Marco Rubio outted himself again the other day during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing that was questioning Secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson.
Aggressive inquiries, especially of someone with Tillerson’s problematic background, are called for. But pointedly asking Tillerson “Is Vladimir Putin a war criminal?” is not helpful. Whatever we think of the Trump-Putin bromance, we shouldn’t want needlessly worse relations than we now have.
Not agreeing with Rubio that Putin was a war criminal made Tillerson look diplomatic to a fault. Conversely, it positioned Rubio as a no-nonsense, street-smart sort–unless Tillerson agreed with him–and took the bait. That can be a fraught situation, when, in a global world, every word–whether it’s a confirmation-hearing response or a State of the Union address–sends international signals that transcend domestic politics.
But Rubio has a key committee vote and, thus, leverage. His performance was a less-than-subtle reminder that he’s still around and still a possible Republican-establishment alternative to President Tweet. Another grandstanding reminder was his extraction of a promise from Tillerson that, if confirmed, he would recommend that Trump veto any bill lifting the Cuban embargo. This is obviously not in the best interest of America or Cuba–but it still plays well among the usual suspects.
This Q&A was supposed to be an exercise in probing the readiness of Rex Tillerson to be secretary of state. Instead, it was a self-evident, self-serving forum for Rubio.