Transcript: Rep. Jim Himes on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” October 12, 2025

Below is a transcript of the interview with Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., which aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on October 12, 2025.

---

MARGARET BRENNAN: Joining us now is Connecticut Congressman Jim Himes. He is the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee. It’s good to have you here. You are a member of the city’s parliament, but I want to talk to you about your intelligence file. Currently, the United States is helping Ukraine target Russian oil facilities, the Financial Times reported. In other words, he hit Russia right in the pocket. What can you say regarding how the Trump administration will change its policy? Do they now really stand up to Vladimir Putin?

representative. Jim Himes: Yeah, not really, right. We’ve been hearing for months that we’re two weeks away. I think that’s the term that the president uses, and he’s used it several times now over the course of several months since cracking down on Russia. And of course, you know, there are bipartisan bills in Congress right now that would impose very severe sanctions on the Russians that would do a lot to stop the export of their oil, which, of course, is the fuel that drives their war machine, the dollars that drive their war machine. These things have not been moved forward by the White House, so it’s hard to say that President Trump is doing anything other than what he’s done forever when he’s been president, which is kind of trying to have it, both ways. Now, I will say, and I can’t get into specific attacks or specific powers that the government has, but these attacks on refineries have had the effect of reducing Russia’s ability to produce gasoline and other things by about 20%. This really hurts the Russians. And I will tell you, again, without being specific, that I wish the president had been more aggressive in terms of turning off those taps and in terms of arming the Ukrainians, but he hasn’t taken any meaningful step back from the Biden administration, so at least we get that.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So it’s not that it’s doing more, it’s that it’s maybe freeing up more for the Ukrainian military to do? Doesn’t he put the same restrictions on them that he had? Is that fair to say?

representative. HIMES: Well, again, I don’t want to be clear, I don’t want to get specific in terms of the authorities, but, you know, his rhetoric has always been suspicious of the Ukrainians and strangely friendly to Vladimir Putin. I’m telling you that his actions so far have been insufficient, by the way, just as Biden’s actions have been insufficient, but they have not been consistent with this very skeptical rhetoric. There, I did not notice a radical change, or a withdrawal, if you will, from the Biden administration in terms of our assistance to the Ukrainians.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I’m asking you because Zelensky and Trump have spoken twice in the last 48 hours, which is noteworthy. Venezuela: There are approximately– the numbers that we have seen are like 6,000 or so service members in the Southern Command area of ​​operations. There were four American strikes on ships. The United States says 21 people were killed. It has requested legal justification from the administration to explain its actions, and has done so alongside the heads of the State Department, the Armed Forces, the Judiciary, and Homeland Security. Can you, in any way, force more information sharing so that the United States knows what’s going on?

representative. HIMES: I mean, one of the many troubling aspects about these deadly attacks in the Caribbean against boats that are supposedly drug trafficking. Now, we don’t know that, because, unlike our counterterrorism programs, Congress was not told who was on these boats, how they were identified, what the intelligence was, which is a completely different matter. Congress was not told anything about this. This appears to be acceptable to the Republican majority in the House and Senate. It’s okay with me. I’m going to leave a little bit of a crack in the door here, because, again, the White House has not shared what they believe is their legal justification. They put out a note. I will tell you that based on what I know now and my reading of that memo, these are unlawful killings. They are unlawful killings because the idea that the United States, which the administration says is justified, is involved in an armed conflict with any drug traffickers – Venezuelan drug traffickers, is ridiculous. The matter will not stand before a single court of law.

MARGARET BRENNAN: They say they’ve designated them as terrorists, so —

representative. Himes: It doesn’t matter. There are many people who have been designated as terrorists. This does not automatically grant authority to take lethal action. So, their legal justifications are laughable, and again, unless they want to share more than they shared with me, these are unlawful killings. What amazes me about this is that the president, of course, thanks to this very compliant Supreme Court, has been granted absolute immunity. But what about the Minister of Defense? What about the representative? What about everyone else in that chain of command, right down to the guy who pulls the trigger, killing people without clear legal authority? What about them? Test me on this. I wouldn’t be surprised if, in the next couple of years, a presidential pardon is offered to the entire chain of command, because it’s not at all clear, well, it’s becoming increasingly clear, that these are unlawful killings. Put the law aside for a second here. Margaret, you know, I don’t know this because they don’t tell Congress anything, but the press has all kinds of rumors that the first attack was on a boat that had turned around and was fleeing. Even if this were legitimate military action, which it is not, because Congress did not approve it, shooting a fleeing enemy would be a violation of the laws of armed conflict. But these are terrible people doing terrible things, my Republican friends say. Well, I don’t disagree with you on that, but are we now in the business of killing people who do bad things without authority?

MARGARET BRENNAN: Are – are you saying that these orders were illegal? It was the military – because what we keep hearing from our military leaders is, don’t worry. Our US military will rely on the Constitution and carry out only lawful orders. Are you saying that those military personnel who were the ones pulling the trigger did something else?

representative. HIMES: I say, in any case, these are unlawful killings. And you can get 1,000 different lawyers on both sides of this show to tell you that, at best, the legal authorities are questionable. So I’m fascinated as to why the chain of command is so confident that their murderous activities are legal. They don’t look that way to me. This is a big problem, isn’t it? I mean, I understand that we’re in a very polarized environment right now, so it would be very difficult for a fellow Republican of mine to make the statements that I just made. But the worm turns, Margaret. You know, in 1968, we tried and convicted of the murder of a first lieutenant, Lieutenant Cooley, because he and his unit had killed, probably, hundreds of people in My Lai and Vietnam, and there were trials after that. So I’m a little surprised as to why this chain of command would be so comfortable carrying out killings just because the Trump administration says, it’s OK. It is not an administration known for its adherence to the law or the Constitution.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, this is a huge topic, and I want to continue covering it with you. But, I also want to ask you about the closing process and cost in your home state. We’ve seen from USAA, which is a lender and a bank, to several people who work for the federal government, they said they had to make $150 million in interest-free loans to 45,000 people in a little over 48 hours. This is a cash crunch for a lot of people. What’s happening in Connecticut?

representative. Himes: So, I’ll tell you a story from Connecticut. The day after the lockdown went into effect, I went to see the National Guard at Windsor Locks Airport. We were deploying 500 members of the Connecticut National Guard to the Middle East. These were 22, 23 years old. None of them are rich. None of them will receive their salaries on October 15. And I heard the Vice President on your show say it’s about the Democrats. The American people understand that Republicans control the White House, they control the Senate, and they control the House of Representatives. So when the Vice President of the United States says, it’s all about Chuck Schumer, who was rejected by the American people in the last election, I think the American people realize that.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, it seems like the White House is trying to take this issue off the table. The president is posting on social media that they will reuse the money in some way to pay the military, at least for this payroll cycle. Is this sustainable? Is this legal?

representative. Himes: Well, maybe not. Again, we just had a brief conversation about the White House’s understanding of United States law, which is — and it is — which is very tentative to say the best. Speaker, because I believe that paying the military during the shutdown will require legislation. The Speaker of the House of Representatives took this matter off the table. So, I mean, is Donald Trump going to say a bunch of stuff? Yes, he’ll say a bunch of things. But I don’t see anything moving. Home, as Senator Murphy pointed out, home is on vacation. So no, I don’t think that’s very likely.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the Speaker of the House says that if the government doesn’t shut down, the military will get paid if Democrats vote for the short-term funding bill. But no one is working now, as I just said. We’ll have to keep tracking this. Thank you, Congressman Himes. We’ll be back shortly.