News

Transcript: House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,” Jan. 5, 2025

The next is the total transcript of an interview with Home Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” that aired on Jan. 5, 2025.

MARGARET BRENNAN: And we’re joined by Speaker Emerita, Nancy Pelosi. It is so good to see you right here in particular person.

SPEAKER EMERITA NANCY PELOSI: My pleasure to be right here. Thanks a lot.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You realize, tomorrow morning on the Capitol you and different members of Congress can be there to certify the election win in 2024 of Donald Trump. There’s an unprecedented degree of safety, partly due to what occurred 4 years in the past with the violent assault by his supporters to vary the result of the final election. Why do you assume that so many members of the American public determined that was not disqualifying when it got here to reelecting him president?

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: Effectively it- once more, thanks for the chance to speak about this as a result of the denial that they’d in regards to the election, which is what they have been performing upon, and the denial they’ve had since then about what occurred on Jan- January 6 is simply appalling. They wish to revise historical past. They usually just- they simply cannot. However I am so glad that they’ve elevated safety and I am hoping that this can be very peaceable because- the general public is aware of it. Now to your query, I believe- it is not, I- I would not say that the American individuals disregarded this. They only had a special view as to what was of their curiosity, economically and the remaining. So I do not- I do not name this a disregard of January 6. I simply name it one thing that they noticed of their curiosity economically.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Even simply final evening at Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump was screening a documentary in regards to the 2020 election, claiming his win and attempting to speak in regards to the authorized challenges he had. There appears to be a continued effort to say that he received in 2020.

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: It is actually unhappy. It actually is unhappy. And I do not know in regards to the movie that he had and the remaining, nevertheless it’s- it is nearly sick that he could be pondering that in 2020. He is received the election now, that can be clear- that can be clear, and tomorrow he can be clearly- we can be accepting the outcomes of the Electoral Faculty. So he needs to be triumphant about that. However to be nonetheless attempting to struggle a struggle that he- he is aware of he misplaced is- is actually unhappy.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You realize, the President-elect has mentioned that within the first 9 minutes of his new time period, he’ll pardon lots of those that participated in January 6. He mentioned he’ll have a look at it on a case-by-case foundation, however in wanting again at what occurred 4 years in the past, there are recordings, there’s video proof of what occurred. That is private for you, a few of these rioters in your workplace. chanting your identify. One among them, one of many defendants: “We have been searching for Nancy to shoot her within the friggin mind, however we did not discover her.” For you, that is private. So if you hear about pardons, do you assume the non-violent attackers should be pardoned?

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: The non-violent- I believe that is a violent attacker, with the intent–

MARGARET BRENNAN: – the violence itself.

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: Yeah–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –The violent language, you assume.

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: The violent language- sure, the intention. And naturally, the intention to assault the Vice President of america. Now it did not finish that day. As you already know, he known as out to those individuals to proceed their violence, my husband being a sufferer of all of that, and it still- he nonetheless has accidents from that assault. So it simply goes on and on. It is not one thing that occurs after which it is over. No, as soon as you might be attacked, you’ve got penalties that proceed. So I do not- it is actually an odd one who’s going to be President of america, who thinks that it is okay to pardon people who find themselves engaged in an assault. However let’s- you already know, let’s do that. Let’s simply say okay to the American individuals. That is what that is about. Don’t be conned by the denial of the election of 2020 and- why would he be saying that? However he- however he’s. After which on prime of that, the denial of what occurred on January 6.

MARGARET BRENNAN: However a few of the 1600 defendants right here have been actually solely charged with trespassing. And if you have a look at the profiles, College of Chicago did a examine, half of those that broke into the Capitol have been white collar staff. They have been small enterprise homeowners. Did not essentially have a felony document. While you have a look at that profile, you mentioned intention. It- it was the intention itself, you assume, that must be thought-about extra so than the crime. You realize that- that it casts the crime itself of trespassing in a special gentle for you.

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: Effectively the President mentioned he would go on a case-by-case foundation. So I assume that- that a few of these individuals could not have engaged within the violent actions that a few of the others did. Have a look at this lovely Capitol, the dome constructed by Lincoln. Underneath Lincoln’s management in the course of the Civil Struggle, they mentioned, do not construct the dome. It takes an excessive amount of metal and particular person energy, manpower, they mentioned, from the warfare effort. And he mentioned, no, I’ve to point out the resilience of America. After which beneath that dome you noticed, you noticed flags, the flags that, you already know, simply horrible flags beneath the dome of Lincoln. And so it was a tragedy, and we can’t be in denial about what it was. If the President goes to go on a case by case foundation, I hope he does, after which possibly–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –Trespassers, you’ll be snug with pardoning?

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: Effectively, simply is determined by how they outline what that’s. However the- however I do know that a few of that encouragement after which the comply with up that- that so many individuals have been threatened, together with me and- and to my house, searching for me and discovering my husband, and as I say, who nonetheless suffers from head accidents from- on that day. So these items do not simply occur and go away when you’ve got a head damage. However anyway to- to- to see the menace to so many individuals in elective workplace, now going past me, however so many individuals in elective workplace, it should not be a menace to your loved ones that you’ve chosen to do public service.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You wrote in your e-book about that 2022 assault in your husband, and also you mentioned your daughter advised you [if] she had recognized what you have been signing up for, she would by no means have given you her blessing to run for workplace within the first place. Do you assume that this menace of home violent extremism is having a chilling impact on new expertise and- and anybody operating for workplace?

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: Effectively, I actually hope not. However over time, after I was encouraging individuals to run for workplace, particularly girls, they might say, we might by no means take the abuse that you just take, and that was actually simply abuse. It wasn’t bodily, it was criticism and the remainder of that, and that we do not need our youngsters subjected to that. And sure, I do assume it can have a destructive influence on individuals operating for public workplace. Simply- you already know, in different phrases, in the event you’re- in the event you’re a mother, they usually go after you as a- as a mother, and your youngster comes house crying from college as a result of any person mentioned a destructive factor, as a result of they noticed it on TV, that the opposite aspect mentioned one thing dangerous about you, you may not run for workplace.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So that you assume it can discourage significantly girls—

NANCY PELOSI: Notably girls.

MARGARET BRENNAN: —from operating?

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: Yeah, I do. I imply, I do know that it has. However I hope that it’s going to not, that we’ll have shine a brilliant gentle on this and simply say, that is unacceptable. That is unacceptable. See, for girls, they always- they always- girls are recognized to be extra, let’s say, moral, than males. And so after they go after girls candidates, they go after their ethics. They usually’ll say this, that and the opposite factor. After which the kid comes house from college crying as a result of any person mentioned a nasty factor about mother on TV. And no-one- no one desires that. So hopefully the intense gentle shining on that can reduce- cut back that. However I believe that girls have confirmed that they are- are extra moral, and that they- they’re, nicely, possibly they are not extra moral, they’re all moral, however that they can- then stand up to that criticism.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Effectively, you- in the course of the first Trump presidency, as speaker, you took very public stance to problem Donald Trump when he was president. Democrats now are within the minority on this new congress. Tom Suozzi from New York not too long ago mentioned, it might be a mistake for Democrats to reflexively oppose Trump’s concepts and model themselves a “nationwide resistance motion.” This can be a Democrat who received in a Trump district, and he is warning fellow Democrats. Do you agree resistance is a nasty technique this time?

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: Effectively I- let me simply say, traditionally, after I grew to become speaker, it was after I ran with a Republican president, George Bush, and we opposed his insurance policies. He needed to denationalise Social Safety. And so we went in opposition to that, and we received. After which after I received once more as speaker, George- Donald Trump was president, and we ran in opposition to him by saying, we’ll save the Inexpensive Care Act. That is- that is it. We have been saving Social Safety at first. Now we’re saving the Inexpensive Care Act. So we received the bulk, sure, by disagreeing on sure factors. That does not imply you disagree on each difficulty, no. But it surely does imply that you just defend the values that carry you to Congress, the imaginative and prescient that you’ve about well being care, the values that you’ve about well being care, once more, as a result of well being care is a matter that’s so essential as a result of well being care value are so excessive that- that it impacts whether or not you possibly can have housing, whether or not you possibly can have meals on the desk, and the remaining. And so—

MARGARET BRENNAN: So you’ll encourage Democrats to work with Donald Trump on a problem like well being care?

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: I do not know that he desires to be on well being care.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Are there alternatives to work with him on something?

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: No- on different points. No. On well being care, no. However no, simply be- nicely, we both- with George Bush on many points, and- a number of points, let me say, and no, I do not- I do not say that we should always work with him on well being care. I am saying we’re on the market to guard the Inexpensive Care Act. He mentioned, Obamacare sucks. Now that is not one thing we wish to work with, that Obamacare sucks. So we wish to be on the market to save lots of the Inexpensive Care Act, and acknowledge that lowering the price of well being care can allow individuals to have housing, have meals on the desk and the remaining. And that is- there are research that present the connection between means to have housing and meals when you’ve got good, reasonably priced care, well being care.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Speaker Emerita, thanks to your time at present.

SPEAKER EMERITA PELOSI: Thanks. My pleasure to be with you. Thanks.

MARGARET BRENNAN: And we’ll be proper again with much more “Face the Nation.” Stick with us.

News

Delta dumped jet fuel on schoolkids, agrees to $79-million settlement

Delta Air Lines has agreed to pay $79 million for dumping 15,000 gallons of jet fuel onto a community in southeastern Los Angeles County five years ago, drenching children playing at a school, to settle a federal lawsuit by local residents.

On Jan. 20, 2020, Delta Flight 89 took off from Los Angeles International Airport en route to Shanghai with 149 passengers for what is typically a 13-hour nonstop flight.

That voyage, however, lasted only 25 minutes due to a plane malfunction, forcing the pilot to turn the aircraft around over the Santa Monica Bay and head back toward the airport.

In the lawsuit settlement, Delta said the plane lost thrust shortly after takeoff. The plane couldn’t land, however, because it was already over the maximum landing weight of 160,000 pounds. Flights landing at LAX typically approach the airport from an inland route and take off over the ocean.

En route back to the airport, the plane’s pilots dumped thousands of gallons of jet fuel over Cudahy and multiple schools.

Dozens of children, and 40 people overall, from Park Avenue Elementary School in Cudahy were hit by the fuel and treated by medical personnel.

Other schools, including Pioneer High School in Whittier, also claimed students were hit with the jet fuel.

Delta noted in court documents that it agreed to the settlement “without any admission of liability” to avoid the uncertainty and expenses of a trial and “to eliminate the distraction and other burdens this litigation has caused to Delta’s business.”

The lawsuit was filed by two Cudahy couples and homeowners, Frankie Lomas and Roxanda Yancor, and Jose and Maria Alvarado.

The settlement totals $78.8 million, which translates into $50.6 million for victims after attorneys’ fees and other court costs. The fund will be sliced into thirds, with two-thirds, or about $33.9 million, set aside for property owners, and one-third, or about $16.7 million, for residents.

At bare minimum, a property owner will receive $888.82 per claim, while a resident will receive $104.34, according to court documents.

The estimated numbers of those who were affected are listed in the lawsuit as 160,000 residents and 38,000 properties.

Calls to the plaintiff’s attorney and Delta Air Lines were not immediately returned.

News

What We Know About the Minneapolis Catholic School Shooting

Investigators were still searching for a motive in the shooting, which left two children dead at Annunciation Catholic Church in Minneapolis.

News

CDC Director Susan Monarez refuses to step down, arguing only President Trump can fire her

Susan Monarez, the director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is being ousted from her role less than a month after the Senate confirmed her to lead the public health agency, the White House confirmed to CBS News.

The Department of Health and Human Services announced in an X post Wednesday that Monarez no longer leads the CDC. Reports on her ouster were immediately followed by a dispute between the administration and her attorneys regarding whether she had been legally fired, with lawyers for Monarez arguing she’s still in charge of the CDC and only President Trump can fire her.

It’s not clear why Monarez was removed from the job — but several other top CDC officials resigned Wednesday, often citing disagreements with the Trump administration over its vaccine policy, budgets cuts to the agency, and what one described as the “weaponization of public health.”

Prominent D.C.-based attorney Mark Zaid said in a statement that Monarez “has neither resigned nor received notification from the White House that she was fired.” He said that he and lawyer Abbe Lowell are representing Monarez.

Zaid alleged that Monarez was “targeted” because she “refused to rubber-stamp unscientific, reckless directives and fire dedicated public health experts.”

White House spokesman Kush Desai alleged in response that Monarez was terminated because she “refused to resign despite informing HHS leadership of her intent to do so.”

“As her attorney’s statement makes abundantly clear, Susan Monarez is not aligned with the President’s agenda of Making America Healthy Again,” Desai said in response to Zaid’s initial statement.

Hours later, Zaid and Lowell said Monarez was told of her firing Wednesday night by a “White House staffer in the personnel office.” In a statement to CBS News, they called the move “legally deficient” and argued that she remains the leader of the CDC because, as a presidential appointee, “only the president himself can fire her.”

On Monday, Monarez had to cancel an agency-wide meeting because she had been summoned to Washington, D.C., according to CDC officials.

In its X post, HHS thanked Monarez “for her dedicated service for the American people,” and said Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “has full confidence in his team” at the CDC.

At least three other senior CDC leaders have resigned from the agency, according to resignation emails obtained by CBS News.

Daniel Jernigan, who led the CDC’s National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, told colleagues he was leaving due to “the current context in the Department.” The CDC’s Chief Medical Officer Debra Houry and the head of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Demetre Daskalakis, also announced their departures.

Houry’s message to CDC staffers warned about the “rise of misinformation” about vaccines. She also argued planned cuts to the agency’s budget will hurt the CDC.

“For the good of the nation and the world, the science at CDC should never be censored or subject to political pauses or interpretations,” wrote Houry, who worked at the CDC for over a decade. “Vaccines save lives—this is an indisputable, well-established, scientific fact.”

Daskalakis said in a note to CDC staff: “I am not able to serve in this role any longer because of the ongoing weaponizing of public health.”

Daskalakis also posted on X a resignation letter addressed to Houry, in which he criticized recent changes to vaccine recommendations and warned of an “intentional eroding of trust in low-risk vaccines.” He also said Kennedy and his staff’s views “challenge my ability to continue in my current role at the agency.”

“Having worked in local and national public health for years, I have never experienced such radical non-transparency, nor have I seen such unskilled manipulation of data to achieve a political end rather than the good of the American people,” Daskalakis wrote.

Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, who serves on the Senate health committee, reacted to Monarez’s ouster by calling for Kennedy to be fired, calling him “a dangerous man who is determined to abuse his authority to act on truly terrifying conspiracy theories and disinformation.”

“If there are any adults left in the White House, it’s well past time they face reality and fire RFK Jr,” Murray said in a statement.

CDC departures follow months of upheaval

The sudden departures come at a tumultuous time for the public health agency. Staff are still reeling from an early August shooting outside the CDC’s Atlanta headquarters by a gunman who police said was upset about COVID-19 vaccines.

Kennedy — a longtime vaccine skeptic — also fired every member of an independent CDC panel tasked with making vaccine recommendations. During Kennedy’s tenure, HHS has made other moves on vaccines that have troubled public health and infectious disease experts. Kennedy halted contracts for mRNA vaccine research earlier this month, and the Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday approved updated COVID-19 vaccines for seniors and people with health conditions, but not for healthy adults and children.

Meanwhile, the CDC faced hundreds of layoffs this year.

There has been some friction between Monarez and Kennedy over COVID-19 vaccines and the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel, CDC officials told CBS News. Monarez has publicly said that vaccines “save lives.” The Trump administration was also unhappy with the way she had talked about the Atlanta shooting and stopped her from publishing an op-ed about the incident, the officials said.

Mr. Trump nominated Monarez to lead the CDC in late March, calling her a “dedicated public servant” who could repair what he called a loss of public confidence in the CDC “due to political bias and disastrous mismanagement.” Monarez was confirmed by the Senate in a party-line vote in late July, after previously serving as the agency’s acting head starting in January.

She was nominated to lead the agency after Mr. Trump pulled his initial pick for the job, former Florida Rep. Dave Weldon, a physician who was controversial in part due to his past skepticism of vaccines. In private meetings with Weldon, some Republican senators and their staffers grew concerned that he seemed unfamiliar with the CDC’s operations, CBS News reported at the time.

Monarez holds a Ph.D. in microbiology and immunology, though unlike most prior CDC directors, she is not a medical doctor. She previously served as deputy director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health, a federal agency that backs advanced medical research. She also worked in the Obama-era White House’s science and technology office and the Department of Homeland Security during Mr. Trump’s first term.

During her Senate confirmation hearing, Monarez faced a number of questions about vaccine recommendations. Kennedy has pushed a discredited theory linking routine childhood shots to autism, but during her hearing, Monarez refuted that view and said she has “not seen a causal link between vaccines and autism.”

“Vaccines absolutely save lives, and if I’m confirmed as CDC director, I commit to making sure we continue to prioritize vaccine availability,” Monarez told lawmakers.

Olivia Rinaldi

Olivia Rinaldi is a White House reporter at CBS News. She covered President Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign and was previously an associate producer for “CBS Evening News with Norah O’Donnell” and a broadcast associate for “Face the Nation.” She is based in Washington, D.C.