Secretary of State Marco Rubio served up another master class on communicating the Trump administration’s foreign policy goals, while also batting down Democrat lawmakers’ efforts to smear Donald Trump’s leadership as warmongering and dangerous.

Sitting before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Rubio explained and corrected the administration’s record, particularly with Venezuela, all the while parrying away disingenuous questions and false assertions as the nonsense they were.

A memorable example of Rubio’s quick wit came during an exchange with Virginia Senator Tim Kaine, who noted that Trump, on his recent trip to Davos, Switzerland, repeatedly referred to “Iceland” when speaking about Greenland. Kaine asked, “We’re not mad at Iceland, right? They haven’t cost us any money. The president just mistook the two countries for each other, correct?”

Rubio quipped, “Yeah, he meant to say Greenland, but I think we’re all familiar with presidents that have verbal stumbles. We’ve had presidents like that before. Some made a lot more than this one.” Boom!

It was clear that Rubio, having served in the Senate, is quite familiar with these former colleagues across the aisle. He knows the games; he knows how they’re played, and unfortunately for Democrats, he knows how to beat them.

Indeed, from the look of the hearing, Rubio is clearly one of, if not the smartest, man in the room.

An example of this played out when Illinois Democrat Tammy Duckworth, referencing the Trump administration’s actions against narco terrorist drug cartels, asked if Rubio would “advise the president to rescind his invocation of the wartime Alien Enemies Act?” He responded, “Of course not! These are people that are threats to the national security of the United States!”

Duckworth replied, “You’re saying we’re at war?”

Rubio then educated the senator, stating, “When it comes to narco-trafficking groups and criminal gangs that are targeting the United States for criminal activity, there’s no doubt about the fact that we’re confronting them in a war-like manner. They’re waging war against us; they are enemy combatants.”

As constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley observed, “Rubio is extraordinarily good at this. He is unflappable and stays on message and on point. The man could talk the bolts off a bridge.”

When it came to Cuba, Hawaii Democrat Senator Brian Schatz embarrassed himself when he asked Rubio, “Will you make a public commitment today to rule out U.S. regime change in Cuba?” Rubio answered, “Regime change? Oh, no, I think we would like to see the regime there change.” He added, “That doesn’t mean that we’re going to make it change, but we would love to see it change. There’s no doubt about the fact that it would be a great benefit to the United States if Cuba was no longer governed by an autocratic regime.”

Schatz should have stopped there and saved some face, but he decided to dig the hole deeper, saying, “But you know what we mean by regime change. We don’t mean, ‘I wish someone else were in charge.’ When we talk about regime change, we’re talking about using the power of the United States, usually kinetic power, but often other kinds of coercion … and, I’m not saying that’s not in our interest. … I’m not asking whether we would prefer a different, eh, kind of government. I’m asking whether you’re trying to precipitate the fall of the current regime.”

Rubio took Schatz to school, answering, “Yeah, but that’s statutory. The Helms-Burton Act, the U.S. embargo on Cuba, is codified. It was codified in law, and it requires regime change in order for us to lift the embargo.”

It was apparent throughout the hearing that the Democrats were pushing a negative narrative surrounding the Trump administration’s successful U.S. military operation to arrest and extradite Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro, and stoke fears of further U.S. military actions in Venezuela. Rubio quickly corrected and rejected the Democrats’ disingenuous premise that Trump was seeking to start a war with Venezuela, while also defending the administration’s use of force against our enemies in the region, specifically narco terrorists.

Regarding Iran, and the question of regime change, Rubio was clear that the recent buildup of U.S. Navy presence near Iran had to do with protecting U.S. troops and assets that are already in the region, not a military buildup to remove the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei from power.

On NATO and Greenland, Rubio defended Trump’s actions, noting that an agreement had been reached and that Trump’s pressure on NATO members was beneficial, strengthening the alliance.

The more time passes, the more obvious it is that Rubio is Trump’s best cabinet pick, and an increasingly strong option for a future presidential ticket.