Washington, D.C. – A House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Wednesday witnessed a heated exchange between Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), as the two clashed over the format of questioning. Sherman’s insistence on “yes” or “no” answers was met with resistance from Rubio, who argued that the complex nature of the topics required more nuanced responses.
Rubio was testifying before the committee, addressing a range of foreign policy issues including foreign aid, nuclear proliferation in Saudi Arabia and Iran, and the war in Ukraine. The confrontation began during Sherman’s questioning about a potential nuclear cooperation agreement with Saudi Arabia.
Rubio, attempting to provide context, began, “First, I will tell you that there has been no conversation about entering into one. For example, during the recent trip…” However, Sherman interrupted, demanding a simple “yes” or “no” answer due to time constraints.
Rubio countered, “Well, I’m going to give you my answer if you want my answer.” Sherman, however, reclaimed his time, leading Rubio to retort, “Well, reclaim your time. But it’s not a game show. I get to answer. These are complex questions.”
Sherman, emphasizing the procedural differences between the House and Senate, stated, “Mr. Secretary, I’m reclaiming my time. The filibustering takes place in the Senate. Not here.” Rubio responded, “I’m not filibustering. I’m trying to answer your question.”
The tension continued as Sherman shifted his focus to Iran, asking Rubio whether the Trump administration would maintain sanctions until Iran verifiably agreed to abandon all nuclear enrichment. “That’s a yes or no question,” Sherman asserted.
Rubio replied, “No, it’s not.” Sherman pressed for a direct answer, asking, “Well, can you give me a yes or no? Should I go on to go on to the next?”
Rubio clarified the administration’s stance, stating, “We believe that Iran should not be allowed to enrich uranium, correct. We believe that an acceptable deal with Iran is one in which they cannot enrich, because if they can enrich, they can weaponize.”
Sherman, seeking a more definitive commitment, asked, “I know why we don’t want — I asked you, will we agree, will we continue the sanctions until they verifiably agree to get rid of enrichments?”
Rubio responded, “Oh, you have nothing to worry about. The worry was the previous administration. This administration—” before Sherman interrupted, stating, “Your refusal to give me an answer is loud and clear,” and reclaiming his time.
Throughout the hearing, Rubio emphasized the importance of measurable outcomes for the American people in foreign policy decisions, asserting that government actions must contribute to the nation’s safety, strength, or prosperity. The clash with Sherman highlighted the differing approaches to congressional questioning and the complexities of addressing sensitive foreign policy matters.
Discussion about this post