Rex Tillerson Refuses to Label Vladimir Putin a “War Criminal”

Marco Rubio grills Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of state.


Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fl.) confronted Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of state Rex Tillerson on Wednesday over his close ties to Vladimir Putin, asking the former Exxon Mobil CEO if he believed the Russian leader should be labeled a “war criminal.”

“I would not use that term,” Tillerson responded.

Tillerson claimed that he did not have sufficient information to charge Putin with committing war crimes, even when pressed with the Russian president’s record in Aleppo and evidence he authorized the use of battlefield weapons to kill civilians. Tillerson also refused to say if Putin was behind the killing of dissidents and journalists in Russia.

“Those are very, very serious charges to make and I would want to have much more information before reaching a conclusion,” Tillerson said. “I understand that there is a body of record in the public domain—I’m sure there is a body of record in the classified domain. And I think that in order to deal with a serious question like this, I would want to be fully informed before advising the president.”

Rubio, who has been a vocal critic of Trump’s views on Russia, called Tillerson’s answers “discouraging.”

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate