We regret to inform you that CBS’s Margaret Brennan is at it again. Brennan attempted to chastise Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) over his most recent op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, with its language evocative of the 2020 New York Times op-ed that triggered a newsroom revolt. 

As you can see from watching the exchange, Cotton was ready:

WATCH: Sen. Tom Cotton SHUTS DOWN Margaret Brennan's hectoring over the "language" of his WSJ op-ed pic.twitter.com/c33NUQkq1l

— Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) June 15, 2025

MARGARET BRENNAN: I also want to ask you about the enforcement to date. As you know, there has been outcry. We've seen protests across the country because of the enforcement policies. You wrote an op-ed supporting President Trump's decision to send in federalized National Guard troops and active-duty Marines to California. You referred to it as the threat from the radical left , an overwhelming show of force to end the riots, and talked about communities being terrorized. Given the amount of tension in the country right now, is that really the language to use?

TOM COTTON: Yes, when you see left wing street militias who are throwing bricks and frozen water bottles at police officers and shooting them with fireworks, and unfortunately, you have mayors and governors in some places that won't allow police to maintain order, the next step is to call in the National Guard, and if the governor won't call on the National Guard, then the President has to federalize them. We always hope that the local police are allowed to do their job and have sufficient numbers to do their job to maintain order and protect innocent life and property. But if they can't, or they're not allowed to, the National Guard has to be on scene to restore civil order.

BRENNAN: LAPD says they were handling when things turned violent, yesterday, they fired rubber bullets, but they said they had it under control.

COTTON: The LA police chief said last weekend that his forces were overwhelmed, and they couldn't manage the situation.

BRENNAN: Senator Cotton, thank you very much for your time today.

At a moment when leftwing violence is at a crescendo, with violent rent-a-mobs descending upon our major cities under the guise of ICE protests and the very real violence of deranged shooters such as Luigi Mangione, it is telling that Brennan chooses to question Cotton’s language in calling for order to be restored and for the law to be enforced. Of course, you never hear elite Acela Media questioning the left’s deranged language. 

Cotton calmly took Brennan to task, reminding her of the mob violence that broke out in Los Angeles and other cities that was mostly directed at law enforcement. Brennan’s attempted pushback was swiftly rebutted.

The exchange proves, more than anything else, that the Acela Media have learned nothing from the violence of 2020. Blinded by their desire to “resist” President Trump and his policies, they persist in selling “fiery but mostly peaceful” to their ever-dwindling viewership. Never mind how ridiculous or detached from reality it makes them look, as Tom Cotton demonstrated here.

Click “expand” to view the full transcript of the aforementioned interview, as aired on CBS Face the Nation on Sunday, June 15th, 2025:

MARGARET BRENNAN: And we're joined now in Washington by Senator Tom Cotton, who is the chairman of the Intelligence Committee. Good morning and Happy Father's Day to you. 

TOM COTTON: Thank you, Margaret. 

BRENNAN: So, I know you are staying on top of all these events. When it comes to what President Trump has said publicly, he seems to be indicating not just that the U.S. had nothing to do with the attack on Iran, but he's saying this is not America's fight, unless Iran hits the U.S. Should it be such a bright line?

COTTON: Well, what the President said in his overnight post was a clear message to the Ayatollahs, that if you hit America in any way, whether our troops or our citizens or our ships, for instance, then you're going to feel the full force and strength of the US military in a way no one's ever seen. That's a clear deterrent message, setting aside the threat that the nuclear program poses to Israel and to the United States, because let's remember, the Iranian regime has been terrorizing Americans. It's killed thousands of Americans. It's taken them hostage. It still chants "death to America," it's building missiles that can strike not just our troops or our friends in the region, but soon enough here in the United States as well. And that's why President Trump has been consistent for his 10 years in political life that we cannot allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. We cannot allow them to have a path to a nuclear weapon with uranium enrichment. That's the deal that he was trying to negotiate for the last two months. But as he said early last week, Iran was simply too stubborn. They weren't willing to come to the table and negotiate. And I have to disagree with the reporter who said that Israel strikes in Iran ended those negotiations. It was Iran's- Iran's stubbornness that ended them. President Trump was clear about that, and he is still clear that there is time if they want to come back to negotiate an end to the uranium enrichment program, that he would accept that. But he's given them chance after chance, as he said. 

BRENNAN: But in terms of the line, he's drawing on military force, should the U.S. involvement be purely defensive and deterrent, or should the U.S. be willing to be engaged in these military operations?

COTTON: Well, I don't think he's drawn that line. He's been very clear that all options remain on the table to defend our own people, to support Israel--

BRENNAN: -- He hasn't said that--  

COTTON: But he- well, he said that for 10 years, and he said it for months leading up to this moment. He said that Iran can make a deal and live happily without death or there will be bombing. So, I think he's appropriately kept all options on the table. He made clear in the early days of this conflict, on Thursday night and Friday morning, that we back Israel to the hilt. There's almost 700,000 Americans in Israel at any time. So of course, we're going to protect Israel, and that we have the best military technology in the world. And he said that he has proudly provided Israel with those weapons, both in his first term and in this term as well. So, we back Israel to the hilt all the way. But he's appropriately keeping all options on the table.

BRENNAN: But he's emphasizing again and again, this isn't us. This isn't America. This isn't an American operation.

COTTON: So far in this operation, we have not been involved in offensive strikes. We've been involved in other ways, through our provision of Israel with weapons over the years, or our defense of Israel and its citizens and our citizens in Israel. Now he has said his objective remains the same, which is Iran's nuclear disarmament, and he has said that that can happen still through a deal, I don't think--

BRENNAN: --He prefers diplomacy. 

COTTON: And he would like Iran to come back to the table. I think now that Iran sees that Israel and America mean business and surrender its enrichment capabilities voluntarily. If that doesn't happen, though, I think the strikes are going to continue. 

BRENNAN: But to the point, if it's really about destroying the nuclear program that Iran has, you know this very well, that there's this underground facility at Fordow, very deep, under a mountain. It's long been assessed that only the U.S. has the capability with a bunker buster bomb to take it out. Should the United States offer that kind of massive ordnance penetrator to Israel to finish the job?

COTTON: Well, I'm not going to speculate about the methods that the United States or Israel might use--

BRENNAN: --But should they?--  

COTTON: --to protect our own interests. I'll simply say this, it is, as you say, widely known that Israel does not have heavy bombers. It doesn't have those 30,000 pound penetrating munitions. But as we saw with Hezbollah last fall, as we saw in Iran on Thursday night, when the Mossad had infiltrated officers and agents and manufactured drones in Iran, Israel has more than a few tricks up their sleeve, and I wouldn't be surprised if Israel has other cards yet to play.

BRENNAN: So, when it comes to differences in intelligence assessments, the U.S. intelligence that was made public in March said at the time the U.S. does not assess Iran's building a nuclear weapon, and that the supreme leader has not reauthorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended back in 2003. Was there more recent US intel sharing or intel indicating that there was some kind of sprint for a bomb? Because that seems a very different assessment from what Israel's claiming.

COTTON: Well, unfortunately, Iran enriched a lot of the uranium to near weapons-grade over the four years of the Biden administration--

BRENNAN: --But that's not weaponization, you know that--

COTTON: -- They are- they are close to having enough pure weapons-grade uranium for several weapons. Now that's not the only step to having a weapon. You also have to have the weapon design. We've seen indications that Iran is once again exploring those weapon designs. And then if you want to use a missile, obviously you have to marry up the warhead to the missile. But Iran has other delivery methods as well, through terrorist proxies. So I think that's one of the reasons why both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu thought we- things that were coming to a head. A second reason is Iran is rapidly producing ballistic missiles, both medium range to target Israel, and short range to target our troops, and they add substantially to those stockpiles every single month. And at a time when Iran is both continuing its work on its nuclear program and trying to rebuild its offensive missile capacity, that the window to actually stop Iran from entering that zone of immunity was rapidly closing.

BRENNAN: But why Thursday night? 

COTTON: Well, as President- 

BRENNAN: -- There seems to be a difference in this--

COTTON: --Well as President--

BRENNAN: --idea of a sprint.

COTTON: Well, as President Trump said on Friday morning that he had given Iran 60 days to make a deal. That was day 61--

BRENNAN: --And he scheduled talks on day 63 you know that. I mean, this was a, this wasn't really a hard deadline.

COTTON: He gave them 60 days. On day 61 the strikes began. 

BRENNAN: Day 63, Steve Witkoff wanted to meet with him. But if this was a covert race to weaponize, though it- it raises questions here, because it appears President Trump's offer is to negotiate with the existing regime that is in place in Iran. Do you support a deal with the existing regime in Iran to stay in place? Do you support his push for diplomacy?

COTTON: President Trump has always said his goal is to end Iran's nuclear weapons program, which means the surrender of its uranium enrichment capability--

BRENNAN: -- Right. This would be offering them a lifeline, wouldn't it? 

COTTON: Well, it would be protecting our interests and securing Israel's interests as well on Iran not having a nuclear weapon. We've seen what happens when they don't have nuclear weapons. They're deliberately targeting civilian areas in Israel. We've seen their campaign of terror against Americans over the decades. That's why we can't allow them to have a nuclear weapon. And presidents have said for 20 years, presidents have said that. George Bush said it didn't act on it, Barack Obama and Joe Biden, frankly, aided and abetted Iran's nuclear program. Only Donald Trump has drawn that line and is willing to enforce that line. 

BRENNAN: But he's not enforcing that line. It is Israel that's bombing. As you just said, the United States is not involved in these offensive operations-- 

COTTON: -- But in Israel, we are helping- we're--   

BRENNAN: -- Do you- but do you share the President's assessment that the way to finish this is through negotiating with the existing regime that the Israelis have called for the Iranian people to rise up against?

COTTON: I think there's multiple ways to eliminate Iran's enrichment capability. They are today what they were Thursday morning, before these strikes started. As the President has said repeatedly, they can make a deal, or there's going to be bombing.

BRENNAN: I want to move to some domestic issues, but very quickly, I know in the past, you have said that former officials who have a direct threat against them from Iran should continue to receive security. President Trump pulled it. Should they get it now?

COTTON: We should probably revisit the threat that all persons face. Remember, President Trump faced assassination threats from Iran as well. In this moment of tension to ensure that no one who worked for President Trump in the first term or works for him now could be the target of Iranian agents.

BRENNAN: And that security detail was pulled by the president himself. On immigration, the Trump administration has decided to pull back its policy a little bit. They are pausing raids on farms, hotels and restaurants. Arkansas has a lot of agricultural business in your state. Do you support this decision?

COTTON: I think we need to have robust worksite enforcement. I don't think ICE is going to show up at one or two restaurants where they have an illegal migrant working. Usually, it's unscrupulous employers who have large numbers of illegal immigrants working in their work sites. And whatever work site it is, whatever industry it is, ICE has to be able to go and enforce our immigration laws and remove illegal immigrants. 

BRENNAN: But the President has pulled back from that. That was the change in policy last week when it came to farms, in particular. 

COTTON: I don't think we should pull back on any kind of enforcement at all. I think worksite enforcement in all industries needs to be able to move forward. And I think ICE agents on the front lines need the support of political leadership.

BRENNAN: You would want more enforcement, including in manufacturing, including in construction, which could impact the economy? 

COTTON: We should not declare any industry or any work site that uses large numbers of illegal immigrants off-limits for enforcement of federal law. 

BRENNAN: I also want to ask you about the enforcement to date. As you know, there has been outcry. We've seen protests across the country because of the enforcement policies. You wrote an op-ed supporting President Trump's decision to send in federalized National Guard troops and active-duty Marines to California. You referred to it as the threat from the radical left , an overwhelming show of force to end the riots, and talked about communities being terrorized. Given the amount of tension in the country right now, is that really the language to use?

COTTON: Yes, when you see left wing street militias who are throwing bricks and frozen water bottles at police officers and shooting them with fireworks, and unfortunately, you have mayors and governors in some places that won't allow police to maintain order, the next step is to call in the National Guard, and if the governor won't call on the National Guard, then the President has to federalize them. We always hope that the local police are allowed to do their job and have sufficient numbers to do their job to maintain order and protect innocent life and property. But if they can't, or they're not allowed to, the National Guard has to be on scene to restore civil order.

BRENNAN: LAPD says they were handling when things turned violent, yesterday, they fired rubber bullets, but they said they had it under control.

COTTON: The LA police chief said last weekend that his forces were overwhelmed, and they couldn't manage the situation.

BRENNAN: Senator Cotton, thank you very much for your time today. Face the Nation will be back in a minute, so stay with us.