On Tuesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio was submitted to an audience in the Senate, and the Democrats of the Senate continued him.
Boy, were they sorry.
The reason they pursued it is because they are very concerned about President Trump’s policies, both with regard to immigration and also with regard to generalized foreign policy. This is because Trump is a break in the past on these two questions.
President Trump has created a consensus on illegal immigration, and Marco Rubio played a main role by helping to enforce the vision of President Trump: close the southern border, and if people come here as guests, they cannot stay here if they are interested in overthrowing the American system and supporting terrorist groups.
Democrats, of course, have a much more open borders’ vision of what America should be. They believe that, for a strange reason, the United States literally owes it everyone on earth to let them in.
It is the same exact perspective that has destroyed large parts of Europe.
Rubio, who has become one of the most popular members of the Trump administration, retaining wide popularity, destroyed the Democrat after the Democrat.
It started with the senator from Nevada, Jacky Rosen, asking Rubio how he faced his past opinions with his current representation of Trump’s foreign policy.
The answer, of course, is that Rubio has not changed many of his past opinions concerning the Trump administration. There is a desire on all sides to claim Trump as theirs. But Trump is not these elements. Regarding foreign policy, you have a lot of different camps within the Republican Party at this stage, ranging from the interventionist even to those who are not only isolated, but sometimes alongside people who have generally been our enemies.
President Trump has no in -depth ideology, and there is a “thrones game” that occurs with regard to foreign policy in a given situation and a given day. This is why you have seen a bunch of flip flops on Ukraine, a bunch of flip flops with regard to Gaza, a bunch of flip flops on Iran, flip-flops in the Middle East and flip-flops on Tiktok and China.
But it is because the battle is underway. Marco Rubio was responsible for offering a more coherent face to this. And it does a great job, because the truth is that it is a very difficult thing to do.
Rosen asked: “I would respectfully ask for a yes or no. Do you not think that women’s participation is important and allows better results? ” Rubio retaliated: “It’s not a television game. I will not answer with a yes or a no. This is an important question, and I can answer it. We do not give up the problems of women. ”
It is funny for me that democratic senators think that the main concern of the American people at this stage is the number of women who will be in the State Department or the questions of women in Afghanistan.
President Trump does not tend to make these sycophanic spots based on the appearance in which you claim that you are for women’s rights while abandoning 19 million women to the Taliban predations in Afghanistan, as Joe Biden did.
Senator Chris Van Hollen – who could be the stiff member of the American Senate outside of Mazie Hirono – suggested that he regretted voting for Rubio, who obtained 99 votes for his confirmation in the Senate. “I must tell you directly and personally that I regret voting for you for the Secretary of State,” grooved Van Hollen. Rubio retaliated: “First of all, your regret of having voted for me confirms that I do a good job.”
Rubio continued to own Van Hollen again and again. Van Hollen, of course, had gone to El Salvador to visit the accused’s leader and an alleged member of MS-13 Kilmar Abrego Garcia, which was expelled. Rubio said: “We have expelled gang members, including the one with which you had a Margarita. And this type is a human trafficker, and this type is a gang banger. And the evidence will be clear. “
It didn’t go well for Van Hollen. Rubio also criticized her on exceeding, saying:
There is a division in our government between the federal branch and the judicial branch. … The judicial branch cannot tell me or the president how to conduct a foreign policy. No judge can tell me how I have to raise awareness of a foreign partner or what I must tell them. And if I reach this foreign partner and speak to them, I have no obligation to share this with the judiciary. Just as a judge cannot order me to negotiate with a Minister of Foreign Affairs in Russia; They cannot order me to negotiate with a Minister of Foreign Affairs or the President of Salvador.
Regarding immigration, Rubio has stunned them. He was questioned about the visas of people who are here as guers and if they should be dismissed according to the things they say. He said:
We are going to do more. There is more to come. We will continue to revoke the visas of people who are here as guers and disturb our higher education. People pay money. These children pay money to go to school, and they have to travel a lot of crazy people who are here … I want to do more. … The other day, some guys led a riot … and I asked, please, can you find the arrests of all the people who were arrested during this riot of this campus? Because if one of them has a visa, we will revoke it.
“Our immigration policy should be based on the national interest of the United States. End of history,” he said, adding: adding:
If there is a subset of people who are easier to examine – who we understand better who they are and what they are going to do when they come here – they will receive a preference, without a doubt. There are a lot of sad stories worldwide, millions and millions of people around the world. It’s tearing. We cannot assume millions and millions of people worldwide. No country can.
He is absolutely right about this.
The greater questions occurred about foreign policy in general. Rubio has been asked if the United States is withdrawing from the world. He said:
I want you to know what the intention of changes is. It is not a question of dismantling the American foreign policy, and it is not a question of withdrawing from the world, because I have just struck 18 countries in 18 weeks. It doesn’t look like a withdrawal. And I see some of these foreign ministers, including people from Ukraine, more than I saw my own children. And I speak to them at least three times a week. We are engaged in the world, but we will engage in a world that has meaning, and it is intelligent. And it’s not about saving money. It is a question of guaranteeing that we deliver to our people what they deserve: a foreign policy which makes America stronger, safer and more prosperous.
Articulated, aggressive and inflexible.
You can’t do better than that.
