Rubio -- who refused to say if he would vote for Tillerson after a day of testimony -- pressed the former ExxonMobil CEO hard Wednesday on a slew of human rights questions, pushing him to denounce the behavior of Russia, China, Saudi Arabia and the Philippines and expressing deep disappointment when the Texan refused to do so. 
 
 Rubio's vote could make the difference in Tillerson's progress, as Republicans have only a one-vote margin on the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee and Democrats may not support him. But it is possible, should Tillerson stall in committee, for the Senate to bypass the panel and bring the nomination to the full Senate for a vote. 
 
 "This is a very important decision and I recognize the partisan split on the committee and what it means," Rubio told reporters after the hearing. "I'm prepared to do what's right." 
 
 The Florida senator -- who lost to Trump in the GOP presidential primary and had heated personal exchanges with him during the campaign -- told Tillerson that "moral clarity" is crucial to US foreign policy and expressed disbelief that Tillerson wouldn't deliver judgments on countries' alleged human rights abuses when information is widely available. 
 
 "The position you've been nominated to is, in my opinion, the second-most important position of the US government, with all due respect to the vice president," Rubio said. 
 
 When the world sees that "the United States is not prepared to stand up and say, yes, Vladimir Putin is a war criminal, Saudi Arabia violates human rights, it demoralizes these people all over the world," Rubio said. 
 
 Rubio wasn't alone on the fence. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, said he is also undecided about Trump's choice. 
 
 "I think probably what happened today is he is a good man, an honest guy, well qualified in terms of his life experience, but I don't think he grew the vote today," Graham said. "I think there are a lot of Democrats that may have been thinking about voting for him are going to have a harder time of it." 
 
 Graham said Tillerson failed to answer a key question at this hearing about what he intends to do about Russian election-related hacking. 
 
 "Real fuzzy answer," Graham said. "He needs to clear that up. If he doesn't clear that up, it would be a problem, and I think he can clear it up and he needs to clear it up." 
 
 JUST WATCHED Rex Tillerson perfects the non-answer Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Rex Tillerson perfects the non-answer 01:18 
 
 Tillerson did get one small bit of good news - Sen. James Lankford, a Republican from Oklahoma, indicated on CNN's "Erin Burnett Out Front" that he is "leaning" toward a yes vote on Tillerson, but still wants to review more materials. 
 
 During his day-long testimony, Tillerson repeatedly broke with his future boss on key foreign policy issues, backing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, denouncing Russian aggression in Ukraine, and affirming his belief in climate change. 
 
 Tillerson said he wasn't against TPP, a massive trade pact that Trump condemned as he made staunch opposition to free trade deals a centerpiece of his presidential campaign. 
 
 "I do not oppose" TPP, Tillerson told the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee. "I share some of (Trump's) views regarding whether the agreement that was negotiated serves all of America's interests the best." 
 
 Tillerson also blasted Russia's invasion of Ukraine as an "illegal action" -- something Trump hasn't done -- and said he even would have sent the country defensive weapons to use against Moscow. 
 
 In a striking exchange, Tillerson admitted that he'd only spoken to the President-elect about world affairs in general terms, and that they haven't discussed Russian policy, telling the Senate panel "that has not yet occurred." 
 
 And he took steps in his opening remarks to strike an overall tougher line on Moscow than Trump has to date, saying, "Russia must know that we will be accountable to our commitments and those of our allies, and that Russia must be held to account for its actions." 
 
 On climate change, Tillerson told the senators he believes "the risk of climate change does exist and the consequences of it could be serious enough that actions should be taken." In contrast, Trump has in the past described climate change as a hoax perpetrated by China to hurt US manufacturers, although he recently acknowledged the possibility that human activity could be a contributing factor. 
 
 He expressed respect for Mexico, calling it "a longstanding neighbor and friend of this country." In sharp contrast to Trump, who said during the campaign that the country sends undocumented rapists and criminals to the US, Tillerson said, "I would never characterize an entire population by any single term at all." 
 
 JUST WATCHED Trump: Pence getting approvals for wall Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Trump: Pence getting approvals for wall 01:19 
 
 And he distanced himself from calls to create a registry of American Muslims. "I do not support targeting any particular group," he said. 
 
 He also rejected Trump's campaign suggestion that South Korea and Japan should consider developing nuclear arsenals. "I do not agree," he said, adding, "We simply cannot back away from our commitment" to reduce nuclear weapons. 
 
 Tillerson encountered repeated challenges from senators on Russia and on ExxonMobil's track record on climate change and the company's opposition to sanctions against rogue regimes. 
 
 It was enough, at the hearing's halfway point, for Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York to tweet about the President-elect or "PEOTUS" and his State Department nominee. 
 
 "Tillerson hearing raises real questions as to whether PEOTUS & cabinet are prepared to stand up to Putin, Iran & represent US interests," Schumer said. 
 
 In a departure from the pattern, Tillerson noted his position on the nuclear deal with Iran was consistent with Trump's. He told senators that while "no one disagrees with the ultimate objective" to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, he feels there should be a "full review of that agreement as well as any number of side agreements that are part of that agreement." 
 
 And he echoed Trump's frequent condemnations of China, calling Beijing's attempts to control airspace and its territorial claims "illegal actions." He said China's construction of artificial islands to further its territorial claims were "akin to Russia's taking of Crimea. It's taking of territory that others lay claim to." 
 
 Tillerson, who said he hadn't received any classified briefings on the alleged Russian hacks, agreed that it's a "fair assumption" that Putin authorized the attacks. 
 
 For weeks, Trump has denied or played down Moscow's involvement in efforts to meddle in the US election, although Wednesday, at a press conference Wednesday, Trump said, "I think it was Russia." 
 
 At the hearing, Democrats -- and some Republicans -- came out swinging. 
 
 Democrats questioned why in his prepared opening remarks Tillerson didn't mention Russia's alleged hacking of US elections, and they hammered his views on human rights and ExxonMobil's ties to Russia. 
 
 Rubio started out by probing Tillerson's views on Russia's violations of human rights and its alleged war crimes in Syria, pointing to information in the public record about civilians being targeted in the Syrian city. 
 
 "Is Vladimir Putin a war criminal?" Rubio demanded. 
 
 "I would not use that term," Tillerson said. "Those are very, very serious charges to make, and I would want to have much more information before reaching a conclusion." 
 
 Sen. Robert Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat, challenged Tillerson on whether his business experience prepares him to represent the US to the world. "Diplomacy is not the same as deal making," Menendez said. 
 
 He also cited ExxonMobil's membership in a group that lobbied against Iran sanctions and Exxon's pursuit of a deal in Iraqi Kurdistan despite US opposition. And he brought into the hearing room documents showing millions in dollars of Exxon spending against sanctions on Iran and Russia. 
 
 "What message are you now going to be able to send to American businesses who are intent on pursuing their own interests at the expense of US policies and potential political stability in foreign countries," the New Jersey senator asked. 
 
 "I have never lobbied against sanctions, personally," Tillerson said. "To my knowledge, Exxon never directly lobbied against sanctions. Not to my knowledge." 
 
 "There was lobbying here," Menendez told him. "It's a little amazing that you don't know Exxon was lobbying on these issues." 
 
 Maryland Democratic Sen. Ben Cardin later put into the record documents showing Exxon had spent $3.4 million lobbying against the Iran Sanctions Act. 
 
 Tillerson also tangled with Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine over long-standing allegations that ExxonMobil misled the public and its investors about internal research that outlined the threat of climate change. The company's shareholders have filed a class action lawsuit against the company in Texas, and it faces a similar lawsuit in Massachusetts as well. 
 
 "Do you lack the knowledge to answer my question or are you refusing to answer my question?" Kaine challenged the nominee. 
 
 "A little of both," Tillerson said. 

 Rex Tillerson has closed his share of high-stakes deals as the CEO of ExxonMobil, persuading and partnering with unpredictable players across the globe. But on Wednesday he fell short of winning over a new, and especially key, contingent: the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, gatekeeper to Tillerson’s confirmation as the next secretary of state. 
 
 During roughly eight hours of testimony, Tillerson faced surprise pushback from a Republican questioner, Sen. Marco Rubio. The onetime rival of President-elect Donald Trump praised Tillerson’s personal character but pressed him aggressively on his stance toward Russia and President Vladimir Putin, with whom Tillerson cultivated a close relationship as head of ExxonMobil, and on human rights violations across the globe. 
 
 In one telling exchange, Tillerson would not, at Rubio’s urging, characterize Putin as a “war criminal” for his country’s actions in Syria, even as Rubio named the atrocities. Instead, Tillerson said he would wish to review classified information before reaching a conclusion. 
 
 “None of this is classified, Mr. Tillerson,” Rubio said in one of the hearing’s memorable moments. “People are dead.” 
 
 Rubio appeared to grow more frustrated with Tillerson as he later declined to comment on human rights abuses in China, Saudi Arabia and the Philippines, chiding Tillerson that “in order to have moral clarity, we need clarity.” 
 
 “We can’t achieve moral clarity with rhetorical ambiguity,” Rubio went on. 
 
 Following the hearing, Rubio would not commit to supporting or opposing Tillerson, leaving his nomination in limbo. The narrow balance of power on the committee means Tillerson likely cannot afford to lose Rubio’s vote or that of any other Republican — but Rubio insisted he would not be cowed by that dynamic. 
 
 “I’m prepared to do what’s right,” Rubio said. “I'm not analyzing it from a partisan standpoint.” 
 
 Tillerson’s nomination poses an early test for Trump, who has raised some eyebrows among lawmakers and foreign leaders with his unconventional worldview and apparent disregard for diplomatic convention. 
 
 In selecting Tillerson, who has never worked in the public sector and has no direct foreign policy experience, Trump signaled that he hopes to disrupt the manner in which the U.S. conducts its foreign relations, with renewed focus on showcasing strength and cutting difficult deals. 
 
 But the nomination is also testing the limits of Republican support for the incoming president, with some lawmakers still skeptical of his intentions on foreign policy — in particular with regard to Russia and Putin, whom Trump has praised. 
 
 Tillerson’s nomination has added another facet to those doubts, given his deep history with Putin as a powerful business partner who brought billions of dollars of investment and oil revenues to Russia. 
 
 In remarks introducing the nominee on Wednesday, former Sen. Sam Nunn, a Democrat, nodded to both of Tillerson’s potential conflicts, with Russia and ExxonMobil, asserting that "both are assets, not liabilities." 
 
 Sen. John Cornyn, who hails from Tillerson’s home state of Texas and also spoke Wednesday on his behalf, added that the would-be secretary of state "understands how to separate friendships and business.” 
 
 “He knows who he works for,” Cornyn said. 
 
 Tillerson seemed to approach the hearing with a clear-eyed view of the hurdles facing him. He addressed Russia in direct terms in his opening remarks, saying it “poses a danger” to American and Western interests. Later, he expressed doubts that Russia could ever be a “friend” to the U.S., as Trump has suggested it could be. 
 
 Tillerson studded the hearing with some other key views in contrast to those expressed by Trump, including support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership in some form, and a commitment to honor NATO Article 5, ensuring mutual defense, without regard to funding by members states. 
 
 But it is not clear whether those departures from Trump’s emerging foreign policy doctrine will be sufficient to assuage concerns among skeptical lawmakers, and Republicans in particular. 
 
 The holes left for Trump to fill in that doctrine did not ease Tillerson’s task Wednesday. Where Trump has been vague on some areas of foreign policy, senators often pressed the nominee to elaborate. Although one transition official said Tuesday that Tillerson intended to “put meat on bones of what Trump foreign policy will be,” on Wednesday he dodged firm positions repeatedly, to the annoyance of some senators. 
 
 On occasion, committee Chairman Bob Corker would nudge Tillerson with questions to help sharpen his responses. Tillerson and senators on the committee acknowledged the learning curve he would face in transitioning to the foreign policy sphere — and Tillerson at times showcased his personal limitations. 
 
 During one exchange regarding Cuba policy, Tillerson conceded, “I don’t have a great depth of knowledge on Cuba.” 
 
 Tillerson also hinted at another difficult transition, from decades working for ExxonMobil to his potential new role leading the State Department. He tripped up on questions regarding ExxonMobil’s role in lobbying to shape sanctions, which the company afterward tweeted to clarify. 
 
 And even as Tillerson stressed his own transparency, he was not always forthcoming with his responses. When he would not respond to a question from Sen. Tim Kaine regarding ExxonMobil’s approach to climate change, Kaine pressed him: “Do you lack the knowledge to answer my question or are you refusing to answer my question?” 
 
 “A little of both,” Tillerson said, to laughter in the hearing room. 
 
 A key feature of Tillerson’s appeal among his backers, of course, is that his resume differs from those of more traditional nominees. But his detractors on the committee warned that his experience, negotiating with world leaders from a business perspective, might not translate. 
 
 “Diplomacy is not the same as deal-making,” said Sen. Bob Menendez, a New Jersey Democrat. 
 
 To steer America’s diplomacy, Tillerson will need to close one deal, however: with the Foreign Relations Committee. The question now is whether Republican senators, and Rubio in particular, will buy in.
– When secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson testified before the Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday, he faced the toughest scrutiny from Marco Rubio. The pair had a a number of testy exchanges, with Rubio skeptical that the ExxonMobil chief would be as tough as he needed to be on Russia in particular. As Quartz explains, this raises a potentially serious problem for Donald Trump's nominee: The committee has 11 Republicans and 10 Democrats, meaning if Rubio votes against Tillerson, that could prevent the committee from sending his name to the full Senate for a final vote. (The GOP's Lindsey Graham also sounded a bit skeptical, notes CNN.) "I’m prepared to do what’s right," said Rubio after the hearing, per Real Clear Politics. "I'm not analyzing it from a partisan standpoint." All of which sets up three scenarios: The most likely seems to be that Rubio will vote yes, content with having made his point about Russia. The second is that he'll vote no and Republicans will find a Democrat on the panel to flip. The third scenario is perhaps the least likely, but also "fascinating," writes blogger Allahpundit at Hot Air: In this case, the committee votes against Tillerson, but Mitch McConnell, under pressure from Trump, sends his name to the full Senate anyway. The Senate then has a tough decision: "Do they defer to the committee by voting no on Tillerson, knowing how angry Trump will be? Or do they make Trump happy by voting to confirm," which sets a precedent for ignoring committee judgments and thus makes "plum committee assignments" less valuable than they used to be.