The problem with Rubio’s line of questioning was that the current president and secretary of state have not branded Putin a war criminal. Yes, the administration has pointed to war crimes in Syria, but there has not been a declaration from President Obama or John Kerry that Putin is a war criminal. So Rubio was asking the yet-to-be-confirmed pick for secretary of state for a yet-to-be-inaugurated president to announce a significant change in the U.S. government’s position toward a major global rival. It was unreasonable at best, and it smacked of grandstanding by a senator who wants to be president. (Indeed, Rubio later omitted the is-Putin-a-war-criminal question when he engaged in a similar line of questioning with Pompeo.)
Tillerson’s confirmation, indeed, his fate in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is not a lock because of the committee’s closely-divided partisan makeup. There are 11 Republicans and 10 Democrats, meaning that if just one Republican — say, Rubio — were to vote against Tillerson, and Democrats were united against him, the nomination would be voted down in committee.
It’s not clear whether Rubio, still defined to some extent by his bitter rivalry with Donald Trump in the Republican primaries, wants to be the deciding vote against one of the new president’s key nominees. “I’m prepared to do what’s right,” is all Rubio would tell reporters afterward.
But even if Rubio joined with Democrats to vote against Tillerson, the nomination could still be brought to the Senate floor for an up-or-down vote.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member