trumpet sounds again next "sunday morning." ♪

with florida's new law abortion access here in the south essentially is limited to two states, north and south

carolina. republican leaders generally approve states deciding the abortion issue, but our poll shows more than half of americans believe the republican party is trying to ban abortion nationally, rather than let states decide. that view is driven by abortion rights supporters, both democrats and independents. >> mark strassmann in atlanta. we turn now to former arkansas governor asa hutchinson attending a republican gathering in nashville. governor, it's good to have you here. i know you've said you are running for president. so i want to start there. what is the affirmative reason you want to be chief executive of the united states of america? >> because we need leadership that brings out the best of america and doesn't appeal to our worst instincts. we need to have leadership that understands our responsibility across the globe and that we're not an isolationist party or country. so whenever you look at the challenges we face from the

economy that we could be headed into a recession, to our border security and the fentanyl crisis that we face, to the lack of energy supply that is so critical to our growth and our country. these are all issues that i think need to be solved and my experience as congress, as head of the dea, involved in national security issues, gives me the capability to address those and i'm excited about the opportunity to run. >> well, i want to ask you about one of the issues on the minds certainly of a lot of american parents, according to our polling that is most certainly gun violence. six in ten parents say their kids express worry to them about gun violence, either a lot or sometimes. you were with us last after uvalde when 18-year-old man took an ar-15 carrying three times the amount of ammunition that a soldier carries into combat and massacred elementary school children. at that period of time you told

me the u.s. should look at the type of triggers that can alert law enforcement. what triggers do you want to write into law? >> well, whenever you look at each of these incidences of mass shootings, and that's the challenge that we face in america, we ought to always be looking at what can make a difference? what can we do to save lives? and that's why i worked very hard on the national school shield initiative as to what expertise we could bring into schools to bring more safety. whenever you look at the uvalde shooting, i looked at what the solutions were and, thank goodness, we had senator cornyn and senator murphy that stepped up to the plate and said there is a bipartisan solution that can address that particular instance.

i think we can continue to look at what can be done. >> that appears to be the limit of what congress is willing to do, that bipartisan safer communities act you just referenced. in it there was over a billion dollars appropriated for mental health resources at school, just $188 million has actually been allocated to about 30 states. there was money in it to incentivize red flag laws but in these states like kentucky and tennessee where these shootings have just happened, they don't are red flag laws, they don't appear to want them there. so how do you fix that connection between mental health and mass shootings? >> well, the investment is important and in arkansas we made sure that our school counselors can devote time to actually counseling with students and not doing administrative work. so putting more money into the school resources and the mental health services across the board are important. >> more than a billion dollars already allocated? >> well, the states have to pick up that responsibility as well. and, yes, you shift into

enhancing those mental health services, but also making sure that we have the capacity to identify and respond if someone poses a risk. and this is important, margaret, that we have to look at actually utilizing the law that's on the books, and it's been there since the '70s but it was used in a different way, and that is if somebody is a danger to themselves or a risk to others, then they can be committed. it has to go before a judge, there has to be a hearing on it, but we are utilizing that and we need to change the context of our society to take those steps whenever we identify those mental health problems that pose those kind of risks. >> okay. but that assumes identification of the problem. the shooter in louisville was 25 years old, his family said he had no history of violence. he had no police record. he bought an ar-15-style weapon six days before he carried out

this massacre. your solution doesn't solve for that. >> well, it doesn't solve every problem. you've got -- you've got incidences of mass shootings that are caused by mental illness and the failure to respond to those instances you can identify, and here you cite a case, i think we're still learning the facts, but it's evil and you've got to be able to enforce the law and you've got to send a signal that there's going to be serious consequences and the death penalty when somebody through a pure act of evil carries out that kind of shooting. >> he was killed. >> you've got to go to the heart of that problem. >> okay. he was killed on site. the cdc says that more than 50% of americans will be diagnosed with a mental illness or disorder at some point in their lifetime. the numbers are with you in terms of mental health crisis in this country. that's 50% of americans. how are you going to decide who has enough of a problem to

institutionalize? where are you going to draw that line? >> well, that's the line that i just recited that's in the law currently, which is not that you have -- are suffering from depression or not that you have to go into counseling for some reason. we all have those issues in life, but if it reaches the point of paranoia, sociopathic behavior or that you are a risk to yourself of suicide or you are a risk to others in terms of homicide, then we as a society if we can identify that, which we can, we have to act on it. it's not adjudicated by a police officer, it is by a court where evidence is received, but we have failed in our society to utilize and to act upon that. so mental illness is there, but whenever it gets to the level of risk and danger to others, we should act as a society. we've ignored that for the last really 50 years and we're going

to have to change if we're going to address the issues that we see. >> but there are states who are literally turning down money on the table that's in that act you just praised to put in place red flag laws that would allow for family members to say, hey, my loved one is a danger and shouldn't be allowed to buy those weapons. those state governments in tennessee and kentucky didn't have those laws, they didn't want them there. are you talking about some national law you want to create here that would force those states to do things, to prevent people with how you define mental illness buying weapons? >> there's two separate issues here, one is the red flag law that you raised and then secondly there is the adjudication through a court of law for someone who poses a risk to themselves or to others. that's on the books, it's in virtually every state and that's dependent upon action that a family member might take when

they identify another family member that is a risk. it might be the police that could identify that, somebody that's on the streets or it could be a whole host of ways, but it would get it into court. so this is not a federal law that needs to be passed, it is actually a matter of practice, and that the civil libertarians pushed us away from this action 50 years ago and we have never returned to that kind of action when we see the problem in an individual. on the red flag law, that is a separate issue, and there is a resistance because it's not a going into a court and fully adjudicating it, we're still studying the experience that they had in florida on this. we want to make sure it's due process, it's fair and you are not unnecessarily taking firearms away from somebody just because they say they're having a bad day. >> governor, there is so much more to get into with you, i have to leave it there for today. thank you for joining us.

and we turn now to arizona democratic senator mark kelly who joins us from tucson. senator, welcome to the program. >> thank you, margaret. >> i have a lot to get to with you, but i want to start on this issue. our viewers remember, of course, that your wife, congresswoman ga gabby giffords was critically wounded in a shooting. you've made gun safety a primary issue. your colleague said to me recently that someone is dying within the soul of this nation. do you think america is numb to gun violence? >> i don't think we're numb to it and it's really heart breaking to see moms across the country terrified about sending their kids to school. i mean, it's not the country we should live in. i have a 2-year-old granddaughter and in her preschool she's already gone through one lockdown. she's 2, she doesn't know what

it was, but, i mean, this -- if we don't make some serious change this is going to be her experience growing up. we have some of the most permissive gun laws in the world and we have some of the highest levels of gun violence. we passed this bipartisan safer communities act, it is a step in the right direction, but it's only one step and there is more we can do. >> on that law, as we just talked about with mr. hutchinson, it gave a billion dollars for school mental health resources, about $188 million has been awarded to about 30 states so far. is that money moving fast enough? is there more that can be done with resources already allocated? >> i think this issue is so important to address and so tragic and, margaret, i'm a gun owner, i'm a supporter of the second amendment but we make it so easy for irresponsible people and criminals to get access to firearms. there are three schools in arizona that have already gained access to this money, but, you

know, moving it into the states and into communities faster is going to be -- it's going to be helpful. >> it only really began moving in february. you just heard asa hutchinson who is running for president talk about institutionalizing people with mental health issues to avoid mass shootings, it's something that mike pence the former vice president who is running also said at the nra this weekend. he also called for the death penalty for mass shooters. how do you assess those solutions? >> governor hutchinson also said that he didn't want to compel states to comply with the red flag laws. we provided money and it's voluntary for states, we could make that mandatory. red flag laws work. we have data that shows in states that have red flag laws you prevent -- you prevent gun violence. so that's certainly a place to start.

we provided money for mental health services, we've got a mental health crisis in our country. there's more we can do, but, you know, listening to the former vice president to say that this isn't about, you know, firearms, it's not about guns. i mean, it is. we just make it way too easy. how about, you know, more background checks, you know, here in the state of arizona or texas or many places you can go to a gun show and get a gun without a background check. that doesn't make sense to most americans. >> we have to take a break here, senator. i want to talk to you on the other side of it about your recent trip to ukraine and other issues. please stay with us. more from senator kelly in one minute. 're outlawing golf. wait. can i still play? since we work with emower, we don't have to worry about planning for a third kid. you can still play golf... sometimes. take control of your financial future to empower what's next. hi, i'm karen. i lost 58 pounds on golo take control of your financial future and i've kept it off for over a year. it was so easy

that the weight just kept coming off. that's when i knew that this is real. golo works. i still can't believe that i look like this. meet mixtiles! they stick and restick. choose from dozens of sizes, frames and styles. go to mixtiles.com, upload pictures, pick a fancy frame and voila! buy 10 and get 10 for free. we're back now with arizona senator mark kelly. senator, i know you just returned from ukraine, so i want to ask you about this news that we got confirmed essentially this week in these leaked pentagon documents that estimate ukraine will deplete their stock

of anti-aircraft missiles within weeks. it's been widely reported how quickly they're going through ammunition. how concerned are you that this is going to give russia the opportunity to have air superiority? >> well, margaret, i spent 25 years in the united states navy, i flew in combat. this is my first time i've actually, you know, went to a war zone, a country that's been brutally attacked by vladimir putin. there's war crimes committed every day. i mean, the situation is just heartbreaking. one of the things we were looking at was their ammunition supply. i don't want to comment specifically on the classified intelligence here, but we have to make sure that we continue to give them the weapons and the weapon systems that they need to be successful. we cannot allow putin to win this thing. i mean, he -- you know, he said what his plan is. he wants to rebuild the soviet empire and if we don't stop him in ukraine there is no telling

where he will go next. >> well, when you say more ammunition you specifically mean nor anti-aircraft missiles now? >> no i mean, there's rounds for their howitzers, their air defense system is challenged as well. i mean, that's what you're specifically talking about. neither russia nor ukraine have air superiority at this time. that's important in a combat zone and to get it is challenging and they're using a lot of their weapons. i mean, himars is another example. so the purpose of this trip was to see what they need, see what we can supply. i will go back to dod and to the administration and give them, you know, my assessment of what the situation in ukraine is. >> president biden has said they don't need f-16s, you disagree. >> well, i think it's something we need tooo and i've communicated that to the

department of defense and the administration. we recently evaluated two ukrainian f-16 pilots, i rs. it's unclear exactly how they want to use the f-16. they are looking for the next game changer. f-16 is not an artillery piece, it's not a tank, it's very complicated and hard to maintain. we've also looked at some other options. i mean, there are other countries that have f-16s as well. that might become an option, but it's going to take some time. i mean, the assessment here is that it will take about a year to train, you know, 12 ukrainian -- if we go that route -- 12 ukrainian mig 29 pilots. >> senator kelly, good to have you on the program. we hope to have you back. we are going to have to leave it there for today. stay with us. i was born on the south side of chicago. it has been a long road, but now i'm working for schwab.

i love to help people understand the world through their lens and invest accordingly. you can call us christmas eve at four o'clock in the morning. we're gonna always make sure that you have all of the financial tools and support to secure your financial future. that means a lot for my community and for every community.

legal correspondent jan crawford to help us understand what is going on legally when it comes to abortion access and this pill. jan, good to have you here. we snow the supreme court overturned roe v. wade back in june, they sent the decision back to states. now we are back at the supreme court talk being abortion access again. will they hear this case on the pill? >> well, i mean, no, i don't think so, but first of all, let's think about what they did last june, they said in the dobbs decision there is no constitutional right to abortion, states can decide what they want to do with it, let it play out in the political process and that's what we've seen. we've seen the red states, more conservative states restrict or even ban abortion, the blue states, more liberal states say we're going to keep it widely available. this case is an effort by a conservative legal group in texas to restrict abortion nationwide in every state by trying to outlaw a pill that's used in more than half of all abortions in this country.

they're saying that the fda didn't federal judge in texas who is a trump appointee, by the way, agreed with that. so now the case is before the supreme court, whether they should get involved and i don't think the justices are going to go along with this. i think they're going to block that lower court judge's order, keep this pill available nationwide and that's because there are conservative legal principles that go to the heart of this case. this is not a case about the right to abortion, this is not a case about the constitution. this is a case about jurisdiction and administrative law. this is a case that says do these challengers have standing to go into court and attack a law -- a procedure that they just don't agree with. i don't think the court is going to go along with that. i think it's probably going to be at least 7-2 and maybe even 9-0. >> 7-2 -- >> blocking the lower court's order and keeping this pill available nationwide. >> that would be surprising for

those assuming a conservative-leaning court. >> but the conservative legal principles at the heart of this case say you have to have a good reason to go into federal court and challenge something, you can't just say i don't agree with this, you have to show that you were harmed by it, had a stake in it and that's not clear here. if the court goes along with this in this case, it will be at odds with what they have said in other cases in the past about the role of federal judges to get involved in social disputes. i think it would be very surprising if the court blocks this pill. >> let's take a break, come back, i have more questions for you, january. we we will be right back and speak to. in my ozempic® tri-zone, i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. and you may lose weight.

adults lost up to 14 pounds. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. ask your health care provider about the ozempic® tri-zone. you may pay as little as $25. (fisher investments) in this market, you'll find fisher investments is different than other money managers. (other money manager) different how? aren't we all just looking for the hottest stocks? (fisher investments) nope. we use diversified strategies to position our client's portfolios for their long-term goals. (other money manager) but you still sell investments that generate high commissions for you, right? (fisher investments) no, we don't sell commission products. we're a fiduciary, obligated to act in our client's best interest.

(other money manager) so when do you make more money, only when your clients make more money? (fisher investments) yep. we do better when our clients do better. at fisher investments, we're clearly different. i got this mountain bike for only $11. dealdash.com the fair and honest bidding site. this kitchenaid mixer sold for less than $26. this i-pad sold for less than $43. and this playstation 5 sold for less than a dollar. i won these bluetooth headphones for $20. i got these three suitcases for less than $40. and shipping is always free. go to dealdash.com right now and see how much you can save.

welcome back to "face the nation." we are back with our chief legal correspondent jan crawford. jan, i wanted you to take something head-on which is this democratic argument that if this one fda a approved drug for abortion is blocked that all drugs are somewhat at risk. is that true? >> i mean, i think that's a valid argument. if the courts are going to say lower the bar and let people come into the federal courts to challenge things that were approved 23 years ago, even if they haven't been harmed by the drug, i mean, it's certaily a valid argument and it could apply in other cases with other social issues. if the court lowers the bar in this case, you're going to see

conservative groups on other social issues going into the supreme court and saying they have a right to sue here, too. you're going to em broil federal judges back into social issue disputes which if we take the supreme court at its word is exactly what they said should not be happening. >> jan crawford, i have to leave it there. thank you for your time. we turn now to new mexico's democratic governor michelle lujan grisham. it's good to have you back here in studio. >> thank you, margaret. happy to be here. >> so your state is part of a 20-state coalition of governors, the reproductive freedom alliance. some of the states in it have started stockpiling this medication for abortion. when you were here in february you said that's the wrong focus, the wrong question. has that changed? >> for me it hasn't changed. we're going to make sure and we already are that we have access to all of those medications, but if the response is, well, stockpile instead of protecting all access, then we're minimizing the work that we have

to do to make sure that women and families are fully protected. not that in and of itself there is a disagreement by a state that's making sure that irrespective of the legal decisions we're going to make sure that medication abortion is available in our state. but i think that we are moving and to jan's point, it's every social issue that you disagree with. is it stem cell research? is it fertility drugs? whatever it is in this context, if we are going to use the federal courts as a way to bar and ban access, we are looking at a national abortion ban and more. i think states have to band together to do as much as they can in opposition to that. >> and the states are on the front lines here because there is no federal guarantee, the court kicked it back to chief executives like yourself back in june. so currently in new mexico abortion is legal, but you don't actually have a law codifying it. i know you want to write one. >> we do. we do now. the last time i was here we didn't and you were -- and thank

you -- talking about colorado's work. we now have a law both codifying right to abortion, abortion care and access, as well as gender affirming care in the state. so that just got signed by me. >> nail down for me how do you define -- because up until now my understanding was this wasn't a limit on when in pregnancy a woman could receive an abortion. have you set any limit on that? >> there are no limits. >> that's very controversial. >> it can be. i mean, look, it's the 1% of all abortions and that's still a sizable number of abortions worldwide. >> 1% over 21 weeks of pregnancy. >> correct. however, look, these are women that have named these soon to be born babies, these are horrific medical conditions and, again, new mexico's position and mine is that we should not be interfering with a woman's right, medical situation, and her decision about that life-threatening potential circumstance. we shouldn't be doing that. >> explain that.

how do you define fetal viability or that line? you say it's very, very uncommon, but -- >> it is. that is not defined. it is left to two physicians make that decision with the patient. that's the issue is that -- >> two physicians? >> two physicians. >> and so the fear is that folks could take that to an extreme if someone has an affliction that isn't life-threatening. >> well, of course. >> that they're picking and choosing which children they want to carry to term or not. >> i find that argument not to be nearly as compelling as the arguments that we make that we should be focused on contraceptives and better maternal health care, which means you have better outcomes. it's the wrong side of the argument and it pushes buttons for people's fears about what's really happening. late term abortions should occur as rarely as humanly possible and they should be only for life-threatening conditions of the fetus or the mother, and

that should be analyzed by that physician. if we start making any access points, which we are in the country, you end up with tiggers and six weeks, fewer than six weeks. these are all barriers to women's health care, comprehensive reproductive health care and new mexico is going to stand with many other states to make sure that's not the direction we are headed in. >> so your state has become this haven of sorts for the surrounding states that do heavily restrict abortion like texas. >> and oklahoma. >> and oklahoma. so that's, i'm sure, part of your calculus here in crafting the law as you did, but i wanted to come back to something you said both in february and other remarks. you talked about using federal lands, you talked about talking to the tribes in your state, you have a large tribal population there, you said we're moving towards tribal nations providing access including abortion. the hyde amendment prevents

federal dollars being used for abortion. >> but sovereign land is a whole different designation of federalism -- >> are you doing this? >> we aren't doing it now but i think we will and i think we can. >> how? >> a couple different ways. a sovereign nation makes its own decisions. the question that i think you're asking is would we use medicaid to actually pay for those services. that is complicated with the hyde amendment so the hasn't there is no. but we do a ton of state investments and tribes have their own resources, they are already building behavioral health clinics, they run hospitals, primary care clinics. they are already in the business of delivering health care and at least one of those tribes, the pueblo in new mexico has certainly indicated that they would be more than ready, willing, able and interested to make sure that access -- because women of color have limited access for a number of reasons all over the country and these are pueblo, they want to make

sure the women and families in their pueblo or sovereign nation have equal access irrespective of distances that they might have to travel. >> last june vice president harris was asked about this and said the white house isn't looking at it. are they looking at it or just you? >> i don't think the white house is looking at it but they have heard from a variety of states including new york that every federal tool in the toolbox ought to be used to protect and expand access. new mexico has an opportunity with 23 independent tribes to do that in a little different way. the point was we won't leave any access point on the table if it makes sense and we have willing partners. >> i want to quickly ask you about the water crisis. there is this debate over the colorado river, which appears to be drying up, it's been drought stricken for two decades now. do you need the biden administration to step in here because the states aren't settling this? >> i think we do. i think having at least $4 billion which is an incentive. people aren't going to give up

water rights and automatically lean in to do conservation. it's hard. it's full of risk. the biden administration rightly so got money available to create incentives so that we're doing better conservation and management. you've got six states working pretty well together, california, big water user, it's going to be tough, but with good snow packs, money, incentives and cooperation we are in the best place ever to do something meaningful about this. >> governor, thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> good to have you back. and we will be right back. e. this is a leading healthcare system with five nationally ranked hospitals, including two world-renowned academic medical centers. in boston, where biotech innovates daily and our doctors teach at harvard medical school and the physicians doing the world-changing research are the ones providing care. ♪♪ there's only one mass general brigham.

we turn now to the republican chairman of thecommi congressman mike turner. good to have you back. >> thank you. >> do you have any sense yet of the scale of the damage caused by the leak of this classified material by apparently this 21-year-old airman who has been arrested? >> not completely, but clearly there's damage that's done. we have documents classified because we don't want them to get in the hands of our

adversaries and these have been widely circulated. obviously these are damaging both to the states and our allies. what's troubling is when you look at the documents that were circulated without the care of its handling, these relate to actual real people, the marks on maps are real people and they can impact people's lives and that's certainly our concern. >> president biden said when it came to the content of the messages and information he wasn't concerned. you seem to disagree with that. >> i can tell you president zelenskyy certainly would be concerned and so would our other allies. whenever we are trusted with information we are working in partnership with someone, you know, our intelligence gathering, our intelligence information if it is released can represent a vulnerability to them. so obviously it's an issue that's troubling and that needs to be addressed. in the outcome for the ukraine conflict, though, it's early enough and these are static documents, meaning they're pictures of an exact period of time and mitigation can happen, people can change their strategies and that can change

the outcome. >> i asked this question to senator kelly about the concern of ukraine running through its ammunition stocks too quick will i. >> some of these documents would be in the form of managt s,he look at inventories or depleting inventories they are static. they show a too do list and what we need to do to help ukraine replenish those. it doesn't indicate that they have no other sources and that in fact they will run out and be completely open and vulnerable to russia. >> okay. so not necessarily -- it would be a leap to say russia will have air dominance on this date because they run out of this thing. on the leak itself, the individual who is accused here, mr. teixeira, there's video circulated of him saying racist things, shooting guns, anti-semitic things, he has apparently posted these things on social media and they were there undetected for a long period of time. what part of this needs to change because clearly the protocols failed. >> right. absolutely. and if you look at the actual

complaint and affidavit filed when he was arraigned, you have the left side admission from the department of defense that they are able to track his movements. so clearly he was having access to documents that he should not have had access to. and someone should have been paying attention, tapping him on the shoulder and ending that access. but in this instance as you just indicated, you know, through life patterns that were clearly signals that he might be a likely leaker of information in the future and then also the access that he was having to tis information should have been cut off. he should have never been having access to this level of classified information that could hurt the united states. >> he was working in tech support, it wasn't analyzing this information. >> right. there was no need to know for him of the information that he was accessing. the department of defense admits in the affidavit they had the ability to track him. those will be the questions my kple will be having. we will be having hearings on this. from the 9/11 commission we learned that we needed to more widely disseminate classified

information so people had actionable intelligence so they could piece together puzzles. we have gone too far. we have an incidence someone in massachusetts looking to documents with respect to war plans in ukraine and the department of defense knows and that's what our committee will be looking at, how do we make certain we make changes. >> to make those changes i want to ask you to clarify this because there are some conservatives saying things like tucker carlson has, your colleague marjorie taylor greene in defense of this individual, this 21-year-old man. she called him essentially heroic, white mail christian anti-war an enemy to the biden regime. she said he told the truth about troops being on the ground in ukraine and a lot more. >> first off, let's be clear, there are no u.s. troops on the ground in ukraine other than troops that are normally at an embassy protecting the embassy. we do not have dogt. >> -- boots on the ground. it's an inn cred assumption from

the documents that the individual leaked. the other aspect is he's guilty -- if he's brought through this process and he's found guilty it will be of espionage, it's being a traitor to your country. that's not someone to look up to. that is something that has compromised his country and compromised our allies. that's not the oath that he took. that's not the job that he took. >> right. you are in the gang of eight, that small group of lawmakers that gets access to some of the most classified information including the documents that were found at the residence of president biden, president trump and former vice president pence. have you looked at the documents and are your questions answered? >> right. no, so the department of justice has not been forthcoming in this and they've been somewhat disingenuous and certainly both the house and senate will have to address this. one, the documents delivered to congress are not complete and, secondly, this he don't identify whose documents they were, whether they came from the trove of biden's behind the corvette or whether or not they came fro

through the timing. >> timing ought to be able to tell us but at the same time to deliver those documents without even designating whose documents they were clearly shows an unwillingness to work closely with congress. this also it's incomplete. i can tell you this, in the reviews we have had so far of indexes that do include the documents, there is no nuclear codes, no one had anything that was of extrem imminent threat. >> have you seen everything? >> we've seen the index of them. we've gotten some of the documents delivered to us, but the department of justice needs to come clean. they need to deliver the documents to congress, they promised them to us and they need to work with us so we can get an assessment of what happened here. there are laws that need to be changed so that we can more protect our classified documents and those who handle them and we need them to work with us. >> the white house gave access to the classified after action report on afghanistan about a week ago. have you seen it yet? >> i have. >> and?

>> well, so the -- i'm very concerned that the biden administration is looking more for fault and blame than really action items as to what we need to do. what clearly happened here in the abrupt departure from afghanistan is a number of mistakes were made. we can only make certain we doane repeat those mistakes if we're able to really understand them. congress has put together an afghan commission that is reviewing our time there and our exit. i think that's going to be a very helpful avenue of getting an understanding of what happened and how do we not do that again. >> congressman, good to have you here. a lot to get through and we hope to have you back soon. we will be back in a moment. 'll.

we're joined now by christine lagarde, former head of the imf, now the president of the european central bank. good morning. good to have you here. >> lovely to be back. >> your recovery is going all right? >> yes, in a couple of days i think i will be fine. >> glad to hear that. you have a long list of things ahead of you and i want to ask you about the global recovery. you were speaking a few days ago and you said the recovery for the economy is fragile and

uncertain. in this country the fed thinks we will see a mild recession later this year. irstall,re is that there woulde a cessifhnica. atllat the t' all positive. it's been slightly downgraded but overall we have a recovery and we are faced with high uncertainty because of multiple factors, you know, from all corners of the war it's the war in ukraine, it's the financial stability that clearly has been shaken up a bit by the u.s. and switzerland developments, it's inflation that we are fighting. it's all that which really create a hollow of uncertainty

around a recovery that we want to embed. that's pretty much where we are. >> so there were those recent bank failures here in the united states, also one in switzerland. given that it sounds like you're saying you don't see a hard landing. you're seeing a positive trajectory for the global economy? i thinke ve narrow th toverents thehe right polici >> given the bank failures we just saw, you hear from bank ceos in this country, this idea that they're getting more cautious about lending money. >> yeah. >> largely. that there's some contraction in credit there. how concerned with you and how does that complicate your planning? >> it's funny you should ask complication, because in a way it facilitates my planning and it complicates the future. >> because it slows down business activity. >> yes. >> so you don't have to raise

rates as much or as frequently. >> we don't have to reduce -- we will see because we need to really measure what will come out of this financial events that took place recently. what impact will it have? how will banks react? how will they assess risk and how much credit will they lend? but if they don't lend too much credit and if they manage their risk, it might reduce the work that we have to do to reduce inflation. okay? but if they reduce too much credit, then it will weigh on growth excessively. >> there are predictions that the u.s. could default onts national debt as soon as june, some say september and we have a political standoff in this country, virtually no negotiation happening on how to resolve this. does that undermine your confidence in the united states and what message does that send to the world? >> i have huge confidence in the united states. you know, ever since my year in

this country, in this city in '73-'74 i have had confidence in this country and i just cannot believe that they would let such a major, major disaster happen of the united states defaulting on its debt. this is not possible. i cannot believe that it will happen. but if it did happen, it would have very, very negative impact not just for this country, where confidence would be challenged, but around the world. let's face it, this is the largest economy, it's a major leader in economy growth around the world. they cannot let that happen. i understand the politics, i've been in politics myself, but there is a time when the higher interest of the nation has to prevail. i'm sorry. >> and you think that will this ? country yet again. >> you're bringing a lot of optimism to a show where we don't have a lot of optimism in that regard.

>> i'm sorry. >> it's interesting. it's a change. i want to ask you about what you just said in terms of u.s. leadership. you look to the other side of the globe and xi jinping has said he wants china to be the world's leading power by 2049 and beijing is interlinked into so many economies, particularly in europe. is the u.s. losing global influence? >> there is clearly a competition between these large economies. what i hope very much is that they can have a dialogue because, you know, all these relationships whether it's trade, whether it's politics, whether it's economic development, whether it is financial stability, it's a two-way street. we cannot ignore each other and trade should not be confrontational. it has to be careful, it has to identify the areas that are strategic for one country or the other or all the others, but it shouldn't be confrontational. i'm on the same page as henry

kissinger on that or kevin rudd the new australian ambassador. conflict is not unavoidable. >> but there is, it seems, increased political pressure to choose between the united states and china in many ways in some of these political capitals. is that even practical from an economic point of view? >> it would lead to economic dow dow downside, the amount of which is uncertain. is the global economy going to be affected by 1 or x percent? there are multiple forecasts, all of them are negative. so the decoupling and the sort of depolarization of the world would lead to less economic growth, less prosperity in thew world. so i think that this is something that should be by all means avoided. >> madam lagarde, it's always

wonderful to have you here. >> thank you. >> we will be right back. because you're too heavy to make it and you have extreme pain, you have to make a change. golo enabled me to make that change. golo is real and it changes your life. i got this mountain bike for only $11. dealdash.com the fair and honest bidding site. this kitchenaid mixer sold for less than $26. this i-pad sold for less than $43. and this playstation 5 sold for less than a dollar. i won these bluetooth headphones for $20. i got these three suitcases for less than $40. and shipping is always free. go to dealdash.com right now and see how much you can save. meet mixtiles! they stick and restick. choose from dozens of sizes, frames and styles. go to mixtiles.com, upload pictures, pick a fancy frame and voila! buy 10 and get 10 for free.

♪♪ alex! mateo, hey how's business? great. you know that loan has really worked wonders. that's what u.s. bank is for. and you're growing in california? -yup, socal, norcal... -monterey? -all day. -a branch in ventura? that's for sure-ah. atms in fresno? fres-yes. encinitas? yes, indeed-us. anaheim? big time. more guacamole? i'm on a roll-ay. how about you? i'm just visiting.

u.s. bank. ranked #1 in customer satisfaction with retail banking in california by j.d. power. that's it for us today. thank you for watching. until next week. for "face the nation," i'm margaret brennan. ♪ ♪

>> if the pbr's best want to win a world title, they need to realize this montana moment is crunch time. >> it's been a whirl whirlwind season for bull riding's best. >> oh! it went from bad be to worse. our world number one now having to be carried. >> but the time is now for the contenders trying to chase down the world's number one-ranked cowboy.% this week opportunity awaits the chasers as the pbr rides into billings, montana. >> a