Bob Menendez

Without U.S. leadership, the international community tends not to coalesce around active support for democracy in the hemisphere.

Unless properly augmented, the JCPOA will take its place among the hopeless plans.

Peacekeeping is, yes, very important in the sense of what the core of this hearing is about, but part of the way in which you keep the peace is to make sure that the will of the international community is observed and that it is not…

No consequences is a green light to violations.

The snapback means nothing if cannot snap back to something that is meaningful.

I am talking about making sure that we have enforcement of Security Council resolutions that are meaningful.

To the extent that the agreement is going to produce any benefits, Iran must clearly understand that there will be consequences for not following that agreement.

The bottom line is there have been no real actions, no consequence.

With all due respect, I am not talking about the deal anymore. We are past that.

I have a real concern that what we have here is a lack of will by the United States and as a leader in this regard by our partners in going ahead and making sure that Iran understands that you cannot violate the international will without…

We are going to make sure that that is the case.

I do not see us... what are we doing about the hemisphere in which we live in and in which we have a direct interest in terms of our security, our economics.

I see some great needs, as is evidenced by the fact of, you know, citizens' security, children coming to the United States.

I have been a strong supporter of it since its creation.

I am a strong supporter of the MCC. I do not want you to get me wrong.

With limited aid dollars, it is--it is our responsibility to ensure American resources are used in the most effective manner possible.

You cannot have a military state and expect to have stability.

It is clearly in the U.S. interests, and it is a strong component of our foreign policy objectives, to ensure that democracy and human rights are key factors in the countries that we have relations with.

The leaders of those countries felt overwhelmed by Russian propaganda and felt that to them it was an arm as powerful as any of the military aspects

If in fact you cannot get access to the Internet in a given country, it does not mean that we should not look at the circumnavigation abilities to ultimately achieve that access.

So to recap, the only institutional change, forgetting about resources for the moment, is the ability for you to move resources within the institution without having to negotiate with another element of your broadcasting.

I also think there has to be a little intellectual honesty here about how much is necessary to compete if we think that that is a national security strategy.

I am glad to hear that.

Part of the reason for our broadcasting abroad is that very often we are trying to get to citizens who live in closed societies.

Putin's the other way around, he is 75 percent propaganda and 25 percent violence.