Senate Minority Leader McConnell was on “Face the Nation”

The interview with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, which is scheduled to air on April 28, 2024, is transcripted below.

MARGARET BRENNAN: We appreciate your time today.

I’m happy to be here, Senator Mitch McConnell.

There are numerous matters concerning national security that I must discuss with you, Margaret Brennan. I want to start at home with the demonstrations in favor of the Palestinians in Gaza that have taken place on college campuses across the United States; however, there have also been anti-Semitic posters and statements thrown in. When Speaker Johnson paid a visit to Columbia, he told CBS that “law enforcement and the National Guard must be called in to take control.”. “All of the demonstrators ought to be locked up,” stated Texas Governor Abbott. Texas is witnessing protests. Do you concur with them?

Sen. MCCONNELL: So this is how I see it. It’s important to uphold the First Amendment. However, since it endangers everyone else, it prevents you from claiming there’s a fire in a theater. These university presidents need to take charge of the situation, permit free speech, and combat antisemitism, at least in the beginning. I believed that to be mainly extinct in this nation. However, we’ve observed a number of young individuals who harbor antisemitic views. I believe that these university presidents should be the first to defend the discussion, so why don’t they all get down and have a polite discussion instead of trying to bully others?

MARGARET BRENNAN: Does this mean you wouldn’t call the National Guard right now?

SEN. MCCONNELL: Well, let’s see if these presidents of the universities can turn things around. Surely, they could manage that. The goal of a college education is to foster civil discourse. If antisemites could provide a rationale for such discourse, I would be curious to listen.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Vice President Biden declared that he opposes antisemitic demonstrations as well as people who are ignorant of the situation involving the Palestinians in Palestine. Are you in agreement with what he said?

Sen. MCCONNELL: I am able to speak for myself; it is not a question of agreement. In my opinion, the administrations should have authority over these college campuses, as I mentioned previously.

I understand, Margaret Brennan. My goal is to proceed to Ukraine. I am aware that you just got off the phone with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine. These long-range missiles are among the capabilities that the US has sent him as part of this new congressional aid package. Does he require more specialized weapons in the near future? What did he say to you?

SEN. MCCONNELL: I’ve already apologized for a few things, including the excessive delay. Even though I fervently advocated for the supplemental request and diligently cultivated Republican support for it at the outset of this administration, it all began with an abrupt pullout from Afghanistan. It’s similar to signaling to all the world’s rogue regimes that the Americans are returning home. The second is not providing the Ukrainians with what they require quickly enough. didn’t begin with this administration alone; I recall that the Obama administration provided them with ready-to-eat meals. It’s not really a self-defense tactic.

After the partial invasion in 2014, Margaret Brennan?

Sen. MCCONNELL: In that case, absolutely. It has therefore gotten better over time. With some concern that the Russians would be discouraged by our inaction, the administration has continued to act in a self-deterrent manner. So, let’s get the weapons there as soon as possible, is my main grievance. I apologized to Congress for the delay in doing its share, but we did it at last. Additionally, he found it impressive that Republican support increased significantly in the Senate.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You persuaded nine more senators because you were leading those votes.

SEN. MCCONNELL: I tried, to be honest. Let’s say that it wasn’t something I felt lightly about.

But for whom did you feel you were apologizing, Margaret Brennan?

Sen. The slowness of it, McConnell said.

MARGARET BRENNAN: However, when was that not in the Senate?

SENS. MCCONNELL: May I apologize?

Margaret Brennan: The Senate wasn’t the source of the slowness. Was it for House Republicans that you expressed regret?

Sen. MCCONNELL: The Senate was the location, though. We attempted for approximately four months to come to an agreement regarding our disastrous border with Mexico. Of course, dealing with the opposing side is a necessary first step in the legislative process. Both the Senate and the White House are in their hands. Our proposal was developed. That’s because many of my members felt they weren’t good enough. Our presidential candidate didn’t seem to be very excited about following through on that. That therefore required three or four months. We boarded on the topic of the supplemental after realizing we would not be able to pass legislation on the border. We went from 22 to actually 32 members after I believe some of my members changed their minds after concentrating on that. One participant would have supported it had they not missed the previous vote.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You brought up the border, and you gave Senator Lankford the authority to reach this compromise between the parties and the White House. The President expresses regret for its exclusion from this final package. I am aware that you stated the Republican nominee was against it. Did President Trump veto the border bill?

SENS. MCCONNELL: Well, I believe that the product was met with a sincere lack of enthusiasm. And what the product is.

MARGARET BRENNAN: —So you found the product satisfactory?

SEN. MCCONNELL: Of course, but you couldn’t do exactly what you wanted to do in order to pass legislation—there is a Democratic Senate and President. It’s safe to say that I would have preferred more. If we were attempting to pass legislation, that was not feasible. We also attempted to bargain. Personally, I think Senator Lankford did a fantastic job. However, it wasn’t good enough for most of our members, and it didn’t seem to be good enough for the House either.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Regarding Ukraine, there are reports that the administration has advised the country’s citizens not to fire US-supplied weaponry into Russia, to target Russian energy supplies, and to refrain from attacking Crimea for fear of escalation. Should these US weapons, which you just assisted in supplying, be subject to limitations?

SENS. McConnell: I doubt it. They are making an attempt to dictate to the Israelis how they should conduct their war with Hamas. We are facing grave danger from these democratic allies, so I don’t think we should be trying to dictate to them what kind of elections to hold—like we did in Israel—or what kind of military strategies they should employ. Thus—.

MARGARET BRENNAN: — Are you referring to Israel at this time?

SENS. MCCONNELL: I believe we should provide them with the resources they require to succeed in either nation.

Do you think President Zelenskyy has the authority to use these weapons however he sees fit, Margaret Brennan?

SENS. MCCONNELL: Hopefully, that is. I don’t think we—I’m not sure how many times I can say that. We shouldn’t be instructing them on how to win their own war, in my opinion. They’re situated in its center. Indeed, they are present. They are aware of their needs. assisting them in winning, in my opinion, is our responsibility.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The Democratic leader and you collaborated to pass this package. However, during the period of delay that you admitted, Russia’s ground forces have recovered to their pre-invasion level. They have reinforced the 20 percent of Ukrainian territory they control, and their Army is fifteen percent larger. The words of the Supreme Allied Commander are all those that follow. Do you think those failures are your party’s fault?

SENS. MCCONNELL: A good number of them, indeed. It was too long. With so many diverse viewpoints being discussed around the table, this issue resembled a family reunion, if you will. Chuck performed well. But Democrats united in support of Ukraine. Without a doubt, our family was on our side in the debate. Additionally, there was a great deal of skepticism for a while, but I believe things improved. And we may have demonstrated that earlier this week.

MARGARET BRENNAN: What, in your opinion, caused minds to shift?

SEN. MCCONNELL: Based on my thoughts, what?

MARGARET BRENNAN: What changed, in your opinion?

Sen. MCCONNELL: The real information. I believe that our members truly started concentrating on the package once we became aware that we would not be receiving a border result. There was no doubt about it—a border provision would not be included. Additionally, there are very few strong arguments against this. There are very few persuasive arguments made by the opposition, and those that are are almost always demonstrably false. And I believe that some of our members changed their minds because the facts convinced them.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You will continue to lead for an additional eight months. However, you have stated that you intend to remain and complete your mandate. There’s a chance Donald Trump runs for office again. In our most recent CBS poll, 79 percent of Republicans who identified as such told us that Donald Trump is the source of information about Russia and Ukraine that they trust the most. With sixty-five percent, the Pentagon scored lower. How are you going to address the fact that this sentiment doesn’t seem to be going away?

SEN. MCCONNELL: Look, regaining control of the Senate is my top priority right now, not winning the presidential election. I’ve led both minorities and the majority; the majority is superior.

However, this isn’t the race, Margaret Brennan said. This is influencing the minds of people.

Sen. McConnell: Accurate. Give me a moment to finish. Regardless of the outcome of the presidential election, I believe that the most crucial thing I can do is to ensure that my successor is the leader of the majority. This administration hasn’t totally satisfied me. I think it’s encouraging that our nominee, regardless of the outcome of the election, decided to stop berating people for opposing the package. We should also start preparing for China, Russia, and Iran in the long run. The defense budget requests made by this administration haven’t even kept up with inflation. Both of us and that need to change. The Democrats in Congress have consistently demanded that we allocate the same amount of money to domestic as to defense. It was altered during the most recent appropriations procedure. The needs we have right now are primarily defense-related, so our spending has to match those needs.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The defense budget proposed by Biden for the fiscal year 25 is expected to increase by 1%, but as you point out, this won’t keep up with inflation as the spending will be falling the year before.

SENS. MCCONNELL: I see. Indeed. I believe that both sides have drawn attention to this conflict, which has shown how the world has changed and how dangerous this time is for our nation.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You mentioned that the Republican candidate chose not to oppose the package. To put it another way, quit telling lawmakers not to support Zelenskyy, even though we all know Donald Trump does not. Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orban, told reporters after his dinner with President Trump at Mar-a-Lago that Trump had threatened to withhold all financial support from Ukraine and that this would be how he would put an end to hostilities. How do you stop someone who holds such a fundamental belief as the man who will be the commander in chief?

SEN. MCCONNELL: My goal is to create a majority in the Senate and raise awareness of the significance of defense spending, regardless of the outcome of the presidential election. That’s beyond my control. Here in the Senate, I do have some sway. Regardless of who wins the presidency, I plan to use it to boost defense spending and prepare for the challenges that lie ahead of us rather than focusing only on the past.

MARGARET BRENNAN: However, that presents a situation in which you may need to act as a barrier against the head of your own party.

Sen. MCCONNELL: I would have been prepared to carry that out. I believe that a greater number of my colleagues now recognize the significance of this issue, and I played a part in shifting the Senate’s viewpoint on it.

MARGARET BRENNAN: During your press conference the other day, you took a shot at Tucker Carlson for criticizing Ukraine and traveling to Russia to speak with Vladimir Putin. Donald Trump, according to you, had conflicting opinions about this package and never supported it. You appear to be saying here that the institution will prevent isolationism and the streak within your party, but how can you say that these strong voices will control isolationism and the streak within your party?

(STALK IN THE CROSS).

SEN. MCCONNELL: We have indeed been there. Though we might not have time for a history lesson, we have experienced this before. The most well-known Republican of that era was Robert Taft, both before and after World War II. He couldn’t stand lend-lease. He disapproved of NATO. He was against the Marshall Plan. Therefore, Eisenhower’s victory over Taft for the nomination and his entirely different perspective on our place in the world put an end to the isolationist trend that preceded this most recent major war, and this has been the case for the majority of presidents since. Thus, there has been a discussion about isolationism in my party previously. Although it’s not deadly, you still have to participate and present your case, which is why I’m pleased that we greatly boosted our support in the Senate.

MARGARET BRENNAN: And along with it came support for the Indo-Pacific region, which includes Taiwan, as well as support for Israel, the Palestinians, and the Ukraine. Do you believe that the way you wrote and organized this will be able to withstand these oppositional forces and a Trump administration?

SEN. MCCONNELL: There’s still a lot of work to be done. This episode was significant, after all. I believe it is far from sufficient that isolationism was defeated, at least in this particular case.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You do believe it was vanquished.

SENS. MCCONNELL: About that specific problem. It’s not entirely gone, in my opinion. We must budget for defense in accordance with the circumstances, which include the fact that we have two significant enemies: China and Russia. We had Germany and Japan in World War II. What else do we have now that we did not have back then? Terrorism, isolationism, and the threat posed by Iran. Budgets that represent where we are now and where we are likely to be in the future must be passed in order to overcome this different way of thinking.

MARGARET BRENNAN: After Donald Trump was impeached, you voted to exonerate him approximately 30 days after January 6. Additionally, you stated on the Senate floor that “this country has a criminal justice system; Trump hasn’t gotten away with anything yet. There is civil litigation here. Additionally, past presidents are still subject to both of their accountability. Are former presidents still exempt from liability, in your opinion?

SENS. MCCONNELL: Let me state it this way. On February 13th, I took care of that matter.

MARGARET BRENNAN: It’s pending at the Supreme Court right now.

SENS. MCCONNELL: Jan. 6, 2021, as well. I still stand by all I said at the time. Whether I was right or not will obviously be decided by the Supreme Court.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Nevertheless, you became involved, and in some ways, what you said is connected to this case. Since you supported the Senate’s decision not to convict Mr. Trump, you should be aware that the argument at the heart of his immunity defense is the possibility of criminal prosecution for a former president who was impeached and found guilty by the Senate. That he was not. Is there a reason you regret your decision?

SEN. I don’t regret anything I said at the time, McConnell said. Your question will have an answer from the courts; I haven’t taken anything I said back at that time. That will be determined by the Supreme Court.

MARGARET BRENNAN: How do you feel about that argument?

SEN. MCCONNELL: I expressed my opinions to you on January 6 and February 13, 2021. Although the answer is in court, I stand by everything I said at the time. That is going to be decided by the Supreme Court.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you continue to maintain that Trump is both potentially criminally liable and practically and morally responsible for inciting the events of January 6?

SEN. MCCONNELL: I have no idea how often you will ask me this same question. Everything I said on January 6, 2021, and February 13, 2021, is what I stand by.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You know, I’m asking you this because, in the months since our last conversation, you’ve supported him for reelection and you claim to still hold these beliefs despite your apparent moral clarity.

SEN. MCCONNELL: Improving your research is necessary. Three years ago, that question was posed to me. Would I back him if he were the nominee?

MARGARET BRENNAN: She also mentioned that she would back the nominee of her choice.

SEN. MCCONNELL: I agreed, too. because my party’s supporters nationwide have already made up their minds. Naturally, I will back our party’s nominee as the Senate’s Republican leader.

MARGARET BRENNAN: However, you have made positions on matters that you believe to be morally necessary and of great national security interest. You made an argument about Ukraine like that. Additionally, you were defying a populist viewpoint in certain respects. On this one, I’m just curious how you explain the populist view when you say that he would be the nominee because it was good enough for a number of Republicans. It’s not accepting his position; he is not worthy of it.

(Talking back).

Sen. MCCONNELL: The question is: Could I have had any influence at all, even if I had decided to participate in the presidential race?

You are among the most influential Republicans, Margaret Brennan said.

SEN. MCCONNELL: I am the Senate’s Republican leader. Here, we attempt to enact laws. I prefer that the majority includes us. I am trying to flip the Senate so that my successor is the majority leader rather than the minority leader, and I am investing all of my political time and capital in this endeavor.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You know that. You are, however, opposing those forces not only in the person of Donald Trump but also in the person of these other senators, J. B. Vance and others, whose beliefs and viewpoints run counter to yours and what you claim is best for the United States of America.

Sen. MCCONNELL: Alright, you and me.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, that’s difficult to comprehend at times.

SEN. MCCONNELL: You and I are sitting here discussing the people who lost during a week that has seen a victory for the forces opposing isolationism. The distinction between 22 and 32, in my opinion, provides the best proof of how we’re managing to combat isolationism.

MARGARET BRENNAN: It seems that you agree with Joe Biden more than Donald Trump regarding America’s place in the world.

SEN. MCCONNELL: How are you? I apologize.

MARGARET BRENNAN: In terms of American leadership, your viewpoint seems to be more in line with Joe Biden’s.

SEN. MCCONNELL: —I wouldn’t—.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –This global conflict–.

Sen. MCCONNELL: All right, so.

MARGARET BRENNAN: >After that, with Donald Trump.

SENS. MCCONNELL: –I most definitely wouldn’t.

MARGARET BRENNAN: —Who has criticized Volodymyr Zelinskyy, who hasn’t supported the package you’ve been working so hard to complete?

Sen. MCCONNELL: All right. Tell you what, I never would have left Afghanistan. I wouldn’t have submitted defense budgets for four straight years that didn’t even keep up with inflation. I detest the current administration for a number of reasons. It is unclear whether I will disagree with the incoming administration. I won’t therefore make any predictions about the future of this matter. I am aware of my opinions, and it is irrelevant how the presidential election turns out. For the balance of my Senate tenure, I will be concentrating on this.

MARGARET BRENNAN: However, this needs to be something you wrestle with and think about a lot. Donald Trump has targeted your wife in addition to you directly.

SENS. MCCONNELL: Well, it’s not about me, it’s about doing what’s best for the nation.

MARGARET BRENNAN: As a leader of the Republican Party, is he the right choice for the nation?

SENS. MCCONNELL: Alright, this is.

MARGARET BRENNAN: —Among the most influential people in the nation?

Sen. That’s correct, McConnell.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –Is he the one?

Sen. MCCONNELL: That is what I am promoting as a necessary action for the nation. I will continue to push for increased defense budgets so that we can take China, Russia, and Iran’s threat seriously, regardless of who wins the presidency. I have stated this to you several times today. And that means investing more in defense than we do at the moment.

MARGARET BRENNAN: If Donald Trump is commander in chief, you can stop him. Correct me if I’m saying this incorrectly. You will exert every effort, even in the absence of leadership, to refute this isolationist perspective and curtail the potential damage that could be caused by him if he were to win another term.

SENS. MCCONNELL: I will counter by promoting policies that I believe are detrimental to the United States of America, regardless of who wins the presidency. Therefore, my preference for one over the other will depend on the president and the policies they support. Thoughts are passionate during campaigns, what matters to me is the actions of the person who wins the election. And I have made it very apparent, as we have repeatedly discussed, where my advocacy will be and where my interests lie.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Should he visit Kiev as you did? Should Mr. Trump, in his capacity as a candidate and a member of your party, visit and observe Ukraine for himself?

Sen. MCCONNELL: I will not offer him any counsel. I’m attempting.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –Other Republican contenders who were running against him and failed to win did just that. It was you who did it. You jeopardize your personal safety. You visited and observed—.

SENS. MCCONNELL: Margaret, I don’t know how much more explaining I need to do. Here, my main goals are to make the Senate Republicans the majority and to continue pushing—as I believe I did this very week—for a shift away from the isolationist movement started by Tucker Carlson.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Was Tucker Carlson the starting point?

SEN. MCCONNELL: Indeed it was. He has a sizable audience among Republican rank-and-file members. Additionally, I believe it caused a great deal of damage, had a significant effect on typical Republican voters, and raised a significant issue.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Is that because, as the House Intel Chairman stated, he imitated and spread Republican propaganda before it was repeated on the House floor?

Sen. MCCONNELL: All right, I thought he was wrong, and he ended up interviewing Vladimir Putin, which is where he should have been all along.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Given that Donald Trump has reiterated some of these claims, will you verify his statements when he makes them?

SEN. MCCONNELL: –I will not be offering any counsel to our presidential candidate. My main goal is to establish a Republican majority in the Senate.

MARGARET BRENNAN: JD Vance and several other Republican senators echo some of these sentiments.

Sen. MCCONNELL: Well, decisions are made by each of us.

MARGARET BRENNAN: –That America can fight more than one war at once, that the country is somehow involved in Ukraine even though it isn’t sending troops there directly.

SENS. MCCONNELL: –Look, I get to decide how I spend my time, and I’m not going to spend it counseling the presidential candidate from the Republican Party. All of my attention will be directed toward making this Senate Republican majority.

MARGARET BRENNAN: How much of your successor’s time will be devoted to internal strife?

Sen. MCCONNELL: Well, I believe we addressed a significant issue this week. How many contentious topics arise between now and the end of the year? Who can say?

MARGARET BRENNAN: Leader, I’ve been informed that our time is running out. Do you think we should talk about anything we didn’t get around to?

SEN. MCCONNELL: I believe we’ve gotten pretty much everything.

Thank you for your time today, Margaret Brennan.

SENS. MCCONNELL: Thank you very much.