Extended Interview: Sen. Thom Tillis expects a rough midterm election for Republicans

This feelalty to a would-be king or a. powerful president is not a good look in. an election cycle where people are. frustrated. Why anybody hesitates to. say, "Look, I love the president. I. voted for the big beautiful bill. I'm. okay with the CMS cuts, but we got to. get this thing in Iran, right?" What's. wrong with that? If they're thinking it, why don't they say it? And the ones who. do, I think, will be rewarded at the. ballot box. And the ones who don't will. probably have a lot more time with their. family next year. This week on 60. Minutes, we interviewed Senator Tom. Tillis. The two-term Republican from.

North Carolina has been walking a. political tightroppe throughout the. second Trump administration. He's voted. with his party consistently and backed. many of President Donald Trump's policy. priorities. But he's also been a costic. critic of key Trump appointees and what. he calls the president's WTF moments. All while insisting he's just trying to. help the White House succeed. Now, on. his way out the door, he's written a. book called How to Lose Friends and. Antagonize Presidents, in which he.

blames what he calls sycopants in the. President's Inner Circle for the. administration's struggles. In a series. of conversations on Capitol Hill, we. spoke with Senator Tillis about his. relationship with President Trump, his. fear of an increasingly imperial. presidency, and what awaits the. Republican party in the midterms and. 2028. This is an extended version of those. interviews. >> So, we're going to start where. everything starts with childhood. You.

moved around a lot. >> I did. Uh my dad was a draftsman and uh. he did boats which took him from uh one. port city to the other. So, we were in. in Jacksonville, which obviously big. port city, New Orleans. And then he. moved up to Tennessee because it was a. big dredge in industry at the time. and. uh did that until his 40s and then he. moved out of that profession. I always. describe it as the economic bubble. So. we literally moved out of that trailer. into that house that we owned. Um we. sold that. Depending upon the.

circumstances we were either in a house. that we rented, sometimes we owned it. and when things got really spicy we uh. we're in a trailer park. >> Do you think that your background I. don't know does it make you different. from your colleagues? You know what? I. tell you what, it's why I probably react. so quickly to this concept of we don't. have an affordability problem. You you. always have an affordability problem. There's some segment of our society that. always does, but denying it by. definition means you don't recognize the. problem. If you don't recognize it,

you're not solving it. >> Take me from the childhood on the bubble. into your business career. >> Okay, fast forward. I get recruited by. the Air Force to um to go serve and I. thought it was going to be my ticket to. go to officer candidate training or or. go to school. Did that in January of 78. and then in May just before I graduated. I had a car accident. I got discharged. I saw a an ad for a professional job in. Chattanooga, Tennessee and I took that.

job and uh that was a year and a half. there. I was recruited up to Boston at. Wayne Laboratories. I moved about every. two years. So I was up in New England. Got me into high-tech a few years later. I'm interviewing for a job with Price. Waterhouse. Six years later, I'm a. partner. One year later after being. admitted to the partnership, I got my. four-year degree at almost age 37. >> So you're in North Carolina working at. Price Waterhouse. And what takes you. from there into running for office? I um.

I had a friend that by happen stance. lived in Charlotte who had decided he. was doing a lot of mountain biking. So. he asked me if I wanted to go out. I I. got addicted at single track mountain. biking. So got in got interested in. mountain biking. But I looked around at. these woods. I said, "Man, this would. make a great single track." So I. researched. I knew it was. government-owned. I didn't know who. owned it. Then I went before the town. board and being a PW partner, I had a. really polished PowerPoint because we.

always do. And um afterwards the chair. of the uh the park and recck board said, "That's a great presentation. If you. volunteer on the board, we can probably. get that done." Well, I got on the board. and that's what started my legislative. career. And I'm the second Republican. speaker in North Carolina since the. Civil War. I decided to uh challenge a. wonderful man uh who had been a. long-term uh minority whip to be. whipped. Uh when everybody thought after. Obama was elected, Republicans were.

going to be in the bad lands for many. years. I felt like they were going to. misread their so-called mandate and. overreach. Uh when nobody thought. Republicans had a chance, we beat the. Democrats for only the second time in. over a hundred years. And I believe. that's why they they had confidence in. making me speaker. >> Give me one thing from your speakerhip. there that you're proud of. >> Uh restitution for eugenics victims. >> Tell me more about that. >> I had no knowledge of it, but uh it it.

dates back to the Stanger movement and. eugenics programs that were uh you know. were being implemented in Europe. Sort. of uh the arrogance of thinking some. people should procreate, others. shouldn't. Well, that became a part of. social services. Not all, but many. states did it. But they would use your. ability to reproduce as a u mechanism. for having you agree to be sterilized as. a part of uh subsistence. Um, and the.

more we looked into it, >> so you you your if you could get welfare. if you agreed to be, you know, and it. was obviously tracking to probably some. of the the more problematic, more racist. areas of the state. It was. disproportionately African-American. I. think it was around 1973 or 1974, the. last for sterilization. So, North. Carolina was one of the worst states. When we became speaker, I tried to get. it done. I was getting push back from my. side and I had one of my members say you. deserve to get this done. Um and uh and.

we worked it into an appropriations bill. and uh got restitution first in the. country and and I think only one other. country at the time um had actually done. restitution uh in Northern Europe. So we. allocated $10 million to provide some. form of restitution to them and to the. living victims. This wasn't, you know, you had people, you know, saying this is. reparations for slavery. I said, "Look, buddy, if we've got a living slave here, I want to give them reparations." These.

are living people who had a part of. their body taken out over by government. If that's not a conservative value, and. if that's not the most profound form of. taking, government taking, I don't know. what is, but getting that done, that's. the thing I'll remember. >> So, now we're in 2014. So, you're by by. that point, you're running for the. Senate. Mhm. >> What made you want to be a senator? >> I didn't want a Democrat to win it. Um. and I thought with the right candidate, um we could uh we could win. And u in.

fact, there were a few people if they. had run, I probably wouldn't. Uh but in. my judgment, the other six people that. showed up, most of them were good. people. One was a little crazy. Um, but. I didn't think that they understood that. they were going to be the number one. target at race, that it was going to be. a hund00 million or more race and we had. to have somebody that could actually. win. I wanted I wanted to be part of. turning the Senate to a Republican. majority and that was the year we got. it. >> So, at this point, this is a few years. after the peak of the Tea Party.

movement. Um, but you know, it's still. sort of in the Tea Party era. >> What kind of conservative were you at. that moment? the same conservative I am. today. Uh pro- second amendment, pro-life, limited government, uh fiscal. restraint. Uh the only difference. between me and a lot of people that call. themselves true conservatives is I got a. long list of things that were ratified. and they don't. >> Who are your role models coming into the. Senate? Who do you want to be like. >> as senators? >> As a senator. Yeah.

>> Uh well, I named a dog after Mitch. McConnell. So that he's he's on the. leaderboard. >> Was he was he When did you name your dog. after Mitch McConnell? Uh, let's see. Little Mitch is, I think, seven years. old. >> Okay. So, this was after you got to the. Senate. Yeah. Yeah. So, you're in the. Senate. It's 2014. The next year, it's. the summer. Donald Trump comes down the. escalator in Trump Tower, >> runs against the whole Republican. establishment, the whole primary. campaign. >> and wins.

>> Trump wasn't a traditional conservative. in 2015, 2016. Still is. >> So, so why did he win? uh. >> the nomination. >> I I believe he did a remarkable job of. managing his brand and and and voicing. some of the frustrations. uh that the American people had and uh. and I think that Obama with the. overreach of Obamacare uh a number of. other things, it was just fertile ground. for frustration. But you also have to.

understand this is coming up at the same. time social media amplification of the. message sustaining the message became a. part of polit politics. So it's not like. we're going to get out of a populist. phase that started with Obama and then. put on steroids by Trump continued with. Biden. It's here to stay. And I think. that President Trump does a remarkable. job of you know trying to voice the. frustrations of people and he got the. votes and I'm glad he did. I'm glad he. won in 2016. >> I guess I'm just wondering, yes, Trump.

was running against Obama and the Obama. legacy, but he was also in that primary. running against Republican politics as. usual. And I'm just sort of curious if. while he was on his way to winning or. after he won, if you know there's a. moment when, you know, a bunch of. Republican senators are sitting around. in DC and are saying, "Well, what can we. learn from this?" Yeah, I I think to a. certain extent, but obviously he was. mostly running against the Democrats. That's why he ran and the liberal.

policies that uh had created a lot of. problems for us. Um and uh but he was. also trying to awaken a part of a. Republican base that had become. disinterested after eight years under. Obama. And thank God he did. He awakened. a part of the Republican party uh that. was necessary to win at the national. level. >> Describe that part. Well, some of them. are good people and some of them are bat. crazy. >> What's the proportion?

>> Look, I think at either party, um I I'll. use the uh the abbreviation at either. end of the spectrum, there's about 10 or. 15% that have been exposed to guano. Um. and [laughter] and and but the other the. other people, you know, they're that I I. really believe there's a big center. people that that really want to govern. between the 35 yard lines. U but by. their very nature, they're not. performative. They're not attacking. people. They're not normally they're. going out. Hopefully, we can convince.

them to vote if you have a reasonable. candidate. The problem with politics. right now are the polar extremes. And if. you look at what they're prioritizing, they actually have a lot in common. and. they have nothing in common with the. governing middle between the what I call. the the 35 yard lines of politics. >> So you're glad you're glad Trump won. >> in 2016. >> Yeah. >> You're glad he beat Hillary. You're glad. he was president. >> and we did great stuff. >> You know, you've offered quite a few. criticisms of the second Trump. administration. And some of them have.

been put together in a book that I have. right here. >> Can you tell me the title of this book? Yeah, it's a, you know, it's a little. take on Dale Carnegie, but it's how to. lose friends and antagonize presidents. >> Any presidents in particular? >> Well, I mean, more recent one, but I did. a good job of antagonizing Biden and a. little bit with Obama back in the day. >> Okay. But if if you look closely, there. isn't a picture of a president on the. cover, but there is a picture of three. separate Trump cabinet officials, Pete.

Hegsth, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and. Christine Gnome. And then there's a. small picture of. White House Deputy Chief of Staff for. Policy, Steven Miller. And um we're. going to get into this, but it's fair to. say that you're not a big fan. >> No. >> Of the people on the cover of this book, but. this is Trump 2.0. >> Yeah. >> Talk about Trump 1.0. >> The um. >> what was good about it? Well, you know,

my gosh, we did uh what we're calling, you know, what we did with tax cuts to. continue last year. Uh that was in the. big beautiful bill. The tax cuts were. good stuff. We did that. We did. regulatory reform. Um we did a a number. of things were just good, smart. governance. >> So, you did you like the economic. policies. >> What about foreign policy? Um, I've I've. always uh had some concerns with.

President Trump's foreign policy. We we. always you need to treat the the. neighborhood of countries in a way that. you always know who your family members. are and the family members are NATO. members and democratic nations who have. a history of aligning when when things. get tough. the president, I want to give. him extraordinary credit particularly in. in in this administration, but beginning. in his first one with holding NATO. accountable. I firmly believe that some.

of the vulnerability that we're seeing. that that caused the Ukrainian invasion. is because a $2 trillion shortfall in. spending at the minimum 2% level for the. first 20 years of this century. So NATO. countries left $2 trillion on the. sideline. If we had that capability and. all the integration and industrial base. that came with it, Putin probably would. have made a different calculation. We'll. never know. We're seeing NATO transform. I I was in Poland and Ukraine over the.

past couple of days uh talking about. other member states in NATO. I mean, they get it and they understand that. they've got to sustain it. That's all. because of Donald J. Trump. Certainly. wasn't because of anything Biden did. So. you've got first term, you've got good. economic policies, you've got. problematic but directionally effective. foreign policy. >> What about the Trump style? >> Yeah. Well, that's it. See, most of it. it's not about the what. It's about the. how.

>> I mean, the way that the president Well, you've got president's style. Okay. And. he's going to be he's I'm not going to. change. He's not going to change. >> There's going to be there's going to be. social media post. The problem I have. with some of the people on the front. page of that book and a few others is. that they're not looking around corners. for him. Most of the issues that we're. dealing with here have less to do with. what he wanted to accomplish, but how he. went about it. Border is a classic. example. The, you know, for the first. time, immigration and the the four.

million people that Biden led in with. open borders became a factor in the. president's re-elect. >> He had a wonderful big factor. He had a. wonderful opportunity to cottify these. policies that have effectively shut down. the border. >> He didn't have to do the overreach that. Nol and everybody got involved in. We. could have done internal enforcement and. and use the resources. I I I fully. believe, you know, Obama deported a lot. of people. We've got to deport people. who are here that are illegally present. Um but they just went about it in a way.

that took a issue that helped us win the. election that we were winning on. And. people have forgotten the fact that the. border is secure because of Donald J. Trump. >> So the first term, is it just that he's. he's getting better advice? >> Yes, they were willing to tell the. president what he needed to hear. And. I'm glad they did because they are the. ones who gave him a really I think a. really good four-year administration. >> So what changes this time? >> I should stipulate there are a lot of. good people working for him. But I think.

you got I think you've got these. sickopants who are going to say, "Yes, boss, that's a great idea. Let's rename. this. Let's build a Let's build an arc. Let's uh do whatever we're doing. Maybe. a golden cal cap on the ellipse. I don't. know. But they're they're not being. smart. But the reality is if I'm looking. the president in the eye and telling him. a bad idea is a good idea, I'm lying to. the president of the United States and. I'll never do that. One thing I thought was interesting in.

your book when you're talking about the. change in Trump's second term, um, you. talk about hubris, right? About this. sense that. >> it's our second term. We've won, we can. do whatever the. >> exploive deleted that we want, right? But you also say you think that after. the assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, there was almost a sense. of divine mission or around talk about. that a little bit. Well, I mean, it was. extraordinary and thank God uh he.

survived. Um, but I do believe uh maybe. there was a sense that well, if nothing. else, let's get rid of the divine. mission and just say days are numbered. A sense that days are numbered. I'm. going to charge through and get done. everything I can do. You know, you're in. touch with your uh your mortality. >> You say you think the president came to. believe that he was kind of an equal. partner with God. >> Well, look, man. I mean, you've seen the. post. I mean, when you got a Dr. Jesus. picture, you post it up and then you.

start by doing like a divine thing and. then you move it to I think it was a. doctor. >> Uh, I can't imagine doing something like. that. >> Let's talk about his appointees and the. people around him who you think are. responsible for. >> a difficult second term. Let's start. with the Secretary of Defense, Pete H. >> You voted to confirm him. >> Yeah. You call that your biggest regret? Regret. >> Uh, is you just call on him to resign?

>> Yeah. Yeah. I think he's incompetent. This sort of superhero Department of War. mache machismo machismo crap just. doesn't uh impress me. >> in terms of policy. What he's actually. doing at the department. What are you. against? >> Well, it's the fits and starts, man. I. mean, it's like no vaccines. Whoopsie. We got a lot of people sick. vaccines. Um, it's testosterone testing. Look, if. a war if a war fighter or personnel. wants access to that, give it to them.

Mandatory testosterone. testing. I mean, my gosh, I've even. talked with a lot of people in the field. and they just chuckle at it. But I. decided to rely on the Armed Services. Committee for that uh their assessment. whether or not he had the right job, right skills to do the job. I used to be. on it for eight years. I said, "I'm. going to defer to you all." When. [clears throat] these allegations came. out, though, and quite honest, I was. looking for a secondhand cooperated. account so that I could vote against. them. I couldn't find it. And I don't.

work on Instinct. I don't work on. intuition. So, in the absence of that, I. decided to defer to the Senate vote. And. I the Senate Armed Services Committee. vote. And I regret that. >> Do you hold him responsible for the. struggle in the Iran war? because you've. said that you supported the initial. decision. in you know I think that they got so. caught up after the immense success of. the first strike. >> that heth probably didn't listen to his. best military advice and say now we.

should probably move to a different. posture. >> Do you think that he misled the. president about what the military is. capable of alone? Well, I think that he. gave the president his view and what. some of his political adviserss around. him thought rather than the best. military advice of these extraordinary. men and women with stars on their. shoulders. I can't believe that this war. uh and this plan was largely a result of. the recommendations of the people that. transcend administrations. Just can't.

believe it. >> Pegs has removed a lot of people. >> He removes anybody who views as a. threat. Is that the main thing? >> More competent than Helm, which is scary. because the vast majority of people that. advise him are far more competent than. Helm. >> Do you think that's mostly about. personality clashes about people who. I think inherent insecurity of Hexa I. love a room where my staff are smarter. than me. I I cherish them when I'm in. here and I see them sharing knowledge. that I don't possess and don't intend. to.

>> Have you talked to any of the people. he's removed? >> Yeah. Did they tell you why they thought. they were removed? >> They didn't feel like they were being. listened to. It's like shut up, nod when. I propose something sort of a. environment. And we're at risk of of. others. Um I think if if we don't get. this under control. Look, I don't like I. don't have anything personal against. Pete Hagath. This is not a personal. thing with me. He is not the right man. for the job. >> But what do you think the president is. thinking? I mean, have you talked to him. about this? >> Uh the president I communicate. It's.

It's been about a week or so since we've. last communicated. >> Have you communicated about Pete Hegsath. recently? >> Um I have. I have. >> And And could you share any responses. the president? >> It's not substantially different than I'. you know, I've communicated publicly. I'm not going to uh I don't I don't know. that the president's ever. >> are his responses. >> I don't think he's ever directly. responded um. >> uh to he's taken it in and he hasn't. pushed back, but I don't think he's. directly if he did, I wouldn't tell you. what he said. But uh I respect the.

president. I still feel like we have an. odd relationship where I've clearly made. him angry. But it took years before he. even made the first negative comment. about me. But I react to anybody on this. earth the same way. If you come at me. with. with what I think is unfair or incorrect. data, I'm going to come back after you. >> All right, let's go next to another face. on your cover, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., head of the Department of Health and. Human Services. >> Yeah.

>> Um you also voted to confirm him. >> Y. >> um. >> what has been wrong with his tenure? >> Well, first I decided to confirm him. because there are three Republican. medical doctors on the health committee. and on finance in total. And I had. expressed to them that they're the. subject matter experts here because. they're on the committee and they also. have the distinction of being medical. doctors. And I said, "Guys, I again, I. know where I don't have subject matter.

expertise." And I was relatively new to. finance. Um, and so I said, "I'm going. to go way you go." Um, uh, that's how I. ultimately decided to confirm them. But. my gosh, >> give me vaccine policy for God's sake. I. mean, that's another thing that. infuriates me that brings us back to. that trailer park. Okay, this man has. never wanted for anything in his life. He's gotten whatever medical care he. needs. He may have a distorted view of. how accessible it is and how diligent. the parents are in making sure you get.

all those immunizations to things at the. right time. But when you're in a trailer. park and you hear a health secretary say. maybe you don't need vaccines or instead. of getting two combined when you're in. there, you know, spread them out over. time, that's great. If you're taking a. limo to your doctor's appointment, it's. not great. If you're taking a bus, it's. likely they won't get that other vaccine. and they'll get sicker. This is an. example where I think they're out of. touch with the most at rest at risk. strata of our population and uh standing.

by when we're having dramatic cuts and. uh the NIH funding. It's irresponsible. um and it's killing people. Steven. Miller, president's adviser. Uh you call. him the architect of most of the dumbest. proposals from the Trump White House and. the worm tongue of the Trump. administration, which for those who are. not readers of. >> JRR Tolken is a reference to a uh. >> a uh. >> counselor, very bad, toxic counselor uh.

in those novels and in the movies. Um. what are the dumb proposals that you. have in mind? >> Look, he was absolutely the architect. behind the execu the policy execution. and homeland security. He was wanting to. get the numbers up. He wanted to have. thousands. >> for deportation. >> Absolutely. We want thousands of people. apprehended. Just an irrational way. about going about things. Stephen Miller.

should be saying, "Mr. President, you in. your first 90 days save the border. You. shut it down. We have an orderly border. for the first time in probably decades. Let's codify it. Let's work with. Congress to do it. Let's soften the. edges of our image by maybe working on. reasonable immigration reform, which the. president supports. But instead, Miller. never spends any time talking about. cottifying policy to harden it against a. future Democrat that could open the. border. and he spends time alienating.

the Latino base and legally present. people in the process and then has all. the missteps in Minnesota and across the. country. This goes to show you just how. incompetent this man is to not recognize. the political window that we were. operating within. You you know I mean. the election for one of the first times. immigration and the border open border. was a meaningful issue to get out the. vote. we should have implemented and. codified the policies that were working. in the first six months. Had plenty of. time to do it. Um and instead he doesn't.

even think about it. There was never a. serious proposal from the White House to. to to. >> but this is a this is a pattern for the. second Trump administration. Right. They. like doing things through executive. order. Yeah. >> They don't like going through Congress. >> Yeah. and get ready because probably in. the same way that the president's broken. a record for uh rescending executive. orders, implementing his own, it's going. to be beaten by a liberal uh president, the next liberal president who comes in. They're going to use the Trump president. as a reason president as a reason for.

for doing it. >> There are people in the White House who. you like. >> Yeah. A lot. >> And. >> more than the majority. >> The majority. >> Who do you like in the administration? >> Besson's a great Treasury Secretary. Uh, Wright's doing fine in energy. Bergam's. fine in interior. Um, I could go down. the list and for those of you that I. didn't list, I'm giving you examples of. a majority of the cabinet I'm okay with. >> You're very circumspect in the book. about the vice president of the United. States. >> What's your take on JD Vance?

>> Well, JD's politics today bear no. resemblance to the JD that um uh that. that campaign to be a senator. Let's. just be be honest with ourselves. you. know, he's supposed to be a kind of a. limited government, no wars pres uh uh. kind of person and he's excusing uh. wars. He's excusing cozying up with. Russia and uh that's but we're far away. from LZ fair economic theory that we. could possibly imagine. My gosh, he.

hadn't said a single negative word about. the fact that we have equity stakes in. 10 or more companies that we've. essentially made stateowned enterprises. by our share. Does anybody really. believe that if the US government uh has. an equity stake in these companies that. any of the other board votes count? >> You don't think he's a conservative? >> Uh I think he's a populist that has some. conservative uh leanings, but he's not. going to let that stop him from, you. know, looking the other way with the. equity stakes that I've talked about and. other big government policies. I mean, I.

don't think he said anything about. promising people $5,000 checks and a. trillion dollar uh, you know, a trillion. dollar expenditure that. >> neither neither has any. I mean, if. you're a member of the Trump cabinet, you're not going to, you know, Secretary. Bess hasn't hasn't criticized. >> There's a difference there's a. difference between the vice president. and the rest of them. All the rest can. be fired. I like JD Vance. Again, I. don't take any of this stuff personally. I'm giving him an assessment, an. organizational assessment. You need to.

understand, I fired my best friend. I. literally did and we managed to stay. friends. But, uh, this is not personal. to me. You're either the right person to. be on the field or not. >> Why can't the good people who you like. in the White House, and you just said. it's a majority, you said you like a lot. of people in the cabinet. Why do they. kept getting, you know, run over by the. people on the cover of your book or the. people you don't like? Um, I think that. there are some people in the in and.

around the president who have an. outsized influence over him. And uh, I. do believe that the people that have the. last word with the president have the. heaviest weight, particularly if there's. some of his inner circle. My guess is. there there are some cabinet members who. are saying, "President, you need to look. around the corner." And then they get. into a room and either the president's. dismissive. >> and none of his inner circle pushes back. or somebody in his interpersonal circle. or in in his his circle say ah we don't. believe that and they move on. >> Who is that besides the people we've.

been talking about? >> I think Howard Lutnik's clearly one of. I'm no fan of Howard Lutnik. He. apparently thinks that we have money. genies that uh can create this trillion. dollars and not use taxpayer expenses. I. need to figure out how that works. because we need about 40 trillion of uh. those to retire our debt. So, he's one. that I think has an outsized influence. over the president. And again, with. Lutnik, he's treating this like a. business. This is not a business. >> What don't they understand about the. Senate and Congress, >> that we're a co-equal branch and they're.

at our best when they treat us like a. peer. >> But this runs both ways, right? that. they're more likely to treat you as a. co-equal branch if you act like a. co-equal branch. >> Do you think the Republican Senate in. Trump 2.0 has acted like a co-equal. branch? >> Uh, I think in some cases, yes, in most. cases, no. And I would say the same. thing for a Democratcontrolled Senate. under Biden and Obama. >> Look, we always make the mistake when. our guys in office of conveying power to. the White House, and I've had a real.

problem with that because it almost. always comes back to bite you. You. mentioned already the power over. nominations is one of the key obvious. powers the Senate has. Why didn't you. use that power. >> to try and block Robert Kennedy Jr. and. Pete Hack? >> And uh it was all timing. Look, all. these were happening in the first. quarter of the president's. administration. And I think the president is entitled to. have the people he wants in the office.

So, I got to strike that balance between. my own idealized view of a nominee and. what he wants. I don't want the story to. be, you know, Republicans are beating. themselves up. So, on the margins, I'm. going to go with what they want, even if. I have some misgivings, unless I can. find something compelling and concrete. that I consider disqualifying. And I. could not find that in the time frame. that I had on HEX. You say in the book. that at least 30 of your Republican.

colleagues in the Senate express. reservations Yeah. about many of the. president's actions in private. Why. can't in cases like Heg said, those 30. turn into five votes. >> against confirmation that gets you a. different Secretary of Defense. >> Okay. There are some that just really do. not want to. >> they don't want to put their. >> they don't want to bear the weight of. the president. I get that. You're up for. reelection, he'll target you in a. primary. Um and so look, you know what.

all martyrs have in common? >> They're dead. There were probably a few. instances where if we kind of ripped the. band-aid off early, then I think we'd. had a lot better midterm environment. than we're confronted with now. Describe. the pressure that gets exerted on you or. any of those 30 anonymous skeptical. senators when they're thinking about. casting a vote against a presidential. nominee or any presidential policy. What. form does that take? >> Oh, it can be intense with ads.

>> uh uh and and l like calling over to the. White House. you saw with um you've seen. busfuls of House members that are far. more susceptible than than senator the. in any given cycle to primaries being. busted over you know doing the Jedi mind. trick on you will vote for the big. beautiful bill it's called whipping okay. that's what we do we whip a voter an. outcome but they were intense and a lot. of people had a tough time with the. pressure. >> why didn't you want to run for. reelection.

>> I didn't want to run the second time in. fact I decided not to and I talked with. a few people after I decided not to that. uh convinced me that u if I didn't then. we'd probably lose the seat. They were. right if you take a look at it and uh I. did not want to have that weight on me. But you could if you do that every cycle. that's how you become 120 in the US. Senate. I can find other ways to. probably contribute. It's time for. somebody else to step up. And I'm not so. arrogant as to think that with a state.

of 10 million people that I'm the best. possible option. There's plenty of. people out there. They need to get out. and take a dip in it and uh be. patriotic. >> We also spoke to Senator Tillis in a. Senate hearing room asking him about his. public grillings of some of President. Trump's officials, including former. Department of Homeland Security. Secretary Christy Gnome. What makes the. difference between a really good. grilling and just bloating at someone?

>> An outcome. you know, when I have uh I I. don't take the oversight role lightly. I. don't like abusing the uh power that we. have at the dis with witnesses. Um and. so when you hear me do that, it's not. for viral. It's to shed light on a. problem. We did that with Christine. Nolan. >> The fact that you can't admit to a. mistake which looks like under. investigation is going to prove that. Miss Good and Mr. Pretty probably should. not have been shot in the face and in. the back. I'm not very often that angry,

but when I'm angry, I believe there's a. reason behind it and people should. listen. >> What were you thinking then? What had. gone wrong with her tenure? >> I was thinking about the $200 million. that the Department of Homeland Security. was spending on an ad campaign with her. riding a horse. I was thinking about her. calling people that were shot. potentially domestic terrorists. Has. proven not to be true. >> Why do you think the president picked. her? I think there are some people that. are in the cabinet because to use the. president's term, they're right out of.

central casting. I think Nome and Hexath. are probably the poster children for men. and women who should never have the. authority they've been granted. >> You got to watch Elon Musk. >> come in and run the Department of. Government efficiency. >> Yeah. >> What did you make of Doge? >> I knew it was doomed from the beginning. Um, and the reason for that, I met Elon. Musk is brilliant. I'm a huge fan of. Elon Musk. What he's done to advance uh. rocket research and private sector, it's. enormous. But, you know, just because.

you're a billionaire or almost a. trillionaire or or just because you're. successful in one field doesn't mean. that you know how to do enterprise. transformation, how to drive efficiency. I don't know of a single dollar that's. been booked as a result of Doge. How. many times did we have like a reduction. in force by email and then have to. withdraw it and bring people back? Well, what happens there? are the really. really talented people probably aren't. going to come back or they're only going. to come back long enough to get the heck. out of government. >> The Trump administration did end up.

raising tariffs on just about everybody. >> Yeah. >> Were you in favor of that? >> No. I wrote a letter to my conference. the week after so-called liberation day. and said this is going to end badly. It. was obvious to me. Look, uh, number one, uh, how on earth can you declare using, uh, emergency powers to impose a tariff, a 50% tariff on a country that has a. trade surplus with the United States. It's what he did to Brazil. Even the. tariff amounts themselves in the.

countries were nonsensical. It was. another example of where Letic thought. it was going to be found money. He. thought he was going to find a trillion. dollars that he could then invest and. maybe invest our way out of the debt, which conceptually I agree with, but. there were a lot of kinks in that slinky. that he did not anticipate. So, they've. created more uncertainty. People don't. even know when they buy something how. much it's really going to cost. Um, now, should they have tailored and use. sanctions to go after bad actors? 100%. China, India, even some of our European.

uh uh allies, even in some cases, there's a valid reason for Canada. But. this sort of shock and awe and think. that there wasn't going to be a counter. and people kind of rethinking whether or. not they should depend on the United. States going forward like they have in. the past. Those were the unintended. consequences of you know a halfbaked. idea. And I and I lay that primarily at. Howard Lutnik's feet. We're headed into. an election year. Inflation is creeping. back. Interest rates were just raised.

We're in an escalating trade war with. Canada. Gas prices are still elevated. Who's to blame for all this? >> Well, first, uh, I don't think when. Republicans are out campaigning, um, that they're not mindful of. affordability problems. This is a this. is the situation that I have with the. president, some of his adviserss saying. it's a hoax. The president needs to. understand that not everybody grew up in. the circumstances that he did. We need. to show empathy to people who when they.

see the president of the United States. on TV saying the affordability thing is. a hoax and they're trying to figure out. how they're going to pay for food. Um. it's uh it's not a good look and it. could have electoral consequences. >> Well, speaking of the president though, how much of this is just his foreign. policy and the war in Iran, right? Like. if you took away the Iran war, if the. straight of Horm moves were fully open, you know, you'd still have affordability. issues, but things would be a lot. better, right? >> We would uh we'd probably have more of.

the traditional headwinds in a in a. midterm uh than the kind of headwinds. that we're having that are almost 2010. like in my opinion. >> You supported the Iran intervention when. when it started. Would you have. supported it if you'd known that it. would still be going on as an open-ended. conflict six months later? >> Uh, I'm not sure that I would have. We. are forgetting how everybody, even the. Democrats, were struggling to criticize. the president for the exquisite.

capabilities that our men and women in. uniform executed to degrade Iran's. nuclear capabilities. The problem is, I. think people like Hegsth thought that. every engagement was going to be that. way. And uh and what we should have done. shortly after that success, maybe being. strategic with some of their strike. capabilities, is immediately move to. some of the economic strategy that. Secretary Bisson is moving on. Now, in. my opinion, what we're doing now through. financial measures should have been the.

second wave probably starting sometime. in March or April. >> Speaking of difficult military. campaigns, you just got back from. Ukraine. What's your assessment of that. war right now? >> Uh the Ukrainian people are doing an. extraordinary job. Uh Putin Putin can be. defeated there. He must be defeated. there. There's no such thing as a. win-win outcome in Ukraine. I. respectfully disagree with Kushner on. that characterization. Uh sanctions. bills at the president's desk. Now. Putin's already planning on freezing.

Ukrainians to death this winter. They're. attacking the electric grid. They're. trying to eliminate steam which is. distributed in places like uh this. winter to literally freeze civilians to. death. That's the sort of terror that. Putin's bringing to uh to Ukraine. We. need the sanctions to be implemented and. we need Putin to lose. Not a win-win, not a face saving measure. This is a. this is a battle between the free world.

and totalitarianism. And there's no room for a win-win in. that scenario in my estimation. >> Do you think the president's done. enough? >> No. Frankly, I I hate it. The uh the uh. deference that was paid to Putin in. Alaska. Um I know that the president's a. dealmaker. He wants to make things come. to the table. That's great in a business. world, but we're talking about a. murderer. >> Give me your big picture take on Trump. and Putin. What does the president think. about Russia and Ukraine? Really? I um I.

you know I I don't know if I can get. inside the president's head on this one, but if you've got a country that's now. gone from being attacked to the largest. most powerful military in Europe, do you. really want that to fall to Russia? And. I think I don't know if the president. really understands just how profound. that is or if anybody's really explained. it to him that way. but with with. defense guarantees and pushing uh Putin. further back and denying him his vision.

of reestablishing the Russian Empire. That's it. It's it's the most enormous. win. Creating an additional buffer. between us and NATO countries for. building an economic relationship with a. reformed and emerging Ukraine. that that. should be his legacy. Not creating a. win-win with one of the most vicious, murderous, desperates that's ever lived. >> Let's talk about a different national. security threat. The fears people have about artificial. intelligence. This is a new technology.

Nobody understands where it's going. Do. you think Congress is equipped to do. something reasonable on AI? >> No. I mean uh ultimately we need to act. but what we need to do is I think create. a uh almost a project warp speed uh that. we did to develop a vaccine. We need a. lot of smart people in the room. Give. Trump credit for that. We need a lot of. people in the room from industry. Keep. in mind Ross this is industry saying we.

need to be regulated. You know, if. you're the CEO of a company and you're. asking uh to have a regulatory burden, that almost never happens. And and. you're doing it because you also think. it's in the best interest of your. company and your investors. Let's figure. out at an at a level that all. congressional members can understand. what we should or should not do. I just. think we need them all in the room say. to what extent can you self-govern and. can we create a standard that says if. you can't certify you're doing this,

you're an outlier. and we need to deal. with you. >> How much of that do you think can be. handled by internal industry scrutiny. versus some kind of government. regulatory body? >> I think a fair amount, but there's still. going to be some uh gaps that probably. require congressional oversight. Um, but. I think we need to be uh we need to be. very careful. The malign actors aren't. going to stop. China's not going to. adhere to any industry standards for. child safety. Quite the opposite. I.

think I think you're I think you're an. early adopter. I mean, as senators go. >> Oh, I was I've uh I I gained access to. Open AI within 48 hours of being. available in the developer program. They. didn't know who I was. And I wasn't a. developer. I was trying to use the tools. that existed at the time. And so, yeah, I've invested in it for as long as it's. been available to the general public. I. use three different LLMs on any given. day today. Um, so but I consider myself. still a neoight in terms of the. technology, it capabilities as do some. of the founders because they're going,

"Holy cow, this thing can do that." They. created it. I think we can get this. under control. I've seen this movie. before. We just need coolheads in the. room. >> A lot of people have seen this movie. Uh, I'm told that you keep a potential. killer robot on your property to mow. your to mow your grass. >> I I I I don't appreciate the. characterization. I think he's a kind of. an electronic member of the family and. he's doing a great job on the pasture. >> Let's talk about some of the things that. you've watched in the last couple years.

of the second Trump administration that. have made you say in your own words, "WTF?". Uh we were filming with you yesterday. when a reporter asked you about a story. that Donald Trump Jr., not an. administration official, but you know, a. member of the family, allowed a Russian. oligarch to pay for part of his wedding. celebration. Did that surprise you? >> No, I was disgusted by it. I mean, come. on. The dude is worth somewhere between. 300 and $400 million. Maybe he has a.

liquidity problem, but why on earth you. thought it was a good idea um to receive. money to pay for a wedding uh that he. could have easily paid for or maybe skip. the frills that that were funded by this. oligarch. I mean, yeah, I grew up in a. uh in an environment where you stayed. away. You knew where the line was and. you took a step back and you never. navigated to gray. Uh this is a gray. area that I find very disturbing and in. some respects almost Marie Antoanet like.

in terms of u the the view that somebody. would have who's struggling really you. got a Russian oligarch funding a wedding. at some uh remote island wherever it. was. >> What do you think the oligarch got out. of it? >> Uh I don't know. >> And we've seen a lot of this in this. administration. Obviously, there are. versions before and Hunter Biden got a. lot of attention in the last. administration, but here you've got. cases like Don Jr. and the Trump family.

You've got people connected, the family. of Commerce Secretary Lutnik, not your. favorite person in the world who seem to. be doing very well in this. administration. >> How bad is the corruption? >> I can't speak to corruption. I'm not an. attorney and I don't have the facts. before me, but I can tell you the. appearances are disturbing and and this. one is probably the one that objectively. is the most disturbing because. everybody's admitted that it occurred, right? Uh and now they're trying to. justify it. I'd be writing a check back.

to that oligarch and apologizing for. whoever allowed that to happen. And it. may very well be, I don't know, it may. very well be that Donald Trump Jr. was. focused on a wedding and didn't even. know it was accepted. Uh, but if he. wasn't aware of it, >> he had bad advisors. >> The first thing he should have done is. say thank you, no thank you. I mean, how. much money could it have been? Why did. they do that? It's an unforced error. You. >> got to some moments that you call your. breaking points with the administration. And one of them was the Department of.

Justice, the moment when the Department. of Justice seemed to be opening an. investigation of the chairman of the. Federal Reserve for improper spending on. renovations. >> Talk about that. >> Well, I had uh I developed a. relationship with J. Pal that dates back. years uh since I've been on the banking. committee. I was becoming really. concerned with them trying to politicize. the Fed and u and threaten its. independence. So, and I was aware of.

this investigation that was going on. And so, I told my staff, let's be ready. within minutes of this becoming public. to make it very clear where I'm going to. be on Powell and his nomination uh and. not allowing anybody to replace him. I. really believed if the market thought. that the Fed was going to be controlled. by President Trump, uh, that it was. going to have dire consequences in the. market. Most people I've spoken with. agree with that. So, we just moved.

quickly to try and tie that off and, uh, and then you see what happened. We. finally got to a point where WH is. confirmed and the investigation has been. withdrawn. >> So, do you think that's a case study in. how the Senate can use leverage. successfully? >> It's 100%. And, you know, again, I hate. it. I was already working behind the. scenes to get it done. I hate it when. stuff gets the attention of the press. Some of the most fun I've had here are. the things that we've gotten done and. y'all never known about. And I was. hoping that's what we were going to do.

with Powell. But then somebody puro and. people in little DOJ uh over in the DC. decided to get too cute by half and it. required me to to come out and be public. about something that I'd been private. about for months. Another breaking point. was the plan or the proposal to pay out. 1.776. billion dollars in taxpayer money to. people who were in the president's view. persecuted for their political beliefs. or loyalty in the Biden administration.

What was your objection to that fund? >> I came out when I first saw it said it. was stupid on stilts. The fund itself, I. said, was a payout pot for punks because. it was going to allow somebody who. admitted to destroying the capital going. into it, causing harm to a Capitol. police officer to possibly seek. restitution after they admitted their. guilt. I mean, and then the uh the get. out of jail free card for the.

administration, it was just the. appearances were horrible. It made no. sense. and and somebody got cute by. having 1.776. thinking it was somehow patriotic. There. was not a single shred of patriotism. demonstrated by the people who breached. the capital. >> You ended up negotiating with then. acting attorney general Todd Blanch over. this. What was the agreement you came to. on the fund the 1776. >> to torch them and to to basically you. know create render it completely use.

useless not able you know like those. zombies in the walking dead you thought. you killed them and all of a sudden they. pop out of the closet. I didn't ever. want to see it again and he's satisfied. in my mind that that would go away and. uh. >> and are you confident that once you're. not in the Senate it will stay dead or. will it reanimate and shamble out of the. woods? >> Don't see it. I don't see any scenario. where it happens again. >> Okay. So, you're putting a lot of but. you're putting a lot of confidence then. in him. >> No, I mean there are structural reasons. why even if he wanted to and I don't. think he would. He knows how damaging it.

would be to the president. U. mechanically it's not going to happen. I. don't care what the Democrats say it's. [clears throat] dead. We stuck a fork in. it, which is exactly what I told him we. had to do to get my vote. One other. breaking point. No, the last breaking. point maybe for you was the big. beautiful bill and you called it the big. beautiful blunder. >> What was wrong with it? Um, it was. another example where somebody in the. White House or in the administration in. this case, I think it was over in CMS or.

DHS, air dropped language that was going. to cut direct payments to healthc care. providers that exceeded at least in the. state of North Carolina what the. Medicaid cuts were. I said I was fine. with the Medicaid cuts. As a matter of. fact, I thought they were necessary, but. North Carolina was already ready for a. cut because of the House proposed. measures, and I was okay with that. But. then when it came to the Senate, somebody got too cute by half and said, "Let's add this," which almost doubled.

the overall cuts to states like North. Carolina. It's not sustainable. Tried to. work with legislative leaders, tried to. work with congressional members, say, "Guys, I want to get to where the. president wants to get or the. administration, but this is not the way. to do it. This is too much change too. soon. It's going to be disruptive and. the ads are going to write themselves. >> How do you know when a cut is too steep? How do you assess that? >> The same way I did in business. I mean, you got to program it out and say, "How. do I do this? What are we going to do?". Home health is a classic example. The.

[snorts] states are going to go to some. of the more costly programs first to try. and get their their budgets in balance. There's going to be a lot of unintended. consequences. These things resonate with. the American people. Those sorts of ads. and those sorts of cuts are like, you. know, that could be me. I wish I could. have voted for the bill. Couldn't vote. for it when I knew it was going to have. an impact on North Carolina. Also knew. it was going to have an impact on the. politics this year. Both are true. >> As much as Tillis trains his fire on. Trump's adviserss, he also acknowledges. what he calls Trump's WTF moments,

threatening to seize Greenland, casting. himself as Jesus or Easter musings about. annihilating Iran. I think he said, "Open the straight.". >> Were you worried that we were going to. start carpet bombing Iranian civilians? >> No. And I've told the president this. before. I think you really need to. understand the weight of your words and. how literally people take you. >> But how do you tell the difference. between what people are supposed to take. literally and what they aren't?

>> You know, I' I'd like to think that most. of the time the president would be. surrounded with people who would finally. say, "Mr. president, if you do that, I'm. walking out this door. >> There's a Russian expression, if only. thesar knew, which means people don't. want to blame thesar when bad things. happen. They want to blame his. adviserss. But in this case with Trump, it's on him, right? In the end, whoever. he has around him, he's the zar. >> Truman famously said that the buck stops.

here. Get that. >> That's a good line. >> I get that. Um, but Truman had great. adviserss. Um, and I believe that the. president should rightfully look at some. of the people that said, "Oh, you look. so good. Oh, that speech was so great. Oh, Mr. President, that's a great idea.". And then go behind and say, "That's a. bad idea." Those people need to be held. accountable. And uh, and I think that. they will be in the in the pages of. history and probably in in future. elections. This falty to a would-be king.

or a powerful president is not a good. look in an election cycle where people. are frustrated. Why anybody hesitates to. say, "Look, I love the president. I. voted for the big beautiful bill. I'm. okay with the CMS cuts, but we got to. get this thing in Iran, right?" What's. wrong with that? If they're thinking it, why don't they say it? And the ones who. do, I think, will be rewarded at the. ballot box. And the ones who don't will. probably have a lot more time with their. family next year. >> So, you think the Republican party is. going to have a rough midterm? Yeah, we were going to historically. I.

think we're going to have more and we. can we can remove some of this just by. being straight with the American people. Look, I the American electorate is very. forgiving. Um, if you if if you. apologize for a misstep, explain what. you're going to do differently, you get. votes back. But if you double down on. something that's clearly not resonating. with the voters, then you're going to. get what you get. Do you think there's. any way the Republicans hold your seat. in North Carolina? >> Uh well, the the numbers are against it,

but I I tell you, it's uh the next. couple of weeks uh will be a make or. break. Uh I think in states like North. Carolina. >> after a tough 2026, >> it'll be 2028. It'll be a presidential. cycle. What does the battle over the. future of your party look like then? um you know, we're going to have this. situation where the president's going to. have a heavy influence on the primary. And boy, this is when we really have to. speak frankly about what kind of profile.

we need to win a national election in. 2028. Um and it probably isn't what the. president is thinking right now as a. go-to pick. So, we're going to have to. have a serious discussion with that. the. end the RNC other Republican. organizations need to come down and take. the president's advice um but look more. towards the Republican party priorities. and things that go beyond uh 2028. What's what would be wrong with the. president's go-to pick? >> Um because I think it's one that works.

well and red mega states won't work well. for a general election. The nation. >> are we are we talking about the vice. president or are we talking. hypothetically? >> Uh well I don't know. I assume right now. you had you know at I guess the Texas. uh Trump of Palooa whatever it was. called that he was kind of introduced. and I think endorsed by uh Turning. Point. Uh so it looks like things would. lead that way. That's not necessarily a. lock in terms of the president's. endorsement, but I don't think the. president should handpick the president.

is by definition going to be in. retirement when the next person is sworn. into office. Um, the president should. have a say, but this is not a this is. not a decision that should be solely. his. And my god, I I'll tell you, if we. have people looking at a nomination that. he wants that we all know isn't the. right one, um, then we better step up. and defend this party. I'm not going to. run for elected politics again, but I'm. going to be involved in that process. And people making decisions that I think.

undermines our brand and undermines our. chances for success will be in my. crosshairs any way they can be. politically. If this election goes the. way I think it will, that we will. maintain a majority in the Senate, maybe. net lose a seat or so, get some of these. good members back and we lose the House. That is a time for reflection and that. is a time for saying clearly if we lost. and lost by whatever the numbers happen. to be, we've learned from that. These. are the mistakes we've made. This is. what we're going to stop doing. This is.

what we're going to start doing. We're. going to start engaging Democrats. We're. going to start pushing aside these. partisan voices. We're going to be the. adults in the room. Um and this is what. we're going to continue to do. We're. going to continue to cut your taxes. We're going to continue to cut your. regulations. We're going to continue to. do the good work that's been done under. this administration. >> One thing that happens when a president. is unpopular with the country but still. popular in his own party. >> is that people try to criticize him by.

criticizing the people around him by. saying it's this person's fault, it's. that person's fault, it's the adviser's. fault, it's this group's fault. In the. end though, the president's bad approval. ratings, a lot of the things that have. gone wrong in his second administration, they're his fault, right? >> Look, you can't fire the president. That's not an option. The president is. going to be the president until the end. of 2028. The only thing that you can.

change, the only people you can fire are. the people around him. Tillis often talks as if the. administration just needs a dose of. managerial efficiency. >> I'm just going to hit play and let you. watch. >> And maybe a little less flattery in. cabinet meetings. >> You are fixing everything with your. policies. You have changed America and. created the golden age. >> Oh, wait a minute. I don't have enough. drama to go forward. [laughter]. >> So, you've been in a lot of corporate.

board meetings. >> Yeah. >> Do they ever sound like that? >> No. The American people want honesty. I. don't want sickopants around the. president because it ultimately harms. him. It may very well be that this is. what the president needs to feel good. about himself. But if that's true, the. president needs to seek help and find. confidence. This he's a successful man. He should feel comfortable in his own. skin. I don't need people gushing over. me to feel comfortable in my own skin. And I expect the president of the United. States to have that swagger going into a. room and get right to business. The.

American people want business. They. don't want cheerleaders. They want. people on the field doing the work. >> This is the work right here. >> We spoke with Tillis about the events of. January 6, 2021. He told us he was so. angry about what was happening that day. that he considered staying back in the. Senate chamber. >> On January 6, 2021, is it true you were. the last senator out of the chamber? >> I was in the back of the chamber and one. of the vice presidents, presidential. detail, came back and said, "Sir, we. really got to go." And uh we left. But.

part of the reason I was there was I was. angry. Quite honestly, I wanted to greet. him and not in a in a hospitable way. >> Were you expecting serious trouble? >> Not at that level. I mean, we heard the. noise, but at the time we thought it was. from outside. Um, but then it got louder. and louder and my my chair was at the at. the time center back of the chamber and. I could hear it more closely. I had no. idea they were all over the place at. that point. Do you think they were. sincere, the protesters, in the sense of. they thought they were patriots saving.

the republic? >> Some, but not many. I think many of them. were just people that are hateful, disrespectful of our democracy. There. were there were some in there that were. probably legitimately concerned and. sincere, but I don't even believe it was. a majority. I think some of them are. just grifters that look for a good cause. they can make money off of. Look, this. was the first time in the history of. this country that we had not had a. completely peaceful transfer of power on. that day. And that was despicable. The.

people that led the charge, the people. that assaulted police officers, I wish. they were still in prison and serving a. very long sentence. >> But they were there for the president. >> Yeah, I think so. I found it disgusting. So you have a president who in in in. this account has. >> effectively encouraged a mob to storm. the capital. You had the chance to. convict him in an impeachment trial and. prevent him from being president of the. United States again and you decided not. to. Why?

>> Because they cheapened the impeachment. process by not having witnesses and. going through the months that have. historically gone through when we've. done impeachment. it would transform it. into a vote of no confidence. I thought. that they were abusing it. The. president, every person, even a serial. killer, is entitled to due process. The. House did not give the president due. process. >> If you had run a trial and spent like. weeks, months litigating this,

>> well, first of all, would it have. changed your vote? Would you have voted. to convict in a scenario where they'd. run the full trial and the facts were. what they were? >> If they'd presented the evidence, I was. open to it. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> I read your book and one of your themes. was that senators need leverage. [snorts]. >> This was a moment when you as a. Republican senator and your colleagues, you had all the leverage over him. You. had the power to make sure he wasn't. president again. >> What you're doing is a a means justifies.

the end rationalization. So cheapening. the impeachment process to prevent. somebody from running in the future, I. just don't buy it. >> Regardless of whether it would have. shaped your vote, I think it's clear. that with the passage of time, the. Republican party as a whole became. uncomfortable with the whole subject of. January 6, but just specifically with. the reality that, you know, people did. bad things, the Capitol police were. assaulted, these kind of things. What. does what do members of Congress what.

does the country owe the Capitol Police. >> based on that day? >> Uh number one, respect. Uh number two, thanks. Um they got us out of the. chamber. We didn't have a scratch. As a. matter of fact, they got us into a. conference room that uh or committee. room that within two hours we were being. served a hot meal with two different. choices. Thank them for doing that. Thank them for taking uh the heat. And. when we passed through the hallway that.

we came down to get to the cap, I saw. people red and bleeding, police officers. holding the line and there were people. probably not 75 yards away. Uh we owe. them a debt of gratitude and they owe us. no apology. >> So there was a plan to install a plaque. >> honoring. honoring that sacrifice, those efforts, everything the Capitol Police did. Why. did it take so long to install it? Um, I have to believe that people were. afraid uh on the House side to follow.

through on the legislation that had been. passed because they thought there'd be. repercussions from the president, thanking the Capitol Police for. protecting us and recognizing January 6. is one of the most disgraceful days in. US history. >> Where did you install it? It's in the. hallway that every president who gets. inaugurated in the future walks through. before they go out to the uh the West. front. Uh and I think that that is an. absolutely appropriate place for it to.

be to remind every single one of them to. never repeat that um that day again. >> About to have a midterm election. Do you. have any concerns about how this same. president who you've been condemning for. January 6 will react if Republicans have. a bad night in the midterms? >> I think there's a risk. I really do. It. would be another political unforced. error if we do that. >> Tillis showed us the plaque honoring. those who protected the capital on. January 6th. While watching the sunset.

over Washington from the capital. terrace, he offered a warning about the. rise of the imperial presidency. >> You talk a lot in your book about the. risks of authoritarianism. What are you. worried about? >> The executive branch with its outsized. influence threatening people in. primaries basically degrading their. independence or eliminating it all. together. Then we become a a one. institution. country which is exactly what we fought. a revolutionary war over. I mean, we.

will have a sort of dictator king if. we're not careful. And we have to fight. uh for this institution. I'm a I don't. work for the president of the United. States. I work for the American people, the voters of North Carolina, and I'm a. steward of this institution. And I think. our members need to take that job very. seriously. We're not a sounding board. Uh we're not a manufacturing facility. We're a board of directors for this. democracy. And we need to assert that at. every chance we get. It seems like. there's a step change where presidents. just ignore Congress or don't even try.

and get things passed. Great. And all. we've seen over the the last four. administrations is a constant. escalation. I want checks and balances. I want all three branches to have their. individual role and continue to check. power as they have for 250 years. And I. think because we've been such a. successful democracy for so long, it's. hard for the American people to. understand how quickly we could lose it. all.