Marco Rubio just gave George Stephanopoulos the on-air schooling he’s deserved for years. In what has to be one of the more satisfying interviews of the weekend, the Secretary of State wasn’t about to sit there and let an ex-Clinton staffer-turned-“objective journalist” twist the facts about America’s position at the U.N.
Stephanopoulos, in peak DNC mouthpiece form, tried to hit Rubio with a gotcha moment, claiming that the U.S. had suddenly decided to vote “with North Korea, Russia, and Belarus” and against its so-called “Western allies.” The insinuation? That Trump’s America is somehow cozying up to dictators and throwing our allies under the bus. But Rubio was having none of it.
“No,” Rubio shot back, setting the record straight. What the U.S. actually voted for was a simple, rational resolution calling for an end to the war in Ukraine. Not a pro-Russia resolution, not an anti-Ukraine resolution—just a resolution stating the obvious: this war is devastating, and it needs to end. Last time anyone checked, wasn’t that supposed to be the whole point of the United Nations? You know, that big international body that was created to stop wars, not fuel them? Apparently, that logic is lost on ABC News.
And, of course, Rubio didn’t stop there. He pointed out the absolute hypocrisy at play. The first Ukraine-related resolution to actually pass the U.N. Security Council since the war started only happened after Trump returned to office. Three years of war, and suddenly, when Trump steps back in, things start moving. But instead of giving credit where it’s due, the media is in full meltdown mode because, well, Orange Man Bad.
Rubio nailed the absurdity of it all: if a Democrat had done this, we’d already be hearing whispers of a Nobel Peace Prize nomination. But because it’s Trump, the media acts like trying to negotiate peace is some kind of betrayal. Let’s get real here. No one is saying the war ends tomorrow or that Putin suddenly becomes a good guy. What Trump and Rubio are saying is that no war in history has ever ended without both sides coming to the table. That’s reality, whether the left wants to accept it or not.
Amazing explanation of the situation from @SecRubio: “Shouldn’t we all be happy that we have a President that is trying to stop wars and prevent them instead of start them?… We are trying to end a war. You cannot end a war unless both sides come to the table.” pic.twitter.com/aoGfXm3PJ5
— Alex Pfeiffer (@Pfeiffer47) March 2, 2025
And let’s not forget the most obvious point—this war never would have happened if Trump had been in office. That’s not speculation, that’s historical fact. Putin invaded Ukraine under Biden, not Trump. Why? Because Biden projected weakness from day one. From the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal to his “minor incursion” gaffe that basically invited Putin to make a move, Biden made it clear that he wasn’t up to the task of deterrence. Contrast that with Trump, who kept Russia in check, NATO in line, and—oh, right—didn’t have any wars start under his watch.
The left and their media lapdogs don’t actually care about ending the war. If they did, they’d be supporting these diplomatic efforts instead of throwing a tantrum because it’s Trump leading the charge. But, as usual, their hatred for Trump outweighs their concern for actual peace. Rubio called it like it is, and the media’s response just proves his point: their outrage isn’t about Ukraine, it’s about politics.
So, let the media whine all they want. Meanwhile, Trump and Rubio will keep working to do something Democrats failed at for three years—bring this war to an end. And when they succeed, expect the media to act like it was their idea all along.
