HEATED EXCHANGE: Rubio & Booker argue at hearing as US-Iran talks stall

Mr. Secretary, you and I talked a lot about Africa and I raised concerns about a lot of the cuts.We're seeing globally an increase in tuberculosis, an increase in malaria cases, we see a continued ongoing on the continent HIV crisis, and the United States has pulled back from a lot of its investments in those areas.Now with the crisis with Ebola, We see the challenges that have been brought about as a result of our surveillance, early detection, and the like.So I'm just very concerned about what the administration's strategy is, because we're clearly seeing here that what goes on in the continent of Africa directly affects our public health as well.

Well, first of all, I don't agree with that assessment.I mean, first of all, it's not about cutting back.The response here is not just how much money you spend.It's what results you're going to get.Now, let's talk about Ebola for a second.Ebola, the outbreak in Ebola, was in a war -torn isolated rural area in the DRC.

That's where that began.Since that time, our response has been very quick, very rapid.

Well, so you're saying you did not cut early detection, Pierce.I'm not talking...

I'm saying that whatever you're pointing to as the cut is not the reason why there was an Ebola outbreak.I'm not connecting the two.I'm simply saying...Well, you are connecting them.You said that our cuts...

Senator Rubio, I'm not trying to get in an argument with you.I would really like to actually have my questions answered.So, very quickly, we cut early detection when it comes to infectious diseases on the continent Factually, this is not an opinion.We made those cuts.We cut early warning systems on the continent.

It had nothing to do with the Ebola outbreak.

So I don't need to tell you, Secretary Rubio, that we're living in a place where an infectious disease crisis anywhere is a threat to public health everywhere.The United States has made major reductions in these areas that have put us more at risk.If you're talking about this clearly Ebola crisis, there's other things and other cuts we've made, and you see it factually.Even our own State Department personnel that I've talked to are saying we're less prepared for a global outbreak than we were before.And my worry is, specifically in a budget hearing, is this budget makes even deeper cuts into the kind of things that can prevent the next outbreak, or as we've seen with with unfortunately with COVID, have us more prepared.

Yeah, I don't agree with that assessment.I don't know who told you that at the State Department.So let's move on.My time is limited.I know that's an important question.I don't want to eat up your time, but I need to answer that because I just don't agree with that.

Mr. Secretary, you can't even agree on the facts.

That's not accurate.I mean, again, you look at what we've entered into.

It's not accurate.that we cut early detection.

Because those have all been repurposed and different arrangements that we now have with these countries as an example.

Well, I would like for the record, because we're not going to cover it in my short time, if you're telling me We are as prepared or more prepared before the Trump administration came in.I'd like to see the facts.

I think when these reforms are finalized, which we're on the verge of doing, we're actually going to be better prepared.We are we are responding today faster, not just to humanitarian crisis, but to outbreaks than we were before.We are responding in some cases within 72 hours are able to move funds to task, which you weren't able to do in the old system.And we're also building the capacity.

Mr. Secretary, may I please reclaim my time to shift gears?The Strait of Hormuz, I was listening to conversations you had with some of my colleagues.We've now seen the street closed for months, and you explained that we're going to see an opening of the street, and ultimately the exchange we will get for that is after that fact we will release certain sanctions.Is that correct?No, that's not what I said.

What I said was that if they open the streets, we will lift our blockade.The streets and the blockade are what are interrelated.

And so for the nuclear program, in exchange for getting rid of the fiscal material out of country I imagine is what you're the highly enriched uranium We would release sanctions.Is that correct?

Well, it's not just that it's also their enrichment activity They would have to you know, they're about to make very severe and significant concessions on what they intend to do

and already with the March relaxing of sanctions allowing Iranians to sell oil to the Chinese Estimates have been between 10 and 50 billion dollars.They got from that relaxing of sanctions How much money might we see in a deal that?in our relaxation of sanctions in order to get rid of the highly enriched uranium and stop their enrichment.

covered, and to the extent we've been able to enforce them, we have the revenues of those sales.So yeah, the oil, the Iranian oil was unsanctioned so that it could be sold, but the revenue would have to flow back to blocked accounts, which our sanctions were able to go after.We've also seized, I believe, six vessels in the Indo -Pacific that involved Iranian -sanctioned oil on top of it.So that wasn't necessarily a trade.They didn't get $50 billion directly as a result of it.They might have gotten some of it.

They certainly didn't get the majority of it.They are now losing hundreds of millions of dollars a day in revenue because of the blockade.And the blockade is exists because of what they're doing in the straits.

Right.And I guess the conclusion I have in my time has expired is that the Strait of Hormuz was open before this unjustified war.We're now scrambling to try to find a way to get it back opened again.Not only is it causing economic havoc to our country and to residents all around this nation, families trying to make ends meet, But you see, on top of that, the Iranians finding ways to leverage that, as we allowed them to do with the Chinese for tens of billions of dollars.And so my point is, before we even get to a nuclear negotiation, this regime is getting money to rebuild, purchase more drones, cause more havoc.And this is before we're even trying to get back to a nuclear deal.

But I don't, I apologize, I don't understand how they're getting this, what revenue are you referring to?

Well, there's two sources of revenue we're seeing.One is the military.the Chinese.That's factually documented.And number two, the revenue that you're proposing that they should receive by releasing all of their highly enriched uranium, as well as in making a commitment about their enrichment capacities.Hold on.

And that was the exact deal that you guys vilified that the president and you vilified President Obama from having.Here we have a worse situation where our adversary and our enemy, who's causing havoc in the region, who is funding proxies and terrorists, has discovered, thanks to you all, the power of shutting down the Strait of Hormuz.They knew that a long time ago and they've done it before.Clearly, we all knew that a long time ago.That's why this ill -conceived war should have never happened.You have made our adversary in a stronger negotiating position.

We are the strongest nation on the planet Earth and we're in a stalemate with Iran.And now, we're begging to get back into a deal that you all trashed in the first place.

There's no one begging.Clearly, this is a shame.Senator Booker, your time's up.I do want to address these points because they go to the heart of the matter.

No one's begging for anything here.The Iranians might be begging because their economy's losing hundreds of millions of dollars a day.Understand, Iran had street protests going on before all of this started.All of those factors, economic factors in Iran, are far worse today than they were six months ago when those protests started.were happening.They have hyperinflation.

Their currency is completely devalued.They're struggling to make payroll for their government workers.Iran is in a very serious situation.And if it was up to the political class there, and I understand everybody there is sort of radical in some way, but if it was up to the people that actually, like, go to elections and wear the suits and you see on TV, they'd probably make a deal tomorrow.The issue they're facing is that the supreme leader and the IRGC core are a little bit more immune from those pressures until they can be convinced otherwise.And I think that's the direction that they're moving in.

Because the reality, I don't know where you're getting this perception that Iran is stronger.Iran has no Navy left.They've lost a substantial percentage of their defense industrial base.Iran has lost a substantial percentage of their missile launchers.And their economy is far worse today, and I mean far worse today, than it was six to nine months ago.And they are looking at hundreds of billions of dollars of reconstruction costs just to get to where they were six months ago.

Mr. Rubio, you keep telling us how we're winning this war.The president keeps saying, completely annihilated.The war is not over.And yet the American people see how we're losing at the pump and with their costs, and yet this thing still hasn't been resolved.Every day he tweets out, oh, we've obliterated them, we've annihilated them, they're going to surrender.But yet we still find ourselves spending billions of dollars a week on a war abroad.

Senator Booker, you've gone way over it.It would be nice if we had hearings where people...Thank you, Senator Booker.Senator Scott.

All right.Secretary Rubio, so first off, do you think it's important to Americans that the Iranian regime doesn't have nuclear weapons and ability to destroy?

I think it's important to the world, the whole world.This question about the straits is a great example.The straits gives them leverage.Imagine what nuclear weapons would give them leverage to do.At that point, they wouldn't even have to announce that we're controlling this.They would just say, we control the straits.

There's nothing you can do about it because our nuclear weapon will allow us to do it.You will have to pay us a toll for using an international waterway from now on.And you can't do anything to us militarily because we'll blow you up with a nuclear weapon.That is the leverage that they were trying to build.If they ever got a nuclear weapon, not only would they have a nuclear weapon, not only would they control the straits, they would be able to act with impunity.because you wouldn't be able to touch them.

You wouldn't be able to do anything about them.