welcome back to "face the nation." we continue our conversation now with governor ron desantis. governor, thanks for sticking with us through that break. i want to pick back up. you heard the president's national security adviser say

that the request to congress will be for well beyond $2 billion in support. that is for israel, that is for ukraine. in the past you've said you don't want a blank check to ukraine. do you want a blank check to israel? >> no. i think that there's actually two different things. one with israel, we've provided a lot of support since its inception, about $158 billion in the last 75 years. we've done over $120 billion just for ukraine in two years. it's a different level that we're talking about. also, with israel, they've never asked us to displace their responsibility. they take their defense very seriously. what we do complements and supplements what they're already doing for themselves but they are not going to ask us to fight this war for them. we have a long-standing security relationship. they're a very strong and long-standing ally and we'll be willing to support in the traditional ways that we have. >> there are no u.s. troops fighting in ukraine.

>> no, but what biden's policy is, a blank check, in his own words, as long as it takes. they have not articulated what the concept of victory is going to be. people said this is going to go on for another five or six years. that would require potentially hundreds of billions of dollars more. we're not just sending weapons. we're paying salaries for ukrainian bureaucrats, funding small business ventures, all kinds of things. i think if you look, as you mentioned iraq, and i served there, our foreign policy the last 20, 30 years has suffered when we don't have a clear concept of victory, when we have conflicts like iraq and like afghanistan, where we don't have a clear resolution, so he owes a strategy to the congress and i think most republicans or a lot of the republicans in the congress are going to insist on that before they authorize additional money. >> we don't have a clearer definition of success from the israeli prime minister either. i asked the national security adviser, and he just said generally -- >> i think we do. i think we do with all respect.

i think he has said that it is the total and complete defeat of hamas where they're no longer existing as a functioning entity. i think that that is achievable. i think israel can do that. i think they have every right and indeed i think they have the duty to do that. >> what is your view on who should rule 2.3 million palestinians in gaza? do you believe they have a right to their own state or do you want israel to maintain an occupation after they go through this invasion? >> well, israel is not occupying it. they pulled out in 2005. >> but they're about to invade. >> well no, no, no. of course. we'll have to see how that goes. i mean, i would say this, there have been generous offers by israel to provide palestinian arab states. you go back to 1948, they had an opportunity to have an arab state, and the arabs rejected it and went to war, so they've always cared more about eliminating the jewish state than they have about receiving their own state, and i'm not

sure that that's changed in terms of their outlook. >> who is they? > excuse me? >> i'm sorry. who is they? >> the palestinian arabs in both the west bank and gaza. >> the palestinian authority is moving towards a two-state solution. that's why i asked if you had support for a two-state sfloougs they've rhee jektsed that in the past. arafat rejected it. in 2000. probably would have put israel in situations they would have had serious security concerns. they were willing to go forward. the history of the last 75 years, israel has always been willing to take tough steps for peace and they've always had rejection on the other side and the other side has typically chosen war. that's the cycle, so i would not push israel to grant statehood to people that don't recognize their right to exist as a jewish state. >> well, the palestinian authority does, but i hear you personally do not support that. let me ask you about something

here at home when it comes to the u.s. border. there's talk right now about the need to provide more aid. you and the -- to the u.s. border. you in the past have said you would authorize the u.s. military to go to the u.s. border and shoot cartel members. you told my colleague norah o'donnell, quote, when somebody has a backpack on and they're breaking through the wall you know that's hostile intent and you have every right to take action under those circumstances. can you explain how that would work? would a soldier have to ask his commanding officer for permission before he shoots anyone wearing a backpack or is this shoot anyone with a backpack? >> well, first, cartels are invading this country and killing tens of thousands of our fellow citizens with fentanyl and this is happening in communities all across our country. we have every right and duty to fight back against that. it's typical you would have with law enforcement or military, you define rules of engagement. they have positively identified

somebody that's hostile, action or intent, and engage. we are going to engage. the days of our communities being ravaged by fentanyl are going to be over. yes, we're going to stop the invasion. yes, we're going to build the wall. we're going to do those things and deport people when they come illegally. you have to hold the cartels accountable and i'll do that as commander in chief. >> i think a lot of americans would support given how terrible fentanyl is, but in terms of the specific proposal here, how would you differentiate who is a threat? how would you say shoot people wearing backpacks? >> well, margaret, when you're don at the border, you see, like the cartels will actually have lookouts where they'll just bring people across. they will have, yes, they will be carrying -- >> how do you know what's in the backpack? >> you have to make those judgments based on intelligence and all the other things that you do. but i can tell you this, once you show the willingness to actually take this threat

seriously, you are going to change their behavior. they're eating our lunch at the border right now because we don't do anything to fight back. that's going to change on january 20th, 2025. >> governor, thank you for coming on the program today. we hope you will come back and we'll be right back. personalized financial advice from ameriprise can do more than help you reach your goals. i can make this work. it can help you reach them with confidence. no wonder more than 9 out of 10 of our clients are likely to recommend us. ameriprise financial. advice worth talking about.

- wounded warrior project has been with me every step of my journey. - they've helped me realize it's possible to rise to the top again. - it's possible to get the help i need for me and my family. - it's possible to hate pushups again.

- to feel understood. - to begin healing both inside and out. - to feel like myself again. - and now i know anything is possible. (gentle music) we go now to the chairman of the house intelligence committee, mike turner, who joins us from dayton. good morning to you. >> good morning, margaret. >> we heard the national security adviser jake sullivan say that the request to congress will be significantly higher than $2 billion in terms of aid for ukraine and for israel. what can you tell us about what is needed? >> i met with him and members of the national security council with the counterpart jim himes at the end of last week and they're talking in terms of a national security package, that is certainly the border, additional funds there for border control, the border

barrier, the wall that administration has now said needs to go forward in areas, ukraine. obviously, now that we're dealing with this crisis with israel, bolstering our support for them. also looking in the southeast as to what we might do to support taiwan. as they're putting those together so we don't piecemeal this and look at this as an overall security package it will give us an understanding to have a debate what's needed for this. >> you support bundling all those things together. do you think your fellow republicans will support that? >> at this point we're having a hard time keeping the house floor open. i don't want to have to keep trying to bring people in and convince them to vote for minor pieces of overall security bills that we know are going to have to come to the house floor over the next this year and next. >> well, to that point, because, of course, congress is paralyzed until a speaker is chosen, do you know how long it will take

before republicans can select a speaker so you can do this important business? >> no. this really is the tragedy. as you know, kevin mccarthy was fired because he had sought a bipartisan solution to keep the government open, and those who wanted to close down the government, closed down the house of representatives with the aid of democrats. this is a bad deal for america and was a bad deal for hakeem jeffries as he got all the democrats to vote with less than, you know -- the vote less than 4% of republican votes. to take down a speaker who is working for bipartisanship. it's going to be hard for them in the future when they want to work in bipartisanship when they fired the guy sitting there for doing so. >> in the past you supported jim jordan. he doesn't have the votes right now to become speaker. kevin mccarthy acknowledged as much on another network this morning. >> right. he's working to do so. kevin, when he finisherst came f conference when you're nominated to be speaker did not have enough votes, he didn't enough

votes when he got to the house floor. the coalition formed that he elected him. jordan is working to put that coalition together to get to 217. >> do the allegations that he turned a blind eye to sexual assault at ohio university cause any problems for you or the allegations that he had knowledge of donald trump's attempts on january 6th, and leading up to it, to stop the election certification? >> margaret, the allegations at ohio state, there's not one person who ever said they have knowledge of jim jordan having any knowledge. what occurred at ohio state wasn't even under jim jordan. he was not the head coach. this was not something he had responsibility for. those making accusations are making, you know, just presumptions he would have had to have known. there's no one, mind you this was years ago no one who has come forward at all ever and said there was actual knowledge on jim jordan's part. he condemns what occurred there. with respect to donald trump, you know, that's a mess that's going to continue going on on the issue of january 6th and

americans will be able to have that debate as we go forward in this next election cycle. >> so no pause on your part for jim jordan. do you think that there is an alternate here where republicans work with democrats to find a mutually acceptable speaker? >> you know, that would not be my preference since hakeem jeffries walked away from the opportunity to do that when kevin mccarthy was on the floor. the vote on the floor was should the speaker, kevin mccarthy, be removed? and every democrat, 208 of them, voted to remove kevin mccarthy. so at this point, i would prefer there to be, you know, republican solution because when they rejected bipartisanship it's kind of hard to go back to it. but we have a lot of people on the bench. i think jim jordan will be an excellent speaker, able to get to 217. if not we have other leaders in the house and certainly if there is a need, if the radical, you

know, almost just handful of people in the republican side make it unable -- make us unable to be able to return to general work on the house i think, obviously, a deal will have to be done. >> wow. i want to also ask you about a comment you made on this program recently talking about classified documents, mishandled by the current president, and you said that when it came to biden and trump, they're both equally egregious with equal classification issues. this past week, president biden was interviewed by special council robert hur. will there be legal consequences? will your committee do anything to act on this? i mean, what exactly do you mean equally egregious? >> well, when you look at the documents, both the classification level and the subject matter, both sides, trump and biden's documents, if they had been released in the public or gotten into the hands of nefarious parties, would it be damaging to the national security. when i look at those documents,

documents on both sides, equally egregious, would have enough consequences to our means, methods, techniques and allies. in this instance, president biden the same consequence they pursue with president trump. the actions are the same. >> indictment? >> you're getting leak after leak, after leak on the trump documents. you're hearing nothing on the biden documents. you're continuing to see the inequality out of the justice department as there's silence on the other side with respect to biden's -- by the way, he was a serial classified document hoarder. i reviewed documents from all the time that he's been in government. this really is a very serious breach by president biden. >> just to be clear here, though r you saying that president biden had top secret and tsfci classification level documents in his personal home? >> that's public already. i'm not confirming something that people don't already know.

that is correct. >> okay. so i think you're saying that he should be indicted when you say treated the same? >> they need to be treated exactly the same. they're continuing their investigation with president biden. i don't think president biden in the end has been found to violate the law and from what i've seen he has, he should be treated any differently than donald trump. why would he? just because he's president or he's a democrat? that's how the department of justice has been acting. they need to be treated the same. >> have you seen evidence of a crime? it sounds like that's what you are saying? >> i have seen evidence of the fact that classified documents of some of the highest levels have been mishandled by president biden, yes. >> mike turner, we will stay tuned to watch what happens with your party in the coming days and stay in touch. we'll be back in a moment.

retired general frank mckenzie last served as commander of the u.s. central command and oversaw operations in the middle east, central asia parks of south asia and joins us from tampa, florida. good morning to you, general. >> good morning, margaret. >> we want to get your perspective as to the very dynamic situation on the ground.

earlier today when i spoke with jake sullivan the national security adviser, he said there was no specific change in intelligence that led the u.s. to send that second aircraft carrier to the eastern mediterranean, but he said there is a real risk of the state of iran getting involved. how do you see that threat right now? >> so i think the second carrier is designed to send a strong message to iran that we have the -- that they're not going to be able to act with malice to get into this conflict. the second carrier does, along with the ships associated with both of those big deck carriers, it gives ballistic missile defense capability to israel should iran elect to fire their large stable ballistic missiles towards israel, we'll be able to assist israel in intercepting them that would allow israel to conduct other tasks. largely, it increases flexibility and options for our

president should he need to do something in the region. >> so a u.s. official told our david martin this morning that a marine expeditionary unit which had been conducting an exercise in evacuate, is back on board a ship in the red sea waiting to hear about movement into the eastern mediterranean. does that signify anything more to you? >> i think it's all part of the same thing. what we want to do is send a strong signal, i think, to iran, and to lebanese hezbollah particularly in lebanon, now is not the time to enter this conflict. the israelis have the capabilities to conduct their gaza operation, but i think what a what we're trying to do is prevent the conflict from widening and all these actions are designed to establish that. >> so give us a sense here, you know, israel is very advanced military. they have a lot of technology, they have a lot of surveillance power, but then they just had this massive intelligence failure. as they are about to launch this

ground invasion, what are the things that are of concern to you about how this is going to play out? >>well, first, margaret, when we go back and look what happened in the run up to the attacks we're going to find there were indicators there. you look back in hindsight and can find things that were evident and you should have seen. that will probably humble the intel guys a little bit going into gaza. the gaza problem is an extremely difficult urban environment. urban fighting is fighting where technology is -- the ability of a technologically advanced force begins to be limited because you're in very close quarters with a potential enemy, fighting on the ground, fighting below the ground in sewers and the tunnel system that hamas has erected and fighting low-level altitude. israel has air supremacy over gaza but we should expect hamas to try to fly droens even as the

israelis fly their highly capable drones. it's going to be a bloody, tough, ugly fight and going to come down to an infantry fight. young men and women at very close quarters. >> and israel doesn't have a lot of recent experience in that kind of fighting. the u.s. does in iraq, certainly in fallujah, the marines did. is that the kind of advice that you think the u.s. military is providing to the israeli military right now, how do you that urban warfare? >> i'm sure it is. although the israelis have done a great deal of thinking ate it. their main battle tank is a tank that is optimized for urban warfare. engine in front which not a lot of tanks in the world do. has a true compartment for carrying troops in back. the israelis have given this a lot of thought and i have high regard for the idf and their ability to prosecute this. we need to realize it's going to be an ugly affair, it's going to drag on probably longer than people want. israel is going to go to great

lengths to avoid collateral civilian casualties. hamas is going to do go to great lengths to kill civilians and place them in harm's way to profit in the information atmosphere. >> israel's defense minister said israel won't shoot civilians on purpose but the camouflage of the terrorist is the civilian population. how difficult is it going to be to avoid large-scale civilian casualties? that is going to put a lot of pressure on the world to get israel to be very cautious in the coming weeks? >> margaret, you're right. i believe that israel will go to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties. the fact of the matter is, though, there are going to be civilian crash casualties because hamas is going to create circumstances, by basing their rockets in schools and mosques and hospitals and other locations where civilians are gathered, they're going to create every opportunity for civilian casualties to occur. israel is going to have to work

very hard at this and they're not going to be perfect. mistakes are certainly going to be made and as it tragic to predict it but civilians are going to die. there's a clear distinction between the two actors here. israel will seek to minimize those casualties and hamas is not going to seek to minimize those casualties. there's no sense of equivalence in this fight. >> the u.s. has troops in syria and iraq. what would draw the united states into it? >> i think we would seek to stay out of it as best we could. i think we have undoubtedly sent messages at the diplomatic level about the force protection and the security of our forces in iraq and syria and i believe moving the carrier into the region sends a very strong signal. this is ample evidence that iran respects the flow of combat force into the theater. it does affect their decision calculus. as iran's calculus is affected so is lebanese hezbollah's affected. >> i want to ask you about

something that former president trump said on wednesday. he said in regard to the drone strike that took out has sam soul manny head of the iranian revolutionary guard, he said israel pulled out of the operation and, quote, bibi netanyahu let us down and that did israel pull out and let america down? >> margaret, i am unable to know of any communication, of course, between president trump and prime minister netanyahu. but i can tell you that this was a u.s. operation. >> that would mean that's not accurate? >> that would mean that this was a u.s. operation. it involved only u.s. forces in the operational decision and execution of the mission. >> understood. you said that iran is the most significant threat to peace in the region. iran's supreme leader says his country did not play a role in the hamas attack on israel. do you buy that?

>> i believe it's likely they did not know the date or time of this particular attack, but iran, by supporting hamas, with hundreds of millions of dollars through the years, by providing them with kwaemt, providing them with training, and by supporting their ideology, is certainly the moral author of this attack even if they didn't know the exact time of this particular attack. >> do you think this will engage the state of iran in this fight eventually? >> i think wear going to try very hard to keep iran out of it, and i think the actions the administration have taken are all good to that end. i think, again, iran respects power, flowing power back into the region and i think it will have an effect on them. >> general mckenzie, thank you for your insights. we'll be right back. and i am the owner at isla veterinary boutique hospital. i was 5...6 years of age and i knew i was going to be a vet. once alexandra called me to let me know that bank of america had approved my loan...

it was important to me. we not only just provide the financing piece, we do everything that we can to surround them with the right people. all you need is a perfect, amazing team that will guide you through the right steps to be successful. and that's what bank of america was for me. this is american infrastructure. megawatts of power, rails and open road, and essential services of every kind. all running on countless invisible networks, making it a prime target for cyberattacks. but the same ai-powered security that protects all of google also defends the systems running america's infrastructure. for these services. for the 336 million of us living here. ♪

that's it for us today. thank you all for watching. until next week, for "face the

nation," i'm margaret brennan.

>> announcer: this is the "cbs overnight news." good evening and thanks for joining us tonight. i'm jericka du