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Does what Hegseth stated match what Admiral Bradley informed you?
REP. HIMES: Effectively, there was plenty of lack of readability over precisely what Pete Hegseth’s position right here was, however Pete Hegseth has no credibility on this matter, proper? Bear in mind, per week after this strike, there was a briefing for Congress. Why was a observe up strike taken? The reply then, within the first week of September, was a observe up strike was taken as a result of we would have liked to clear the wreckage in order that there wasn’t a hazard to navigation. That was rationalization primary. Rationalization quantity two, proper earlier than we watched the video, was that they may have had a radio, they usually might need been radioing a ship, they usually might need been making an attempt to get better the cocaine. After which if you really watch the video, you notice they do not have a radio. They’re barely hanging on and never slipping beneath the waves. Then we get this factor of how they’re making an attempt to proper the boat. This was a few 40 foot boat that had simply been hit with a large piece of munitions. The conflagration most likely destroyed the whole lot in that boat. However, oh, possibly they may have swum underneath, gotten a radio, most likely waterlogged, and radioed a ship that we’re not even positive was there. So what we have had is a sequence of shifting explanations. Oh, and together with the fog of battle, proper? You already know that Hegseth stated, effectively, they took the second strike due to the fog of battle. There was no fog. The navy watched this boat very fastidiously, or I should not even say, boat, they watched the wreckage of the boat very fastidiously for an extended time frame earlier than they took the second strike. So, look, what Pete Hegseth says about this strike has zero credibility at this level.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you’ve got confidence in Admiral Bradley?
REP. HIMES: You already know Admiral Bradley, this was my first assembly with him. Anybody who has ever labored with Admiral Bradley will let you know that he has a storied profession and that he’s a person of deep, deep integrity. And admittedly, I’ve no purpose to doubt that. What it raises is, what occurs when an apparently good man like Admiral Bradley is positioned in a context the place he is aware of that if he countermands an order that he’s maybe uncomfortable with, it is vitally probably that he might be fired. When he works for a man, Pete Hegseth, who wrote a e-book about how we should not observe the legal guidelines of battle, about how we must be deadly in [unintelligible]. It is attention-grabbing to consider how man in that context possibly does one thing that, if he weren’t in that context, he may not do.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Effectively, Senator Tom Cotton, the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, stated there have been dozens of JAG law- legal professionals observing all of this. On NBC this morning he stated all 11 individuals on the suspected drug smuggling boat had been legitimate targets as a result of the U.S. had excessive confidence they had been a part of a international terrorist group. Are you aware, had been these excessive stage cartel members?
REP. HIMES: No, after all not. After all not.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Who had been they, if the U.S. had excessive confidence–
REP. HIMES: You suppose Pablo Escobar back- effectively, to begin with, to begin with, let’s be tremendous clear about this. I do not suppose we knew the identities of any of the individuals within the boat. We’d have identified one or two, I do not know, however we definitely did not know the identities of all 11. So no one can characterize who all these individuals in any of those boats are. Now, I’ve sufficient confidence within the intelligence group to know that these are most likely not guys out fishing or guys out, you understand, being vacationers and stuff. They’re nearly definitely working medication. However this actually issues given that you stated. You already know, if you are going to occupy an immense quantity of the American naval fight functionality, you’d wish to imagine that you are going after the leaders, the cartel leaders, the- the kingpins, as they are saying. What we’re doing right here is we’re taking out the equal of the nook drug vendor within the Bronx, proper? Which, by the best way, we must always arrest the nook drug vendor within the Bronx. However the primary purpose we do that’s to go after the kingpins who, I promise you, are sitting in very snug villas proper now in Colombia and Venezuela and in every single place, and watching as a lot of the US Navy is devoted to taking out their lowest stage workers.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So I hear you saying they weren’t on an inside navy goal record for top worth people. That is what I hear, what you are saying.
REP. HIMES: Effectively, that is an attention-grabbing query. I am under no circumstances satisfied that there’s a record of people. Now, that is what we do within the terrorism world, proper? We designate excessive worth targets. We designate people. I’ve no purpose to imagine, and in reality, I doubt that there are any people on the record anyplace. What we’re doing, and I am not going to get terribly particular about it, for apparent causes, however what we’re doing is we’re choosing up that this boat could also be carrying medication, and to the administration, it does not matter who’s in that boat, because- and look, they’re saying this, as a result of if this boat is definitely carrying medication, then we will strike it. So no, I do not suppose there’s a record of people. I do not suppose we have now any concept who exactly the people in these boats are.
MARGARET BRENNAN: In order I perceive it, these are signature strikes. That is an intelligence evaluation primarily based on alerts intelligence saying that is who we imagine these people to be. You already know, a few of these defenders of the Trump coverage, like conservative columnists, have argued it is a precedent that was set by the Obama administration, which used signature strikes to kill alleged al Qaeda operatives, together with a U.S. citizen at one level in Yemen. Have they got a degree right here that the drone coverage has lengthy allowed the killing of suspected criminals, even with out due course of?
REP. HIMES: Effectively, there’s a few actually essential distinctions, and you will keep in mind that the Obama administration, there was plenty of debate over whether or not signature strikes had been okay or not. Crucial distinction is that Congress licensed the battle on terror. There was an authorization for the usage of navy pressure. The unique sin of this entire factor, whether or not you suppose we must be losing these guys or not, the unique sin is that there isn’t any congressional authorization. After which within the Obama administration, they did have an inventory of people, proper? Typically excessive worth targets, or HVTs as we have referred to them. After which the query was, in case you have an HVT, a excessive worth goal, in a jeep in northern Pakistan, and there is a man subsequent to that HVT, you understand, how do you are feeling about taking that strike? You need to take down the excessive worth man, however what concerning the younger man subsequent to him? Effectively, the younger man has an AK 47 and the younger man was really arranging for the switch of explosives. You might have that dialog, and then you definitely resolve whether or not you are gonna take the strike. Proper now what we’re doing, and once more, don’t- I do not suppose that there is a record of people anyplace. They’re simply saying that boat is carrying medication. And although navy will not be licensed by the Congress of the US, we’re taking out the boat, and we do not give a rattling about who’s on it.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Effectively, and if you say “I do not suppose,” you’re a member of the Gang of Eight, so presumably that data must be shared with you if it does exist. I need to ask you earlier than I allow you to go. Signalgate, individuals might bear in mind a couple of months in the past, the Trump- a Trump official added a journalist to an internet group on Sign and shared superior data of an upcoming bombing operation in Yemen. The Pentagon Inspector Common stated Hegseth’s actions risked operational safety and violated federal legal guidelines on file maintaining. Hegseth stated he’d do the identical factor another time. Are your Republican colleagues saying in personal that they’ve issues with what occurred?
REP. HIMES: Completely, they’re saying it in personal. In public, after all, they’re saying that it was excellent exoneration, proper? That this report, and also you learn the important thing line, that this report that stated that the Secretary of Protection put his troops within the mission in danger, that that is whole exoneration. Now, I did not hear the remark about I might do that once more. But when Pete Hegseth stated he would do this again- and look, once more, you do not must be a navy skilled to grasp that sharing operational particulars earlier than an operation is a very, actually, actually unhealthy concept. If Pete Hegseth stated that, that he would do this once more, you understand, he is simply reinforcing what everyone knows, which is that he has completely no enterprise in that job. One of the vital delicate and tough jobs to do in the US authorities is being finished by any person who put his personal individuals and the mission in danger.
MARGARET BRENNAN: He stated he lives life with out remorse on the Reagan Discussion board, that was the phrase, to be extra precise. However Congressman Himes, all the time good to have you ever on this system. I will have to depart it there for in the present day. We’ll be proper again.
