Sen. Tim Kaine Presses Marco Rubio Over Iran War Legal Basis at Heated Senate Hearing — AC1G

[0:00] I applaud the sea change, and you know you've got support on a bipartisan basis here in the Congress to move this forward. [0:05] Thank you, Mr. Secretary. [0:05] Thank you, Senator Hagerty. [0:06] Senator Cain. [0:07] Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to Senator Hagerty for mentioning our work together in the Philippines and Mexico. [0:12] Mr. Secretary, you won't be surprised that I'm going to ask you about the Western Hemisphere. [0:15] You and I traded the gavel and the ranking on the Western Hemisphere subcommittee when you were on this committee, [0:21] and that was good, productive work. [0:23] I want to ask you about Operation Southern Spear. [0:25] The operation to strike boats in the Pacific and the Caribbean, the dozens of operations have now killed more than 200 people. [0:35] Have you been involved as Secretary of State or National Security Advisor in discussion about the targeting criteria that are used to decide which boats we should strike? [0:44] No, but not because I've avoided it, but because those are largely legal decisions, right? [0:48] But if you haven't been involved in a discussion, as the National Security Advisor, are you aware of what the targeting criteria are? [0:56] Yeah, I mean, they go through it. [0:57] So every strike has a legal officer on the deck that has to make a determination about whether the call is legal or not, [1:03] and this is done by the Department of War the way it's been done in other theaters around the world. [1:07] Here's what I want to ask you about. [1:08] So you're generally aware of the targeting criteria. [1:10] I know what the targeting criteria are because of briefings I've had in this committee, in the Armed Services Committee. [1:17] It's all been in classified, and I'm not allowed to discuss the targeting criteria because they've only been shared and classified. [1:24] But I don't think I'm prohibited from describing things that aren't targeting criteria. [1:28] So I'll give you an obvious example. [1:30] Everyone on the boat is right-handed. [1:34] That's not a targeting criteria. [1:35] It would be ridiculous. [1:36] Everyone on the boat is what? [1:37] Everybody on the boat is right-handed. [1:39] That's not a targeting criteria. [1:41] It's obviously not a targeting criteria. [1:43] It would be improper for it to be a targeting criteria. [1:46] Here's one that's not so obvious and that surprised me. [1:51] There's evidence of narcotics on the boat. [1:54] That is not a targeting criteria. [1:57] I have been briefed on Southern Spears since the first operation on September 2 and most recently within the last couple weeks, [2:02] and I've asked again and again, have the targeting criteria changed? [2:06] No, they have not. [2:07] What are their criteria? [2:08] Here's what they are. [2:09] I can't describe it here. [2:10] But the presence of narcotics on the boat has never been a targeting criteria. [2:17] Would you have any ability to explain? [2:19] And the administration could have picked that as a targeting criteria. [2:23] They chose items that were targets, that authorized the use of the U.S. military to sink boats and kill people. [2:30] But they have not used the presence of narcotics on the boat as one of the targeting criteria. [2:36] And I would suggest to my colleagues, if you go look at the individual files of all the strikes, and I've looked at the first 46, [2:42] they are consistent with what I've just said about something that's not on the list of targeting criteria. [2:49] Why would the administration not include the presence of narcotics on the boat as a targeting criteria in Operation Southern Spears? [2:58] As you just outlined, I can't discuss the specifics of the targeting criteria, but I can tell you the one thing that is obvious is that the targeting criteria is not single source. [3:06] In essence, there are multiple checks. [3:08] There are three elements to the targeting criteria. [3:11] Right. [3:11] And all of it informed and infused by intelligence collection. [3:15] In essence, they have to have true links. [3:16] I can tell you they do walk away from strikes. [3:18] There are multiple times that I've been aware. [3:20] I'm not aware of every strike because it's not reported on a regular basis, delegated. [3:24] But there have been strikes that they've walked away from because it doesn't meet the criteria or because of doubt. [3:28] I'm not saying that the strikes that I've reviewed don't meet the targeting criteria. [3:32] But I'm saying how odd it is, especially since the administration always announced this is against narco traffickers, we've attacked narco traffickers, how odd it is that the presence of narcotics on a boat is not one of the targeting criteria. [3:47] And I would encourage my colleagues, get the same briefing I've gotten, take a look at the strike files. [3:52] You'll be as surprised as I am. [3:53] Here's the second question. [3:56] Again, in your dual role, Secretary of State National Security Advisor. [4:00] The administration's Operation Southern Spear, we could agree with it or not, but the administration presented a legal opinion from the DOJ that we could review. [4:12] Absolute resolve, the effort against Maduro. [4:15] The administration presented a legal rationale that we could review. [4:18] Now, we could review both in classified. [4:20] They've not been made public. [4:21] 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. [4:31] Intel Committee members, SFRC members, Armed Services Committee members, Rank and File members. [4:37] The administration will not make it available to us. [4:41] Now, you can imagine, A, we're the Oversight Committee. [4:44] B, you're here asking for a budget, and in the Armed Services Committee, they're asking for a trillion five, an increase of 40% of our last year's budget, but won't let us see the legal opinion. [4:55] And, Mr. Secretary, you know what kind of thinking we do. [4:59] If you've showed us the legal rationale for two wars, and you won't show us the legal rationale for the third, hmm, is there something in the rationale they don't want us to see? [5:09] Is there a dissenting opinion that says it's not legal? [5:12] Are there conditions, like you can't strike civilian infrastructure like schools and bridges? [5:16] Are there factual assertions, like the war will be over in two days, or Iran will never close the Straits of Hormuz? [5:23] By not sharing the legal opinion with the Article I Oversight Branch, you give us the opinion that there's something in there you don't want us to see. [5:33] Could you use your influence as the President's Chief National Security Advisor, Secretary of State, NSA, to get the administration to share the Iran war legal opinion with Congress? [5:45] Well, look, first of all, obviously the Department of State does not develop the legal opinion. [5:50] That's the Office of Legal Counsel. [5:51] You're the Chief National Security Advisor. [5:52] So I think what you're asking is why haven't the Office of Legal Counsel provided it? [5:55] They don't work for the National Security Council. [5:57] I'm actually asking, will you use your influence as President's Chief National Security Advisor? [6:01] Here's what I'll do. [6:02] I can certainly inquire as to why it has not been available. [6:05] I don't think there's a reason why. [6:07] I am not aware that. [6:09] In fact, my understanding is they have provided documentation to the committee. [6:13] Not the opinion. [6:13] As part of the war. [6:14] Not the opinion. [6:15] Well, that's different. [6:15] And you wouldn't accept that. [6:17] All right. [6:18] Well, let me take that back and ask the Office of Legal Counsel. [6:20] But it's certainly, they provided the legal rationale for the strike. [6:24] You're asking for the actual written opinion the way it was in the other time. [6:26] Which they provided us, and I saw this to be an absolute result. [6:29] I'll take that back. [6:31] Thank you. [6:31] Senator Lee. [6:33] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:35] Thanks, Secretary Rubio, for being... [6:37] You look like Rick. [6:37] I apologize. [6:38] There's through the office. [6:39] Well, look, all this beautiful, and we can't help that. [6:44] But thanks for all of your efforts. [6:47] You are a very effective spokesperson for not only President Trump and the administration, [6:53] but for the United States. [6:54] It's been a great... [6:55] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:55] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:55] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:56] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:56] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:57] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:57] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:57] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:57] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:58] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:59] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:59] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [7:00] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [7:01] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [7:01] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [7:02] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [7:03] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [7:04] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [7:05] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [7:06] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [7:07] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [7:08] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [7:09] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.