Listeners are also taken on a deep dive into national security and defense matters, as military strikes against narco-terrorists in the Caribbean are considered, echoing the Trump administration’s steadfast resolve in the war on drugs. A reflection on the National Defense Authorization Act highlights the contentious inclusion of IVF funding and reveals the intricate layers of legislative negotiations. As government funding deadlines loom, Congressman Eric Burleson offers a perspective on the budgetary challenges ahead, underscoring the tense environment in Congress amid looming shutdown threats.
SPEAKER 17 :
from the heart of our nation’s capital in Washington, D.C., bringing compelling interviews, insightful analysis, taking you beyond the headlines and soundbites into conversations with our nation’s leaders and newsmakers, all from a biblical worldview. Sitting in for Tony is today’s host, Jody Heiss.
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, good afternoon and welcome to this Wednesday edition of Washington Watch. I am Jody Heiss, Senior Fellow here at the Family Research Council. An honor to be sitting in for Tony and thank you so much for joining us. We’ve got a lot to bring your way today. Over 33,000 pages of records related to the late and infamous Jeffrey Epstein were made public yesterday through the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in cooperation with the Trump administration. And apparently that’s not the end of it.
SPEAKER 13 :
The DOJ… has produced nearly 34,000 pages of documents with more to come. These documents are now accessible on our website. We put every single document on the website. The Epstein estate will begin producing documents on September 8th. The committee is operating at an unprecedented pace and doing the work the right way.
SPEAKER 06 :
That was the chairman of the Oversight Committee, James Comer, earlier today. And Florida Congressman Greg Stubbe, who is a member of the House Intelligence Committee, will join me in just a few moments to talk about the release of those documents. Meanwhile, the leaders of China, Russia, and North Korea made their first ever public appearance together during an elaborate military parade in Beijing. And although he suggested that the three countries were conspiring, President Trump says he’s not concerned.
SPEAKER 23 :
I thought it was a beautiful ceremony. I thought it was very, very impressive. But I understood the reason they were doing it, and they were hoping I was watching, and I was watching. My relationship with all of them is very good. We’re going to find out how good it is over the next week or two.
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, if China, Russia, and North Korea were indeed hoping that President Trump was watching, what message were they trying to send to the United States? I’ll discuss this with Asia expert Gordon Chang a little bit later in the program. And speaking of messages, wow, what? A powerful message the Trump administration sent when the U.S. military forces conducted a strike against narco-terrorists who were reportedly transporting illegal narcotics in a boat traveling in the Southern Caribbean.
SPEAKER 04 :
The president’s been very clear that he’s going to use the full power of America and the full might of the United States to take on and eradicate these drug cartels, no matter where they’re operating from and no matter how long they’ve been able to act with impunity. Those days are over.
SPEAKER 06 :
That was Secretary of State Marco Rubio talking yesterday, and we’ll be discussing this a little bit later in the program when I’m joined by North Carolina Congressman Brad Knott, who is a member of the Homeland Security Committee. And also part of today’s program, Missouri Congressman Eric Burleson will join me. He’ll be giving an update on the government funding fight that Congress will be heavily engaged in this month. And then I’ll also be joined today by FRC’s Kena Gonzalez. We’ll be talking about a longtime Democrat pet project that has now made its way into the must-pass National Defense Authorization Act. So we’ve got a lot to bring your way today. We’re going to get to as much of it as we can. If you miss any of it, our website, of course, TonyPerkins.com. Lots of resources also available there for you. But better yet, I encourage you to Download the Stand Firm app, where you not only can get this program, but tons of other information, the Washington Stand, and much, much more. Simply text the word APP to 67742. If you don’t have Stand Firm, you want it. Also, I want to encourage you to remember our upcoming PrayVoteStand Summit taking place October 17th and 18th in Chino Hills, California. Again, visit PrayVoteStand.org for more details on that. All right, let’s jump into our first news item for today. As I mentioned yesterday, the Oversight Committee on Oversight and Government Reform made public more than 33,000 pages of records related to the late and infamous Jeffrey Epstein, And it was the Justice Department, by the way, that made all that available. But the release comes after weeks and weeks of debate over the files. And according to the committee’s chairman, James Comer, more is on the way as part of the committee’s effort to provide transparency and accountability. So what can we make? of this latest release of documents. Joining me now to discuss this and more is Congressman Greg Stubbe. He serves on various committees, including the House Intel Committee. He represents the 17th Congressional District of Florida. Congressman Stubbe, welcome back to Washington Watch. Great to have you.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah. Hey, Jody, how you doing? Thanks for having me.
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, thank you for joining us. Look, I’m sure neither you nor anyone’s had an opportunity yet to go through 33 plus thousand pages that were posted yesterday. But what overall do you make of the release of these documents?
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, this is the most transparent administration in the history of our country. They’ve been transparent about everything. They talked about releasing these documents before they swore in, and now you have the release of a historic amount of information as it relates to this case. And you have a situation where the previous administration had all of this information, and under four years of the Biden administration, they refused to provide this information to the public and to Congress. So you have… the most transparent administration in the history of our country. Like you said, we’re not gonna have, we haven’t had time to dig through all these details, but I’m sure the press is doing that. And if there’s information that’s gonna be provided to the public from the press, from going through those documents, they will. The DOJ is not done in providing that information. One of the things that I think is very important for the viewers to understand is the DOJ has to do everything they can to protect victims’ identities and to protect victims from the unnecessary or unintentional disclosure of who they are. A lot of these victims don’t want to be identified. And I commend the courageous women that came today and talked about their experience and had the courage to talk about the situations that they were in. But a lot of these victims don’t want to be identified because they’re afraid of what some of these people that abuse them will do. So I think we have to make sure, just like Pam Bondi said, just like the speaker said, to ensure that the victims’ identities that want that protected are protected while releasing as much information to the public as we can.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yep, good point. All right, you brought it up, and I’d like to get your opinion on this. You noted that the Democrats could have released these files when they were in control during the Biden administration, but of course they did not do so. Why do you think that they are so interested in this now, but they weren’t then?
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, they’re interested in it now because it’s a good political talking point. I mean, we’ve all seen the pictures. Obviously, President Trump knew Jeffrey Epstein. We’ve seen pictures of them together. There’s never been an allegation that President Trump did anything illegal or unlawful or wrong in knowing who he was. But they’re obviously trying to make this a political score. And they’ve ginned up, the mainstream media has ginned up some relationship between Epstein and the president. And by the fact that they knew each other, there obviously had to be some culpability of what was going on. There’s no evidence of that. So of course, they’re using this as an opportunity to attack the president and attack Trump. Why didn’t they do this during the Biden administration? And don’t you think if they had information that was detrimental to the president, they would have probably released that during Biden’s tenure?
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, I mean, they absolutely would have. Congressman Stubbe, if I can switch gears on you real quickly. The two-week deadline that President Trump had given Russian President Putin, it’s now up. And President Trump spoke with reporters today as he met with Poland’s new president. And he was asked what his message would be to Putin. And if he’s not happy with him and basically Trump just said, well, wait and wait and see. So from your perspective, what things are you hoping will happen if Putin does not take the next steps towards peace with Ukraine?
SPEAKER 09 :
Well, there’s a lot that the president could do economically through sanctions to really strangle Putin and strangle the Russians as it relates to their economy and not being able to fund this war. Now, remember back in Trump 1.0, he had sanctions on Nord Stream 2, which the Biden administration released that then allowed for millions of dollars to go to the Kremlin and fund the war. Zelensky himself said that that funded a lot of the war. So those are things that you can do proactively, not militarily, uh you don’t have to engage them militarily but simply give the ukrainians um the intelligence that we have been sharing and then do significant sanctions on the russians and then any countries that do business with the russians like india who buys a lot of oil from them if you sanction the russians you’re also sanctioning uh countries like india from their ability to purchase russian oil which would debilitate their economy. And I know the president has talked about it, so I know that’s one of the things that are on the table. And I feel that if Putin doesn’t do what the president has asked him to do, isn’t willing to come to the table and have some type of peace accord between the Russians and the Ukrainians, that’s going to be the next step for President Trump, is to institute significant economic sanctions on the Russian regime.
SPEAKER 06 :
I know Putin now is offering a meeting with Zelensky in Moscow. Of course, that’s not going to happen. In fact, it would probably be very dangerous for Zelensky. There have been a number of other neutral states that have offered those type of meetings. What’s your general take of where things stand right now between Russia and Ukraine? Are we going to see peace, do you think?
SPEAKER 09 :
I mean, if anybody can get it done, President Trump can get it done. You can tell that the president has been very frustrated with Putin. Certainly, both sides are going to have to give up significant things for there to be peace. Ukraine’s going to have to give up some land in order for the Russians to stop aggression, and the Russians are going to have to give up a lot of things. And if either side’s not willing to do that, then you’re going to have this continuation of a three-year war that never would have happened but for Russia If Trump was in the White House, none of this would have ever happened because the Nord Stream 2 sanctions would have never gotten released. So I think both sides are going to have to obviously give up a lot in order to end the casualties and the loss and the suffering. Hopefully they’re willing to do that, but if not, you have the strongest president in American history that’s willing to put significant sanctions on the Russians to be able to at least bring them to the table for peace.
SPEAKER 06 :
I’ll be discussing this particular question a little bit further in the next segment, but I’d love to get your thoughts on it. The first time joint appearance of Putin, as well as the leaders of China and North Korea. What are your thoughts with that?
SPEAKER 09 :
Look, on the Intel Committee, we had a hearing about, I don’t know, three to six months ago on threats to the United States. The Chinese Communist Party is the number one national security threat to the United States. You have the Russians, the Chinese, and obviously North Korea, who is also another axis of evil, all working together. That’s clear as what’s going on. They do not stand for the interests of the United States. They stand for the interests of communism. fascism, socialism, and that’s not what we stand for here in America. So obviously they are a threat to the United States. They’re obviously working together both economically and militarily in sharing and selling not just information but assets to each other. So obviously we have to keep an eye on what’s going on and what the Chinese and the Russians plan on doing. A lot of that’s going to hinge on what happens in Ukraine. There’s been a lot of talk about what China is going to do as it relates to Taiwan. So we’ll just have to sit back and wait. But I’m very happy that we have a president in the White House who can make decisive actions and act if necessary.
SPEAKER 06 :
And less than a minute left, just you and Senator Mike Lee have introduced the Department of War Restoration Act. Real quickly, why is that needed?
SPEAKER 09 :
Look, we gotta bring the department back to what it was initially intended. So over 100 years of history prior to World War Two was called the Department of War. Obviously you’ve seen the attack that we did in Iran. You’ve seen this administration use the Department of War. for the defense of our nation and for the national security and safety and security of the American people. Something the president feels strongly about. I agree with them. I think we need to go back to the historic founding and what that department really stands for. It stands for defense as well, but we obviously are planning operations to be able to protect our people.
SPEAKER 06 :
Thank you so much, Congressman Greg Stubbe of Florida. Always great to have you on the program. Thanks for all you do. All right, friends, coming up, that meeting between China, Russia, and North Korea. What was it all about? We’ll talk about it right after this break. Stay with us.
SPEAKER 16 :
Three years ago, the Supreme Court issued its historic Dobbs decision, a ruling that overturned Roe versus Wade, which for nearly 50 years imposed abortion on demand, silencing voters and bypassing the democratic process across the country. The Dobbs decision was a huge step forward against abortion, but it didn’t outright ban it. It returned the power to the people. Now, 29 states have laws on the books protecting life. However, there’s a catch. Abortion numbers since Dobbs have actually gone up with an increase of 12% since 2020, climbing from 930,000 to over 1 million in each of the most recent years. So how can this be? The answer is simple, the abortion drug. Today, over 60% of US abortions involve abortion drugs, many of these without medical oversight. In 2021, the Biden administration quietly removed bare minimum longstanding safety protocols for the abortion drug that have existed for 20 years to protect women from life-threatening risks and ensuring informed consent. The Biden DOJ then declared that they would not enforce the Comstock Act, which prevents the mailing of anything that causes an abortion. This is not only illegal, but also dangerous. A study shows nearly 11% of women who take the abortion drug end up in the emergency room with serious complications. Unless the Trump administration reverses these reckless Biden-era policies, pro-life laws will remain largely symbolic. Without a full review and repeal of Mifepristone, unborn lives will remain in grave danger and pregnant mothers will remain at risk. Let’s stand for life and end this mail-order abortion drug pipeline. Sign the petition urging the Trump administration to take action at frc.org slash stop chemical abortion.
SPEAKER 18 :
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen His glory. The Family Research Council invites you to join our Stand on the Word Bible reading plan as we reflect upon the life of Jesus, the Word who dwelt among us. Come with us and discover the glory of the Word. Read the Gospels and witness the life-changing story of Jesus, His life, death, and resurrection. Come read how Jesus transformed the lives of common people and how those same people transformed the known world through the power of the Holy Spirit. Come with us for 10 to 15 minutes a day and read the entire New Testament before the new year. Find our Bible reading plan in daily devotionals from Tony Perkins at frc.org slash Bible. Join us and stand on the word.
SPEAKER 06 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. Good afternoon to you. I’m Jody Heiss filling in today for Tony. And again, thank you for joining us. Earlier today, China’s Xi Jinping, along with Russia’s Vladimir Putin, and North Korea’s Kim Jong-un were gathered together for an elaborate military parade in Beijing. It actually marked the first time that the three men were seen together in public. And it was the first time that North Korea’s dictator attended a multilateral diplomatic event since he first assumed power back in 2011. Now, the Kremlin is claiming that the three countries were not conspiring, as President Trump suggested, But the public display definitely sent a message to the U.S. as well as the Western-led international order. So what was the message that they sent? Here to discuss this with me is Gordon Chang. He’s a senior fellow at the Gatestone Institute and author of Plan Red, China’s Project to Destroy America. By the way, you can follow him on X. His handle is at Gordon G. Chang. Gordon, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thank you for joining us. Well, thank you so much, Jody. All right. I think this is pretty big news, a big deal. How significant was this gathering of these three leaders?
SPEAKER 20 :
Well, this was symbolic. It showed that these three hardline states are forming an enduring partnership. And we know that because they’re all fighting in Ukraine, for instance. Both China and North Korea actually have soldiers in Ukraine. So that’s the first message. But China’s message really is that China is now driving events in the world. It is dominant and that the United States is finished Now, President Trump doesn’t believe that. I don’t believe it’s true. But that is China’s message. And China is waging an effective information warfare campaign against us. And we’re not doing that at all. We have sort of surrendered in that domain, especially with Radio Free Asia being crippled. So this is important for us to counter those messages in some way. If President Trump doesn’t want those information agencies, he’s got to do something else to counter China’s narrative. Because China’s narrative is actually resonating in many parts of the world. It shouldn’t, but it is.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, so that’s kind of my next question. Did these three countries, China, Russia, and North Korea, did they benefit from this public appearance today?
SPEAKER 20 :
I think what they benefited was essentially the appearance of strength. And that was sort of like, you know, remember Osama bin Laden said that when people see a strong horse and a weak horse, they always pick the strong horse. Well, that’s really what we were seeing today, that China was putting on a display of being the strong horse. Now, I actually don’t think that’s true. I think that both China and Russia are fragile states. And they’re doing this because, as Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese strategist said, when you are weak, appear strong. And that’s what China was doing. It was trying to appear strong.
SPEAKER 06 :
I’d like to go a little bit further into that because I think that’s a powerful point that needs to be underscored. But it is also true at the same time that these three countries do want to see the downfall of the Western-led international order. Is that a fair statement?
SPEAKER 20 :
Absolutely. Now, they have somewhat inconsistent goals. China wants to rule the world and the near parts of the solar system. Vladimir Putin wants to reconstitute the Russian empire at its greatest extent. Now, those two goals are contradictory, but nonetheless, both Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping see that their interests at this time coincide. They identify the same enemy, which is the United States, and they certainly want to take down the international system. So this is, you know, people say it’s a marriage of convenience. Yeah, but don’t diminish it because this marriage of convenience is actually making progress. As we see in a couple parts of the world where there are wars, Eastern Europe, Middle East, and North Africa, where there are insurgencies that resemble wars, plus the brush fires in Asia itself. So this is a very dangerous time for us.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, if nothing else, the intimidation factor that the world sees with those three together, I think, is a significant thing, although maybe more bark than bite. But let’s go back to what you were talking about, the way in which these countries themselves are pretty vulnerable. Elaborate on that a little bit more, if you would, please.
SPEAKER 20 :
Yeah, I mean, Russia’s economy has really been crippled by the war. You know, people will say that they’ve got maybe a year left. I don’t know. But clearly, we see signs of economic failure. China is not growing at the 5.2% pace that they claim for the second quarter of this year. It’s got an economy which is about zero growth, maybe a little bit more or less. But the problem for China is it needs robust growth to pay back all the debt that it accumulated in the last couple of decades in order to escape the global financial crisis in 2008. We see price deflation, which is a real sign of economic failure. This is an economy in China now that has really no way to rescue itself. So this is a time when Xi Jinping or whoever is running China at the time, because there is a lot of turmoil at the top of the Chinese political system. This is a time when Chinese leaders could see it in their interests to either start or to continue a war. And so therefore, we’ve got to be concerned that their interests are not ours. Our interest is to maintain peace and stability. Theirs is to take down the world, which sometimes means war.
SPEAKER 06 :
I wish we had a little bit more time to go into some of this, but President Trump said during an interview yesterday that he was not concerned at all about China and Russia’s possibly forming an axis against the United States. But should he be concerned with what’s taking place?
SPEAKER 20 :
I think so, because these two powers, they’ve already roiled Eastern Europe. China and Iran have roiled the Middle East. As I mentioned, North Africa is in a state of turmoil right now. This is a world where one more war could spark a general conflagration. And also we’ve got Chinese operatives and soldiers who are in our country ready to strike. We’ve seen so much evidence of Chinese military activity on our soil. So yes, we need to be absolutely concerned, and we need to hear the President of the United States talk about this. I know that it is politically not feasible to do that, but we need to get prepared, because if we don’t get prepared, Jody, the worst could happen.
SPEAKER 06 :
Wow. Thank you so much, Gordon Chang, Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute. It is always great to have these conversations with you. We deeply appreciate you coming on Washington Watch and keeping us at speed. Thank you.
SPEAKER 20 :
Well, I’m deeply appreciative to be able to speak to you. So thank you, Jody. Alrighty.
SPEAKER 06 :
All right, coming up, a longtime pet project of the Democrats has now made its way into the must-pass bill, the National Defense Authorization Act. Well, unfortunately, it looks like some Republicans are going to join on to that. So stay tuned. We’ll cover the details right after the break.
SPEAKER 19 :
Download the new StandFirm app for Apple and Android phones today. You can join a wonderful community of fellow believers. We’ve created a special place for you to access news from a biblical perspective. Read and listen to daily devotionals, pray for current events, and more. Share the Stand Firm app with your friends, family, and church members. And of course, stand firm wherever you go.
SPEAKER 02 :
At Family Research Council, defending the family isn’t just a mission, it’s our daily calling. Every team member at FRC uses their God-given talents to stand for biblical truth, protect life, and uphold religious freedom.
SPEAKER 08 :
Here at Family Research Council, we face many threats to the family, threats that have been with us for some time. Abortion, the gender ideology threat, the attacks on marriage, the attacks on parental authority, and the attacks on religious freedom. We have to promote, support, strengthen, and incentivize family growth so families take their place in society in a place of honor.
SPEAKER 22 :
I’m defending the family by working in the Center for Biblical Worldview to provide cutting edge research and resources for pastors, ministry leaders, and Christian parents.
SPEAKER 15 :
Through my work at the Washington Stand, I passionately defend what God has defined for marriage and family. I don’t see the Washington stand as just a place to talk about cultural events. It’s a place to share biblical truth. It’s a perfect outlet to advance and defend what God has defined as good, true, and beautiful.
SPEAKER 12 :
Because of you, we’re able to frame things in such a way that help Christians stand for truth on the things that matter most, like life, faith, family, and freedom.
SPEAKER 08 :
Thank you for standing with us. Thank you for your support. It is so critical to the work that we at Family Resource Council are doing day to day as we support and strengthen the family. So thank you.
SPEAKER 06 :
So glad to have you on board with us today. I’m Jody Heiss. Thank you for joining us on Washington Watch. All right, with Congress now back in session, there’s a lot on their plates that they’ll be tackling in the next few weeks. But among those items that must pass is the National Defense Authorization Act. This is a piece of legislation, of course, that provides funding for the U.S. military. That’s why it’s a must-pass bill. Well, this week, the Senate is taking up their version of the NDAA, and next week, probably, the House will be taking up their version. However, this year, both versions, the House and the Senate, expand funding for in vitro fertilization, IVF. Now, this has long been a pet project of the Democrats, but this year it appears like many Republicans are beginning to get on board with it as well. So what’s the reason for that, and what’s the problem with it all? Well, joining me now to discuss this is Kena Gonzalez. He’s the Senior Director of Government Affairs here at Family Research Council. Kena, thanks for joining me. Great to see you again. It’s good to be with you, Jody. All right, the NDAA. Goodness, this is one of those bills. It’s about pay raises for our military service members. It’s about funding the military. Why in the world are we talking about IVF in the NDAA?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, you alluded to it before the break and right after, Jody. Democrats have been looking for a long time for must-pass legislation that they can use to expand taxpayer-funded in vitro fertilization, or IVF, by throwing that into must-pass legislation. And this year, it looks like they are succeeding in getting some Republicans to come along with them and inject this into a military bill that really has nothing to do with that issue.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, it really doesn’t. And of course, we here at Family Research Council, we’re all about families. We’re all about babies. We’re all about this type of thing. But what are the problems? I think this is an important discussion, the problems and the concerns with IVF.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, Family Research Council is all about babies. We love children. And the purported purpose of IVF is to create children, to help couples who are infertile reproduce, have children of their own. And that’s how it’s billed. That’s how it’s advertised. But that’s not what IVF actually is in practice many times. And so when we look at government funding of something, anything that the government funds, we get more of. And so, as you know, Jodi, government funds often come with strings. You can do this, you can’t do that. This is really a blank check to an industry that, again, sells, will give you a live baby, and doesn’t talk about some of the problems. Some of the problems include all of the children who are conceived and created, but discarded or perpetually frozen along the way. Some are discarded, some are left in perpetual cryogenic, perpetually cryogenically frozen state. Some are donated for science and research. They’re researched upon. Most of the children created through IVF never reach birth. But there are other problems as well. Expanding IVF, which we would do by government funding of it, opens up a whole new world of horrors without any sort of regular, this industry is not well regulated. And so already we’ve had people experiment with putting together human and animal embryos to create hybrids. This has already happened, live embryos that are hybrid animal humans. And there’s nothing in this bill that would guard against things like that. There are others that I could list. And then the last thing I would say is that it really fails IVF to address the underlying issues, the health issues that lead to infertility. And so often couples go through this process at great expense because they greatly desire to have children and they have maybe one child after repeated attempts and after often many, many embryos have been lost. Whereas there are better alternatives
SPEAKER 06 :
for treating infertility okay so where there’s a stand in the senate right now they’re dealing with it this week we’ve only got a couple of minutes left and i do want to give our viewers and listeners the capital switchboard number so if you’re watching or listening get a pen and paper out we’re going to give you a number here in just a few moments but kena where where do things stand right now in the senate
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, the NDAA needs to pass by the end of the month or some sort of extension that would extend last year’s funding while they continue to work on it. And so the Senate is working really hard to pass it this week or maybe early next. The House will take up their version next week. But as you said, both the House and the Senate have different but similar provisions regarding IVF. And so we’re very concerned that this could end up in the final bill.
SPEAKER 06 :
Okay, so what can our viewers and listeners do to help?
SPEAKER 03 :
It’s really important members of Congress that we have been speaking to for the past several weeks are not aware of this issue and are a little horrified when we tell them about what some of these problems are, but they need to hear from their constituents. So the easiest thing that people can do is call the capital switchboard and right now, because the bill is moving in the Senate asked for your senators. Everyone, every state has two senators. Ask for yours. The capital switchboard operator will transfer you to that office. You can speak to a staff member or leave a message. Be polite. Give your name, your address, and state your opposition to including expanded taxpayer funding of IVF and the National Defense Authorization Act.
SPEAKER 06 :
And I will also say we here at FRC, we have Fast Facts, which just deals with concerns with expanding IVF in the NDAA. And you can check that out for more info at frc.org slash IVF in NDAA. So check those out for more information and call the switchboard ASAP. All right, Kana Gonzalez, FRC Senior Director of Government Affairs, always honored to have you on the program. Thank you for joining us today.
SPEAKER 03 :
Thank you, Jody.
SPEAKER 06 :
All right, we’ve got more coming straight ahead here on Washington Watch. Next, we’re going to hit on two more items. First of all, the Trump administration’s war on drug cartels. What a huge battle that is turning out to be. And secondly, we’re going to talk about the government funding battle. I’ll be joined by two different congressmen, Brad Mott of North Carolina and Eric Burleson from Missouri. So stay tuned. We’ll be back in just a moment.
SPEAKER 10 :
Family Research Council is committed to advancing faith, family, and freedom from the East Coast to the West. So FRC is going to Southern California for this year’s Pray, Vote, Stand Summit, October 17th and 18th at Calvary Chapel, Chino Hills. Join us for this powerful gathering of Christians desiring cultural renewal and spiritual revival. The Pray, Vote, Stand Summit brings together Christian leaders, issue experts, and government officials for a time of prayer, inspiration, and action. Together, we will seek God’s guidance for our nation and engage in meaningful discussions on the intersection of faith, government, and culture. If the spiritual foundations and the cultural walls of our nation are to be rebuilt, we all have a role to play. May we each find our place on the wall as we build for biblical truth. Register now at PrayVoteStand.org. That’s PrayVoteStand.org.
SPEAKER 05 :
Jennifer, it’s so exciting to be here with you today talking about our new book, Embracing God’s Design. Who is actually going to benefit from reading this book in your view?
SPEAKER 11 :
There’s so many different audiences that can benefit. The first one are counselors themselves, right? Because we have some material in there where we really address the gender dysphoria diagnosis and what is wrong with it. We have information for people who are wanting to go back to embracing God’s design for their life.
SPEAKER 05 :
This is really magical to have the therapist and the individual who suffered come together and write about why this is happening and why we’re seeing this.
SPEAKER 11 :
And we brought all of that experience to the table. We want to see people walking in the fullness of who God has called them to be and not a false identity.
SPEAKER 05 :
Order today at embracethedesign.com.
SPEAKER 14 :
How should Christians think about the thorny issues shaping our culture? How should Christians address deceitful ideas like transgenderism, critical theory, or assisted suicide? How can Christians navigate raising children in a broken culture, the war on gender roles, or rebuilding our once great nation? Outstanding is a podcast from The Washington Stand dedicated to these critical conversations. Outstanding seeks to tear down what our corrupt culture lifts up with an aim to take every thought and every idea captive to the obedience of Christ. Whether policies or partisan politics, whether conflict in America or conflict abroad, join us and our guests as we examine the headlines through the lens of Scripture and explore how Christians can faithfully exalt Christ in all of life. Follow Outstanding on your favorite podcast app and look for new episodes each week.
SPEAKER 06 :
Good afternoon. Welcome back to Washington Watch. Great to have you joining us. I am Jody Heiss filling in today for Tony. Let me just say, sometimes I forget between our viewers and our listening audience, we had the number for the switchboard up on the screen, but those of you who are just listening only obviously could not see that. So here is the U.S. Capitol switchboard. That number is 202. 224-3121. Let me give it to you again. 202-224-3121. And you can call and speak to your senator about the NDAA and IVF being a part of it. And then while I’ve got your attention on all of this, just another quick reminder that our PrayVoteStand Summit is coming up in October, the 17th and 18th. It’s going to be in gorgeous Chino Hills, California this year. You can learn more and you can register simply by going to PrayVoteStand.org. PrayVoteStand.org. Okay, yesterday President Trump announced that U.S. military forces had conducted a strike against narco-terrorists who were reportedly transporting illegal narcotics in a cartel boat that was traveling from Venezuela in the southern Caribbean. President Trump said 11 were killed in that strike and that they were positively identified as narco-terrorists. They were, according to him, part of the Trandanaragua group, a transnational criminal organization from Venezuela. By the way, that is a group that the U.S. designated as a foreign terrorist organization earlier this year. Well, the president told reporters that there will be more strikes as the U.S. goes on the offense against these drug cartels. So what might this mean for the war on drugs? Well, joining me now to discuss this is Congressman Brad Knott. He’s a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, and he represents North Carolina’s 13th congressional district. Congressman Knott, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for coming on.
SPEAKER 21 :
Hey, Jody, it’s great to be with you.
SPEAKER 06 :
All right. Look, the way, what paved all of this, let me put it this way, for this to take place was the State Department’s decision last February, as I mentioned, to designate eight cartels and the transnational organizations, but to designate these as foreign terrorist organizations. Now, Secretary of State Marco Rubio says that America has to start treating these drug cartels as armed terrorist organizations, not simply as drug dealing organizations. So what’s your take on that?
SPEAKER 21 :
I fully agree with Secretary Rubio, Jody. When you look at the scale of America’s pain and the harm that we have suffered because of these transnational organizations and terrorist organizations, it’s really hard to quantify it. In the year 1990, just to put this into perspective, Guess how many Americans died from overdosing on drugs? It was around 5,000. Since the year 2000, almost 1.5 million Americans have died from overdosing on drugs. The scale is incalculable. AND THESE ORGANIZATIONS ARE EITHER DIRECTLY SPONSORED BY VARIOUS STATES LIKE TRENDA AGUA AND VENEZUELA, OR THEY ARE INDIRECTLY SPONSORED BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE FINANCIAL BENEFITS THAT COME TO THESE STATES FROM AMERICAN LARGESSE, AMERICAN DOLLARS. And when you deal with this type of sophistication, you know hundreds of billions of dollars a year make up the international drug trade. You must take them seriously and playing defense here on our own soil. It’s not as effective as it needs to be and going on offense is a needed step and I fully support the government doing it.
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, those are stunning figures that you gave. So what would you say to those who were against or are against the strikes that the US put forth yesterday?
SPEAKER 21 :
To anyone who was against the president taking the fight to Trinidad or the Sinaloas or any other cartel that is poisoning and corrupting the American citizenry, they need to take the shades off their eyes and, again, realize how grave this threat is. These terrorist organizations, these narco-terrorists, these cartel members, they’re not just drug traffickers. They’re human traffickers. They defraud the country. They work to undermine our sovereignty. I mean, Judge Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, she just announced 360,000 pounds of precursor chemicals were seized at a port in Texas. That kind of scale is staggering. I mean, millions of Americans are affected every year because of the effect or because of the efforts of these organizations. And taking it to them, taking the fight to these organizations is essential to protect our country.
SPEAKER 06 :
Yeah, you know, I wonder for those who are opposed to the idea of striking these cartels like that, I wonder if they would be in opposition if it were, say, al-Qaeda or ISIS or Hezbollah or something along those lines with a boatload of chemical weapons. You know, because virtually we’re talking the same kind of thing, aren’t we?
SPEAKER 21 :
Yes, that boat was filled with poison that is designed to kill, it’s designed to produce addiction. The drugs that come into this country, they take lives, they take communities, they degrade families. It’s really inhumane. And you hit the nail on the head, Jody, it’s as though they’re taking a chemical bomb in their boat. And I will say this, if the president took out Al-Qaeda, Some Democrats would probably be against it. Anything he does, especially as it relates to the immigration enforcement or to the drug trafficking attacks that we’re dealing with, they’re against it. And they’re in lockstep against anything this president does. So, again, I applaud the president for going on offense here. And candidly, I think we’re overdue for it.
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, you know, putting all this together, prior to serving in Congress, you actually personally worked very closely alongside law enforcement at all levels to prosecute organized crime. So this is something that’s very near and dear to your heart. I mean, you have seen firsthand how harmful policies and weak law enforcement literally, as you just said, wound communities all over the country. And this had a lot to do with you even running for Congress to begin with, didn’t it?
SPEAKER 1 :
100%.
SPEAKER 21 :
What I saw as a federal prosecutor, I had cases that touched just about every corner. of the country. And every community is affected by these narco terrorists, these transnational organizations. And it is again, I applaud the president taking this threat seriously, taking the fight to them. It will only strengthen our country. And again, I just go back to that fact. almost a million five, 1.5 million Americans in 25 years. We cannot continue to use the same tactics that are obviously ineffective. And taking the fight to the narco terrorists on their own soil, wherever they operate, that will better enable us to fight what is killing this country. And again, I stand in lockstep with the president in doing it.
SPEAKER 06 :
Let me switch gears with you real quickly, and then I’m going to have to run to my next guest. But a divided federal appeals court yesterday actually ruled that President Trump cannot invoke the Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport alleged Venezuela gang members. It’s pretty stunning when you think about this. But what’s your response to all that from your legal background?
SPEAKER 21 :
You know, I’ll be clear. This was not a total loss for the administration. They affirmed his power to deport. They affirmed a seven-day window is plenty of due process afforded to the people being deported. I do disagree with the split majority, the two out of three. They said that these illegal alien criminals are not part of a predatory incursion or an invasion, and I strongly disagree with that. I do agree with the dissenting opinion that said this should be in the executive branch alone. The president has the authority. He used it appropriately. And my suspicion is it’ll be overturned by the Supreme Court. But again, I agree with the dissent in this case.
SPEAKER 06 :
Congressman Brad Knott of North Carolina, always great to have you on the program. Thank you so much for joining us. We deeply appreciate it.
SPEAKER 21 :
Thank you, Jody.
SPEAKER 06 :
All right, to close out the program for today, there’s one more news item that I want to get to and provide an update on, and that’s the government funding fight, which is expected to only intensify as we get closer to the September 30th deadline. I actually touched on this yesterday with Mark Tapscott from the Washington Stand, but I want to get… A little bit further in the weeds here and get a perspective from Congress. So joining me now is Congressman Eric Burleson. He’s a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committees. And in that committee, he chairs the Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Energy Policy, and Regulatory Affairs. He’s from Missouri’s 7th Congressional District. Congressman Burleson, welcome back to Washington Watch. Appreciate you coming on with us. Good to be back. All right, so this was already expected to be quite a battle, this whole issue over the budget and finances and so forth. But now there are some saying we have a big obstacle. Give us your projection.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, I don’t know. You have a little bit more time and experience up here than I do. But look, as you know, this whole process is broken. The fact that here we are one month from the deadline, and we’ve only passed three bills out of the House, I believe. The Senate has passed three bills. So we’ve got a long ways to go here in order to get to the 12th. to pass the 12 bills that’s where we need to to try to get to but unfortunately it looks like they’re we’re not going to get there we’re going to end up doing what we’d always do which is a cr um and that will probably be the first one will be a short-term cr because they’ll say we need more time to pass more bills and then that’ll give us to like first of november and then we’ll see what, we’ll probably do another CR and the question then will be how long is that second CR gonna be? So we’ve been here before, you’ve been there before. We know what’s getting ready to happen. This time I think there might be, it might be different because the Democrats, at least they’re projecting that they’re very angry and that they are going to, they’re angry about the pocket rescissions that just occurred. And so they’re angry. They think that Trump is unilaterally making spending reductions and therefore they’re not gonna negotiate on, you know, or help us pass a CR, which means, you know, that might be a good thing. If Democrats are never gonna support a CR, that might be a good thing because you’re gonna have to win over a lot of fiscal hawks in order to get the votes for appropriations.
SPEAKER 06 :
All right, so explain the pocket rescission. That’s a term that’s floated around a lot right now. Kind of unpack that for us.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, the pocket rescission. So rescissions is something that the president has under the, I think it’s the Empowerment Control Act of 1973, that allows the president, if they don’t see that they’re going to spend all of the money that’s been appropriated, then they can submit a rescission package to Congress requesting that Congress approve these rescissions. Congress has 45 days to act, and if Congress doesn’t act, then they fail, and the president has to spend the money. However, there’s a loophole or some way that the law was written. If the president is within the last 45 days of the fiscal year, then if Congress doesn’t act, then the rescission goes into effect. So in essence, a pocket rescission. So I was hoping that the rescission was going to be close to 100 billion, that it would be significant, right? That’s what we were hoping for. I think that this pocket rescission of about 5 billion wallets great. It’s like $4.9 billion. While that’s great, I would have done a lot more. But the Democrats are throwing an absolute fit. And some moderate Republicans, especially in the Senate, are throwing a fit over these pocket rescissions as well. So that’s kind of what’s in play right now.
SPEAKER 06 :
So what are some of the different scenarios that could play out this month? Are we gonna see a Schumer shutdown? He’s blaming Republicans, Republicans are saying the ball’s in their court. What could play out this month?
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, absolutely, I think that, especially if Speaker Johnson wants to really put Chuck Schumer and the Democrats in a bind, then just submit a simple continuing resolution with no anomalies, and then dare the Democrats, because then the Democrats would basically be saying that they want the government to shut down. But I think that they actually do want it to shut down. I think that the Democratic Party believes that a shutdown will look poorly on the president and the Republicans in the House and the Senate.
SPEAKER 06 :
So what do you think is the most likely scenario? As you’re looking, I mean, here we’re early in the month, still a lot of water yet to go under the bridge, but what do you expect to happen?
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, I expect that we’ll probably have like a one month CR that’ll get us into the middle of or the first of November. And then and then that’s when things will start getting interesting, because from that moment, it’ll it will either do another CR that gets us to Christmas or we’ll do one that gets us into the spring. If we’re going to do this, you might as well do a one-year CR. But we’re not there yet, right? Because a lot of these appropriators still think that there’s time to pass the 12 appropriation bills. They want their chance to do that process. I don’t know why. I mean, we do it, and then it doesn’t ultimately get passed. But at the end of the day, they want that time, and so the first CR that we’re gonna do is just gonna be giving them another month so they have the time to mark up their appropriation bills.
SPEAKER 06 :
Wow. Well, you know, like you said, it happens seems like year after year and ho ho ho we come Christmas and get all sorts of horrible presents under the federal Christmas tree with a with a big spending bill. But we’ll see how this goes. Less than a minute real quickly. A lot of tension between the administration and the Federal Reserve. Your thoughts on that real quickly.
SPEAKER 07 :
Yeah, I think we need to audit the Federal Reserve. I think it’s long overdue. When you look at how much money they were wasting in the building infrastructures, I think that, and you have these individuals like Cook, who has done some malpractice when it comes to her financial, her mortgage applications. I think it’s time that we audit the Fed.
SPEAKER 06 :
I think that’s a great, great suggestion. Thank you so much, Congressman Eric Burleson of Missouri. Always great to have you. Thank you. All right. That’s all the time we have for today. Thank you for joining us today on Washington Watch. Hope you have a wonderful evening and be sure to join us again tomorrow. Same time right here on Washington Watch.
SPEAKER 17 :
Washington Watch with Tony Perkins is brought to you by Family Research Council and is entirely listener supported. Portions of the show discussing candidates are brought to you by Family Research Council Action. For more information on anything you heard today or to find out how you can partner with us in our ongoing efforts to promote faith, family, and freedom, visit TonyPerkins.com.
