Secretary of state appears before Congress and repeats Trump administration’s claims that a deal is within reachIran has agreed to negotiate aspects of its nuclear program that it had refused to discuss even a month ago, the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, has claimed, even as Tehran announced it was halting peace talks and moving to fully close the strait of Hormuz.Appearing before the Senate foreign relations committee for the first time since the Trump administration launched the war against Iran – which was pitched as a short, weeks-long war, in February – Rubio repeated the Trump administration’s claims that a deal was within reach. Continue reading...
'I know your staff wrote up this cute statement for your TikTok video, but it's not true'
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Tuesday that any new nuclear deal with Iran would have to go far beyond the Obama-era JCPOA, arguing that agreement failed to stop Tehran from building up its enrichment capabilities.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio faced a blistering broadside Tuesday from Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the FY27 State Department budget — a session that quickly turned into a referendum on the Trump administration's foreign policy record."The Trump foreign policy has become a dumpster fire," Van Hollen said at the hearing, ticking through a lengthy charge sheet: a war in Iran that has killed at least 15 U.S. service members and sent gas prices up 28% year-over-year; a UAE crypto deal that enriched the Trump family; and USAID cuts he argued enabled the current Ebola outbreak in the DRC.Van Hollen also criticized Trump's China trip, saying the president returned with nothing but "ballroom envy" — a reference to Trump's Truth Social post marveling at Chinese ballroom architecture after a summit that produced no comprehensive trade deal — while having loosened chip export restrictions to Beijing beforehand.He also zeroed in on Trump's comments about gas prices."He called high gas prices 'peanuts' and said, 'I don't think about Americans' financial situation,'" Van Hollen said at the hearing. Trump made those remarks on May 19, as national inflation hit 3.8% — a three-year high.Rubio pushed back but conceded little. When Van Hollen pressed him on whether the administration had found new evidence to justify reinstating Cuba's state sponsor of terrorism designation, Rubio replied: "Why would I need new evidence?""Because you're claiming they're a state sponsor of terrorism, suggesting they're ongoingly involved in that," Van Hollen fired back.The two also sparred over media reports that the U.S. is working with Israel to strip Jordan of its custodianship over the Al-Aqsa Mosque complex. Rubio said he'd never heard the claim discussed. "Is it a credible website?" he asked. Van Hollen said he was glad to provide it.It was not the first time the two had clashed. Last year, Van Hollen told Rubio to his face that he regretted voting to confirm him. Rubio's response: "Your regret for voting for me confirms I'm doing a good job."
Now for a little dose of good news: while some companies are clinging to Pride-themed ad campaigns in June, one of the most notorious offenders is going all-in for Americana just ahead of the nation’s 250th birthday. Target’s homepage on Tuesday featured a man and woman with children smiling and clad in red, white, and ...
Secretary of State Marco Rubio got in a heated exchange with Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday.Rubio was testifying for the first time since the United States launched the Iran war and Booker raised questions about the Ebola crisis and the military operation. Booker told Rubio he was concerned the U.S. had rolled back its investment in eradicating diseases in Africa, and expressed doubt that the Iran war was over, despite the Trump administration's claims that it was."With the crisis of Ebola, we see the challenges have been brought about as a result of our surveillance, early detection, and the like. I'm concerned about what the administration's strategy is," Booker said. "We are clearly seeing that what goes on on the continent of Africa directly affects our public health as well."But Rubio did not see eye to eye with Booker."I don't agree with the assessment," Rubio said. "It's not about cutting back. The response is that how much money you spent it's the results you will get. Ebola, the outbreak was in a war-torn, isolated, rural area in the DRC. Since then, our response has been very rapid."Booker pushed back."You did not cut early detection?" Booker asked. "That's not the reason there was Ebola," Rubio said. Booker cut him off as the conversation intensified."I'm not trying to get in an argument. I would like to have my questions answered," Booker said. "We cut early detection when it comes to infectious diseases on the continent, factually. This is not an opinion. We cut early warning systems on the continent."Rubio continued to argue with Booker and interjected the senator, saying "It had nothing to do with the Ebola outbreak.""I don't need to tell you, we are living in a place where an infectious disease crisis anywhere is a threat everywhere," Booker said, adding that he worried further budget cuts would complicate future outbreaks. "The United States made major reductions in these areas putting us more at risk. If you're talking about the Ebola crisis, other cuts we have made, you see it factually. Even our own State Department personnel I've talked to are saying we are less prepared for a global outbreak than we were before."Rubio denied Booker's comments."I don't agree with that assessment," Rubio said. "I don't know who told you that at the State Department." "You can't even agree on the facts. It is not accurate that we cut early detection?" Booker asked, pressing Rubio to respond. "Those have been repurposed," Rubio said. "The different arrangements with the countries are an example."But Booker wasn't convinced. "If you're telling me that we are as or more prepared before the Trump administration came in, I would like to see the facts," Booker said. "I think when the reforms are finalized we will be better prepared. We are responding faster not just humanitarian crises but faster than before," Rubio said.Booker then moved on to discuss the Strait of Hormuz blockade."The conclusion I have is the Strait of Hormuz was opened before this unjustified war," Booker said. "We are now scrambling to find a way to get it back open again." Booker argued the U.S. was now in a "worse situation, an adversary and our enemy is causing havoc in the region, funding proxies and terrorists, has discovered, thanks to you all, the power of shutting down the Strait of Hormuz." He said Iran was now in a better position, while America was worse off."It made our adversary have a stronger negotiating position," Booker said. "We are the strongest on earth and we are in a stalemate with Iran. We are begging to get back into a deal that you trashed in the first place." "There is no one begging," Rubio maintained.Rubio argued that the war was over — and Booker pushed back, saying that although Trump says it has ended, it hasn't."You keep saying how we are winning the war," Booker said. "The war is over now," Rubio said. "The war is not over. The American people see how we are losing at the pump and with costs. Yet this thing has not been resolved," Booker said.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio walked into the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday morning to a chorus of protests — his first congressional testimony since the Trump administration launched the war in Iran three months ago.As Rubio entered the hearing room, protesters erupted from their seats and screamed directly at him."Marco Rubio, stop killing Cubans!" one shouted. "Repent, repent Marco Rubio!" another cried, as Capitol Police moved in to drag them out.Before the hearing even began, a separate group was arrested outside the briefing room. NewsNation's Joe Khalil reported the group was "very vocal," chanting "Rubio lies, people with AIDS die." The Associated Press also reported protesters chanting, "One child dies every 30 mins."The disruptions set a combative tone for a hearing centered on the State Department's $36 billion budget request but expected to pivot quickly to the faltering ceasefire with Tehran. Tehran suspended talks Monday after Israel continued strikes on Lebanon.Rubio's prepared remarks offered little conciliation. "The U.S. government is not a charity," he wrote. "We are not here to play social worker."The committee's ranking Democrat, New Hampshire Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, was withering in her opening remarks — accusing Rubio of refusing to provide information on U.S. operations in Iran, the American troop posture in Europe, and support for Ukraine."When you do notify Congress, it's to inform us of decisions you have already made," Shaheen said.It is Rubio's first public appearance before Congress since the war began in February — with a ceasefire under strain and midterms on the horizon.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio was pressed Tuesday over the Trump administration’s refusal to grant lawmakers access to an official government memo on the U.S. war against Iran, one that Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) suspected may have “something in there you don’t want us to see.”Rubio testified Tuesday before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, his first appearance before the body since the war against Iran was launched in late February. Kaine, a member of the committee, asked Rubio why the Trump administration has, to date, refused to share with lawmakers the written opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) on the war against Iran, despite having done so for other recent conflicts.“We can agree with it or not, but the administration presented a legal opinion from the [Justice Department on Operation Southern Spear] that we could review. Absolute Resolve, the effort against [Venezuelan President Nicolás] Maduro, the administration presented a legal rationale that we could review,” Kaine said. “Now, we could review both in classified, they've not been made public. We're 92 days into a war against Iran and the administration will not let Congress look at the OLC legal opinion justifying the war.”Kaine pressed Rubio for answers given the $1.5 trillion defense spending request Congress is being asked to approve, a request that represents an approximate 40% increase of the previous year’s defense spending. He also argued that the Trump administration’s hesitancy to share the OLC opinion on the war against Iran gave lawmakers cause for concern.“Mr. Secretary, you know what kind of thinking we do. If you showed us the legal rationale for two wars and you won't show us the legal rationale for the third... is there something in the rationale they don't want us to see?” Kaine said. “Is there a dissenting opinion that says it's not legal? Are there conditions like you can't strike civilian infrastructure like schools and bridges? Are there factual assertions like the war will be over in two days, or Iran will never close the Strait of Hormuz? By not sharing the legal opinion, you give us the opinion that there's something in there that you don't want us to see.”Kaine then asked Rubio if he would use his “influence” in the administration to press for the OLC legal opinion to be shared with lawmakers.“I can certainly inquire as to why it has not been available,” Rubio said before stumbling his words. “I don't think there's a reason why... I... I am not aware that... I'm – in fact, my understanding is that they have provided documentation to the committee.”Kaine interjected, clarifying that the Trump administration had provided “documentation” to lawmakers but not the OLC legal opinion. Kaine also asserted that Rubio, as a former U.S. senator himself, would “not accept” being denied access to a critical government memo.“Alright, well let me take that back and ask the Office of Legal Counsel,” Rubio conceded. “I'll take that back.”"You give us the opinion that there's something in there that you don't want us to see."Sen. @timkaine presses SOS @marcorubio on why the OLC legal opinion on the Iran war has not been shared with lawmakers."Is there a dissenting opinion that says it's not legal?" pic.twitter.com/vPnGdRufdL— Alexander Willis (@ReporterWillis) June 2, 2026