Skip to main content

Transcript: Rep. Mike Turner on ‘Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan,’ Aug. 2, 2026

▶ Watch Video: GOP Rep. Mike Turner: “The administration could be sharing more with Congress” on Iran

The following is the transcript of an interview with Republican Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on Aug. 2, 2026.


MARGARET BRENNAN 

And we’re back with Ohio Republican congressman Mike Turner. He joins us this morning from Dayton. Good morning to you.

REP MIKE TURNER

Good morning, Margaret.

MARGARET BRENNAN 

You serve on the Armed Services committee. Back in March the republican chair of it said the administration is not giving enough detail. That was March. It’s now July. Are you satisfied with what you’re being told? Excuse me—It’s August.

REP MIKE TURNER 

Yes. The–I–you know, still the administration could be sharing more with congress. I don’t think anybody is satisfied with the level of information we’re receiving, although it is a dynamic conflict. I think also that that’s true, even as the administration is looking to its review, both in Europe, the conflict in Iran, the issues with Ukraine, across the board, both the House and the Senate have registered that the Pentagon needs to be sharing more information with congress.

MARGARET BRENNAN 

Well, on Friday, out at Camp David, it was all on camera, the president’s team gathered. They talked about initiatives they’re working on and all praised him. Secretary Hegseth said Iran has shown no willingness to honestly negotiate. Here’s what President Trump said. Listen.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP SOT 

I’m losing faith in them because they do lie and they do misrepresent. Well the other day, the five missiles we shot, we knocked them down. But we were in the midst of the negotiation // Well they always want to talk but they break their word so often. They’ve been very dishonest, very dishonorable to deal with but that makes no difference.

MARGARET BRENNAN 

So that was the president laying out why he doesn’t trust diplomacy with Iran. Last night, he said there’s a diplomatic opening and a deal may be within reach. Will you support it sight unseen? Are we at risk of the president cutting a flawed deal just to end this unpopular conflict?

REP MIKE TURNER  

Well, I don’t think it’s cutting a flawed deal. I mean, this is this is part of a process, obviously, of where Iran has to be in a position where, as the president has set out, that the two goals and that is one—that they abandon their nuclear ambitions and certainly restarting their their nuclear enrichment programs and certainly the issues of an open Straits of Hormuz and so that we return back to a an open Straits where commerce and the flow of oil and natural gas can can resume.

MARGARET BRENNAN   

So the war should continue until there is some diplomatic deal regarding the nuclear program, because right now they’re just talking about the Strait.

REP MIKE TURNER  

Well, well, it’s it’s not really as you as you know, this began with with Epic Fury where the the president went in, which you know we’ve described as as an inevitable conflict, as a result of where Obama left us with, the you know watching until Iran began to get closer and closer to enough nuclear material to to have an opportunity for nuclear weapon. The International Atomic Energy Agency said that they were weeks away as a result of where they, where they were left before Epic Fury. Then we have—

MARGARET BRENNAN

In terms of enrichment capacity. Not weaponization.

REP MIKE TURNER  

Well yes. They would have the opportunity to be able to do so, and then with with the with the straits and they’re closing the straits, you know, and then the we had the Memorandum of Understanding where it looked as if they were going to come to a deal, and then now the president has been trying to enforce the opening of the Straits. Now, if Iran, where all metrics would show that Iran is, is in a position where they’re going to have to come to a table, whether it’s economics, whether it’s energy production, whether it’s the the loss of critical infrastructure, military infrastructure, the loss of of their military capabilities, all metrics would show a declining capability to continue. They’re going to have to be in a position where ultimately they’re going to have to concede to the opening of the straits and returning to commerce.

MARGARET BRENNAN   

Well, we’ll see. The president said they’re perimeters. I think he meant parameters of a possible deal, but we’ll track that diplomacy. Let me ask you though about what’s happening on U.S. soil. The FBI warned cyber actors are attacking water utilities in at least seven states. CBS is reporting that U.S. officials are probing to determine whether it’s Iranian hackers behind it. They’ve done something similar back in 2023. President Trump was asked, and here’s what he said.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP SOT  

You know who’s behind it? Minnesota, because they’re grossly incompetent. I think the Governor’s behind it. I don’t think there was an Iranian cyber attack.

MARGARET BRENNAN 

I know it takes a while to officially attribute an attack, but has Congress at least been told which states are impacted? Is Ohio? And is this an attack on U.S. soil amid a war?

REP MIKE TURNER 

Well, not not—we certainly have not been informed at this time. But I think you’ve correctly pointed out, Margaret, that Iran has attacked our critical infrastructure previously. There have been reports, obviously, of China hacking and Russia hacking. Well, one thing that we have to acknowledge is that our adversaries—Russia, China, North Korea, Iran—look at the critical infrastructure that support our civilian infrastructure, like water, are seen as valid military targets by our adversaries, and so these need to be monitored. They need to be hardened. These are things that that we do not do, we would not do, and Iran certainly has been doing this well before this conflict, and this is something we certainly need to be aware of—

MARGARET BRENNAN 

Well, we are at war now. 

REP MIKE TURNER 

We need to be diligent. Well, we’re certainly in a conflict where we would expect that they would continue that which they were doing to us before.

MARGARET BRENNAN 

I want to get to a bit of politics out in Ohio, your colleague Max Miller, according to the latest court filing, he’s been accused of domestic abuse. The court filing says he shoved his then wife, held a gun to her head, poured hot water on her, and had concerns he may have broken their two-year-old daughter’s collarbone according to both police reports and court documents that were filed. He just went live in a social media stream and denied these allegations within the past hour. My question is not about his marriage or his personal life, but I’m asking about the politics here and the party. Should there be an ethics probe to look into this?

REP MIKE TURNER    

Well, Margaret, what you just said when you began this question is that this is a matter of litigation. This is best handled in a courtroom and not in a TV studio. And this is, you know, that type of speculation is better for TMZ than CBS.

MARGARET BRENNAN  

Well, we’ve covered with other lawmakers, including in the other party, the Democratic Party, credible allegations against people running for office. We take those allegations seriously. When it comes to Mr. Miller, he was previously accused in 2021 by President Trump’s former spokesperson of abusing her when they dated. So, given these two instances, is it at least something Republican leadership should look into?

REP MIKE TURNER  

Well, again, this is this is an issue that is currently part of a divorce and part of litigation that’s in a courtroom, and the court should be handling this, which is clearly ongoing, and that’s where this needs to be, not in a television studio.

MARGARET BRENNAN   

So it doesn’t matter to you.

REP MIKE TURNER   

It’s not that doesn’t matter to me. This is this this is where the court needs to handle this. The court has filings, which is what you just said. You were reading that there were court filings. 

MARGARET BRENNAN 

Right, there is also an election. 

REP MIKE TURNER 

The court needs to handle this issue as to whether or not it is the truth and where truth will then be resolved, which is where things belong in a court where people file papers in a court, as you just read.

MARGARET BRENNAN 

So you want the court to handle it before Republican leadership looks into it. (CROSSTALK) 

REP MIKE TURNER

This is litigation. This is litigation. This is—this is a court matter, not a television matter.

MARGARET BRENNAN 

Right, and not one for Republican leadership is what I hear you saying.

REP MIKE TURNER   

I’ve said to you that this is not one for you and I to handle in a television studio. This is one that’s in court.

MARGARET BRENNAN   

Okay, we handle these allegations seriously, regardless of the political party, and these are not media allegations, as you said. They’re court documents. Congressman Miller claimed that it’s a media construct—

REP MIKE TURNER  

And it’s being handled in court, which is where it belongs. 

MARGARET BRENNAN   

I got it. You don’t want to comment. I understand. In terms of your portfolio on Armed Services, I do want to ask you about what has happened within the past few days. Russia fired a barrage of ballistic missiles at Kyiv. Only one of them was intercepted. President Zelenskyy said that’s because there are no interceptors left. I know you’ve asked the president to allow for him to be able to produce Patriots. We had thought there was a breakthrough. However, President Trump seemed to backtrack on that Friday. He said, “We’re talking about it, but it’s a hard thing to do to give away that kind of technology.” Is it on track or is it not? Are we letting Ukraine license Patriot interceptor production?

REP MIKE TURNER   

Right. Well, the actual quote that he said he was talking in that in that paragraph, he was talking about tomahawks and patriots. They also went on to say that the negotiations were ongoing. It is very, very difficult on Patriots, which are defensive. In the in the quote, actually, it included Tomahawks, which are also offensive. I do think that there are ongoing negotiations concerning providing a broader opportunity for Ukraine to have access to Patriot technology to be able to have production and defensive technology. This is going to be very important both for allies and for Ukraine. This technology, because it has become so central around the world, because missile technology is proliferating, so defensive technology needs to proliferate. We have the most advanced technology, and there is high demand for it. And the president stepping up and saying that we need to look to being able to license this technology is really going to be important both for Ukraine, our allies, and really, I think, for the United States.

MARGARET BRENNAN   

But you think it’s still in process?

REP MIKE TURNER 

I think it’s still in process. I think it’s incredibly important, and I encourage the president and the Pentagon to move as swiftly as possible to ensure that Ukraine can. You know, every night there are people who die in Ukraine because Russia is sending missiles into Ukraine and hitting defenseless civilians, not military targets, but defenseless civilians. There was outcry because a missile landed in a field in Poland. Every night there are missiles that lie that land on people and kill them in Ukraine. We need to help them.

MARGARET BRENNAN 

Yes, understood and NATO did call out those instances. We have to leave it there, Congressman Turner. We’ll be right back.

La teoría de Trump sobre el poder global se enfrenta a un ajuste de cuentas en Irán y Canadá

La presidencia de Donald Trump se basa en la premisa de que él y Estados Unidos son tan poderosos que tanto aliados como enemigos deben someterse a su voluntad.Su ruptura con décadas de doctrina de política exterior estadounidense se refleja en sus discursos y estrategias de seguridad nacional.En enero, su principal asesor, Stephen Miller, lo explicó de la mejor manera, al declarar a Jake Tapper de CNN que las “leyes de hierro” dictan un mundo real “gobernado por la fuerza, por el poder”.Pero esta filosofía se enfrenta a sus pruebas más serias en los crecientes enfrentamientos con Irán y Canadá.Irán ha desafiado el poderío militar de Estados Unidos durante seis meses en una guerra que Trump inició pero que no ha podido terminar.El primer ministro de Canadá, Mark Carney, quien suspendió las negociaciones comerciales con Washington, ha defendido con más vehemencia que ningún otro líder occidental que Estados Unidos, bajo el mandato de Trump, “ha cambiado”.Carney declaró este sábado a su país que Trump estaba utilizando la “integración económica como arma”.Resulta revelador del profundo impacto de la era Trump que Canadá, uno de los amigos más leales de Estados Unidos, se encuentre en una situación de guerra económica similar a la de Irán, uno de los peores enemigos de Washington.Pero el lunes, la administración Trump no dejó lugar a dudas sobre lo que pretende en su guerra comercial con Ottawa y en su enfrentamiento armado con Teherán.El secretario del Tesoro, Scott Bessent, anunció una “ofensiva económica” contra las conexiones financieras globales de Irán, estableciendo una analogía con el desembarco de Normandía que cambió el rumbo de la Segunda Guerra Mundial.Mientras tanto, Trump advirtió en las redes sociales que “Estados Unidos siempre será mucho más grande, más rico y más fuerte que Canadá”. Añadió: “Alguien debería hacer que estos payasos se pongan en fila”.La retórica del Gobierno este lunes sugiere que Trump está llevando ahora la economía estadounidense a la guerra.Trump espera lograr un acuerdo comercial muy ventajoso con Canadá y, finalmente, provocar la caída del régimen iraní.Pero el futuro se presenta incierto en ambos frentes, ya que el presidente suele dar marcha atrás cuando se hacen evidentes las consecuencias económicas de sus intentos por imponer su autoridad.Cualquier esfuerzo prolongado de Estados Unidos por imponerse a Canadá e Irán —y a terceros países sancionados en su intento por desmantelar las redes financieras de Teherán— podría desencadenar represalias que provoquen aumentos en los precios de la energía y los alimentos para los consumidores estadounidenses.También podría desestabilizar los mercados estadounidenses en un momento en que algunos inversores temen una crisis de bonos.Si las amenazas del lunes son el preludio de más TACOs (“Trump siempre se acobarda”), el presidente socavará su propio poder y el de la nación, y se acercará cada vez más a la condición de presidente saliente a medida que se avecinan unas difíciles elecciones de mitad de mandato en noviembre.El anuncio de Bessent fue el último intento de Estados Unidos por encontrar una nueva salida a la guerra con Irán.Pero la analogía con el Día D parecía inapropiada, dados los terribles sacrificios que hicieron los soldados estadounidenses para liberar Europa.Y a diferencia de Bessent, el comandante aliado, el general Dwight Eisenhower, no pasó días en 1944 planeando un ataque masivo para luego lanzar nuevas amenazas de sanciones sin un cronograma definido.Sin embargo, los escépticos del Gobierno a menudo ignoran el verdadero poder que Trump podría ejercer mediante el uso inteligente de la guerra económica.Un esfuerzo verdaderamente global para cortar las vías de financiación y comercio de Irán podría infligir un daño extremo a una economía ya devastada.“Puede funcionar si conseguimos el apoyo de nuestros socios”, declaró Max Meizlish, exalto funcionario del Tesoro, en CNN News Central el lunes, refiriéndose específicamente a Bank Melli, un banco comercial iraní controlado por el Gobierno que opera en Francia, Alemania y otros lugares y que es una pieza clave en los esfuerzos de Irán por evadir las sanciones.Kenneth Rogoff, execonomista jefe del FMI y actual catedrático de la Universidad de Harvard, declaró a Richard Quest de CNN: “Fundamentalmente, las sanciones funcionan si se consigue el apoyo de la mayor parte del mundo. Pero si no es así, resulta muy difícil”.Es posible que Trump hubiera tenido más éxito con ese enfoque antes de enemistarse con los aliados de Estados Unidos con una guerra que muchos consideran imprudente e ilegal.Y puede que la Casa Blanca esté sobreestimando su capacidad para influir en los acontecimientos internos de Teherán.Los indicios de desacuerdo entre pragmáticos y sectores más intransigentes en materia económica son alentadores. Sin embargo, Washington lleva décadas sobreinterpretando estas señales y dando por sentado que el colapso del régimen sería inevitable.Lo más perjudicial es que la administración Trump está dando señales de que quizás no se toma en serio su propia política.No se tomaron medidas inmediatas contra varios bancos chinos que facilitan el comercio de petróleo iraní a precio reducido por parte de Beijing.China ya ha declarado que defenderá sus intereses, lo que podría interpretarse como una posible represalia contra Estados Unidos que podría elevar aún más los precios y enfurecer a los votantes estadounidenses.El año pasado, al amenazar con restringir las exportaciones de minerales de tierras raras, cruciales para las industrias de defensa y tecnología de Estados Unidos, demostró su capacidad para contrarrestar el poder de Trump.Además, el líder estadounidense tiene una fecha importante marcada en su calendario: la visita de Estado del presidente chino Xi Jinping el próximo mes. Es difícil imaginar que pueda enrarecer el ambiente antes de esa fecha.En un momento revelador, Bessent no hizo sino reforzar las dudas sobre la capacidad de la administración para mantener el curso. Se le preguntó por qué no ponía de inmediato sanciones secundarias a las entidades que comercian con Irán.“Bueno, estamos dando a todos la oportunidad de corregir su mal comportamiento; ¿por qué querría yo hacer estallar el sistema financiero global?”, respondió.La administración se muestra menos reacia a sancionar a los fabricantes de palos de hockey canadienses que a los bancos chinos.Y la retórica transfronteriza es cada vez más tóxica.“Debemos recordar que Canadá es un estado. Disculpen, fue un lapsus freudiano. En realidad fue un accidente”, comentó el vicepresidente J.D. Vance el lunes.El primer ministro de Ontario, Doug Ford, declaró en una conferencia de prensa: “Tengo mucho espacio en el trasero, así que (Trump) tiene mucho espacio para besarme el trasero”.En ocasiones, desahogarse puede crear margen político para retomar las conversaciones.Pero los canadienses creen que están inmersos en algo más que una disputa comercial.Drew Dilkens, alcalde de Windsor, Ontario, justo enfrente de Detroit, explicó el daño causado por las afirmaciones de Trump sobre que era el estado número 51. “Cuando lo dices por primera vez, tal vez puedas restarle importancia, pero el problema fue el hecho de insistir en ello y, sin duda, seguir reforzándolo”, le dijo a Brianna Keilar de CNN.Ottawa afirmó que, entre otras disputas, Carney puso fin a las negociaciones comerciales después de que Estados Unidos intentara debilitar sus garantías constitucionales de bilingüismo.Imprimir el empaque de los productos vendidos en Canadá tanto en francés como en inglés supone un inconveniente para las empresas estadounidenses.Sin embargo, es una muestra de la diversidad cultural y lingüística que mantiene unida a Canadá. Carney también insinuó que Washington pretendía restringir los acuerdos comerciales que su Gobierno pudiera firmar con terceros países.“No permitiremos que ninguna nación dicte nuestro futuro”, indicó Carney el sábado.Como economía más pequeña, Canadá sería la más perjudicada en una guerra comercial con Estados Unidos. Sin embargo, puede desafiar el poder estadounidense.Un prolongado duelo arancelario podría resultar en la destrucción mutua asegurada de la industria automotriz a ambos lados de la frontera.Además, el creciente impacto de los boicots canadienses podría debilitar a los republicanos en contiendas clave en los estados fronterizos de Michigan y Maine, que podrían decidir quién controlará el Senado estadounidense el próximo año.Y al intentar imponer su dominio, Trump puede haber revelado otra ley de hierro del poder que Miller no mencionó en enero.Cuando un pueblo ve amenazada su soberanía e independencia por una potencia superior hostil, prácticamente no hay precio que no esté dispuesto a pagar.The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story