Interview with Rep. Jim Himes on "Face the Nation"

MARGARET BRENNAN: Our next guest is Connecticut Representative Jim Himes, a senior Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, joining us from Greenwich. As a representative of the "Gang of Eight," a group privy to highly classified information, can you give us some insights into United States' current actions?

REP. JIM HIMES: Well, it's interesting you mention that, Margaret. Despite Senator Tom Cotton, leading the Senate Intelligence Committee, having regular communication with the administration, I've been utterly left out of the loop, as have my Democratic colleagues. It seems the legal requirement to brief Congress is now party-specific. We're in the midst of a celebratory phase, recognizing Maduro's negative impact and applauding our military prowess. We've felt similar triumphs after toppling regimes in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya. Yet, we often overlook how dismantling a regime is far simpler than the hard work of governance that follows. My Republican peers can enjoy their moment, but they'll soon need a plan—a plan that was missing in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The Secretary of State recently noted that despite different geopolitical contexts, the administration's messages vary. While some speak of military involvement, others hint at an oil blockade. Where do you see the actual influence? Have Republicans promised to address these queries?

REP. HIMES: Unfortunately, no. With most Republicans I see, their priority is showcasing loyalty to the President daily. The administration's actions appear as a relic of past strategies, like Dick Cheney's Middle Eastern interventions. Suddenly, there’s an aggressive shift towards regime changes unrelated to threats to our nation. The rhetoric of challenging dictators sounds all too familiar, echoing the early 2000s.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yet, some officials talk about collaborating with Maduro’s deputies rather than entirely changing the regime. Doesn't that contradict the notion of regime change?

REP. HIMES: Indeed, this inconsistency is perplexing. We've seen figures pardoned and dealings with individuals accused of serious crimes. The approach lacks coherence, and the legal basis is ambiguous. Without clarity, we're left in the dark about the administration’s strategy.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Apologies, Congressman. We're experiencing technical issues. Let's resume shortly.

[Break for technical difficulties]

MARGARET BRENNAN: Let's continue with our conversation, Congressman Himes. The administration claims legality in their actions involving Maduro, drawing parallels with past interventions like Noriega's capture. What is your perspective?

REP. HIMES: Clearly, this action breaches international laws, defying protocols such as the UN Charter. While some may dismiss international law, any attempt at diplomatic compensation for seized oil assets will hinge on these laws. Moreover, Congress traditionally oversees military decisions, a step overlooked here. This sets a concerning global precedent, suggesting that nations could fabricate threats to justify interventions, learning from the U.S.'s stance.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Do China or Russia have the operational capability to execute similar actions as the U.S.?

REP. HIMES: Russia might struggle, but China is rapidly advancing toward such capabilities, potentially targeting Taiwan in the future. It’s a dangerous precedent, especially referencing Noriega as justification; circumstances there involved declared hostilities and congressional input, unlike the current situation.

MARGARET BRENNAN: The Noriega case hinged on his actions, rather than the legality of the operation. These issues remain complex, and we'll continue to monitor developments. Thank you for your insights, Congressman Himes.