In this riveting episode of Washington Watch with Tony Perkins, we dive into the latest developments in a high-profile investigation—the Epstein case. Congressman James Comer speaks on the government’s shortcomings and the need for transparency on a global scale. We also explore the dynamics of the U.S.-Iran nuclear talks and what progress, if any, has been made in recent discussions. The debates are hot, and emotions run high as representatives discuss the broader implications on international relations.
SPEAKER 05 :
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, Washington Watch with Tony Perkins starts now.
SPEAKER 07 :
This isn’t just about Democrats. This is about anyone that has any knowledge of Epstein, the investigation. I think we all agree the government failed. The government failed the victims. And what our role is, we can’t prosecute anyone. But what we have been doing is getting transparency of the American people.
SPEAKER 14 :
That was Congressman James Comer, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, addressing today’s closed-door depositions of Hillary Clinton related to the Epstein probe. Good evening and welcome to this February 26th edition of Washington Watch. I’m Tony Perkins, your host. Thanks so much for joining us. Well, coming up, Virginia Congressman John McGuire joins us to discuss today’s House Oversight Committee testimony from Hillary Clinton as the fallout from the Epstein Files probe continues to reverberate worldwide. We’ll also explore the progress or lack thereof in today’s U.S.-Iran nuclear talks in Geneva. Plus, we’ll examine the case of a Texas man accused of secretly administering an abortion drug to his girlfriend. Dr. Martha Schuping joins me to analyze the broader implications of the current FDA policy that allows the illegal drug trafficking of these abortion drugs. Well, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says she has no information about Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell’s crimes. This marks the beginning of two days of depositions where former President Bill Clinton is set to testify tomorrow. Joining me now is Washington-San reporter Casey Harper. Casey, what more came from today’s depositions? I know it’s closed door, not a lot of information coming out. What do we know?
SPEAKER 22 :
Yes, I mean, you’re right. It’s a private meeting, although we did have a photo slip out of the hearing all over the social media. Oh, there we go. Can you hear me, Tony? Can you hear me now? It would help if you used a mic. Can you hear me now? Good. There we go. Well, you know, there was no mic here and there was no mic in that room with Hillary Clinton’s testimony today. And so there’s a lot of details we don’t have, though we did get a photo that came out and went viral on social media. So that wasn’t supposed to get out, but it was leaked out. What we do know is Hillary Clinton made her testimony. opening statement public on social media and she said I never even met the guy never have no you know memory of ever even bumping into him although she is and her and her husband are both mentioned in the Epstein files now this deposition and the former president tomorrow come after a lot of behind the scenes negotiating behind a back and forth between Democrats and Republicans over the release of the Epstein files and these depositions in particular in fact here is chairman of the House Oversight Committee James Comer Speaking to media before the deposition today.
SPEAKER 07 :
We have a lot of questions and the purpose of the whole investigation is to try to understand many things about Epstein. How did he accumulate so much wealth? How was he able to surround himself with some of the most powerful men in the world? Was he an asset for our government or any other government? These are the questions that we’re going to ask over the next two days and hopefully we’ll be able to get some answers.
SPEAKER 22 :
Now, the former Secretary of State said the whole thing today is a partisan witch hunt, but Comer pushed back on that, pointing out that even some Democrats voted to make the Clintons testify this week.
SPEAKER 14 :
Yeah, it’s interesting, Casey. We were talking about this back in August of last year, saying that this has legs and they need to be transparent. And this thing is not, it doesn’t seem to be decreasing in its momentum. It seems to be increasing. And as I mentioned at the top of the program, this has had worldwide fallout. So it’s going to be, I think it’s far, far from over. I think that’s right. Casey, President Trump’s Surgeon General nominee, Dr. Casey Means, she faced some tough questions yesterday before the Senate’s Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. What unfolded during that hearing and will she be confirmed?
SPEAKER 22 :
Yeah, that’s a good question. Health policy and some of the questions she faced used to be very uncontroversial. Now, in this day and age, they’re very controversial. As of now, it looks like Means doesn’t have enough votes to get the confirmation as Surgeon General, but it’s not too late by any stretch. Both sides of the aisle, as you mentioned, pressed her in particular on vaccines and the comments and positions she has there. Here is a clip of Republican Senator and physician Bill Cassidy in a heated exchange.
SPEAKER 01 :
Like you, I’m a physician. I believe vaccines save lives. I believe that vaccines are a key part of any infectious disease public health strategy. And I would work with you, the CDC, the NIH, ACIP, FDA.
SPEAKER 17 :
Would you encourage mothers to vaccinate their children with the MMR vaccine, seeing how we’ve had children die in this outbreak in South Carolina?
SPEAKER 01 :
I’m supportive of vaccination. I do believe that each patient, mother, parent needs to have a conversation with their pediatrician.
SPEAKER 22 :
Vaccines have become very political, and it was on display there. And her views that vaccines and other medicines, including abortion drugs, which is something very much on our radar, should be given after discussions with doctors were front and center in that hearing. She sidestepped other questions about studying the abortion pill mifepristone, which the FDA and HHS has been very quiet on, as well as other things like RSV vaccines for babies. And she was very careful around maybe the most controversial topic, which is any connection between vaccines and autism. So far, Means has most of the support from Republicans on the committee. We’ll see if she can get it done.
SPEAKER 14 :
All right, Casey Harper, thanks so much for joining us. We may come back to you a bit later. We were going to go to the oversight hearing. However, our guest, Congressman John McGuire, is actually asking questions as we speak, so he may be joining us a little bit later in the program. I’m going to go on to another topic, something that has become… unfortunately all too common. A man in Montgomery County, Texas was arrested this week for allegedly surreptitiously giving an abortion drug to the woman he got pregnant without, she didn’t know that he was giving this to her, it was not with her consent. That led to the death of her baby. As we have frequently discussed on this program, the current policies of the FDA are allowing these deadly abortion drugs to be illegally trafficked across state lines and that’s why pro-life states like my home state of louisiana are actually suing the federal government the fda and that’s why we’re continuing to draw attention to this issue joining me now to discuss this dr martha schuping an adjunct instructor in psychology at belmont abbey college who joined frc in actually filing an amicus brief in the louisiana lawsuit against the fda right along these lines. Dr. Shubing, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 21 :
Thank you for having me.
SPEAKER 14 :
Should we be surprised to hear of incidents like this one in Montgomery County?
SPEAKER 21 :
No. As we mentioned in the brief, many years ago in the 90s, Daniel Callahan, who is a pro-choice researcher and advocate, stated that Guttmacher data showed that 30% of abortions were at that time were coerced. And he said this kind of a dirty little secret that many men who don’t want a baby or don’t want to pay child support for different reasons, there is a problem of coerced abortion. And that goes on to this day. Some research shows that it’s much higher than 30%. Some studies have shown as much as 64% or a little higher than that. So it has long been a problem. And, you know, we see that some men will father children but not want to take the responsibility.
SPEAKER 14 :
Well, in the news reports out of Texas, actually based upon the man was arrested, based upon the information released, he had repeatedly wanted the mother to get an abortion, in fact, telling her he would cover the cost, take her out of state. She repeatedly refused, expressing her firm intent to carry the pregnancy to term. So this is… It’s really abuse. Domestic abuse is being facilitated now by a federal policy with the FDA that he surreptitiously gave this drug to her. This has been done in other cases as well. So we have a policy in place that is removing women from having interactions with a medical provider, which is often the safety valve for domestic partner violence, is it not?
SPEAKER 21 :
Yes, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology has said that they published a committee opinion about the best practices that they say that any woman, certainly in an unplanned pregnancy situation, but really any pregnant woman should be screened for domestic violence in the office at her first pregnancy visit. And once a trimester, she’s continuing her pregnancy because domestic violence has been such an important vehicle of reproductive coercion. And so there are many women who have been reading about these cases that you can’t do a proper screening for domestic violence if the woman is over a screen or just emailing in saying she needs medication for an abortion. The problem is even if she’s face to face over a screen with clinic staff, they don’t know whether there’s a man just off screen with a gun or someone telling her that she has to order the abortion pills even if she doesn’t want the abortion. And then we read about these cases.
SPEAKER 14 :
But even under the current policy, the woman doesn’t have to request the drugs. I mean, someone.
SPEAKER 21 :
That’s true. That’s true. Anybody could. I mean, a man. Right. He could email in and get abortion pills.
SPEAKER 14 :
Which is apparently what happened in this case. The woman had no knowledge of it whatsoever. He obtained those abortion pills and then. and put them somehow either in her food or somehow administered them to her. This was the focus of the brief that you filed or that Family Research Council you helped us with that we filed in the Louisiana case is that this is only facilitating that intimate partner violence that everybody seems to be concerned about except when it comes to the issue of abortion.
SPEAKER 21 :
Right. And I’ve seen that some abortion advocates had filed a brief saying that women who were abused needed to have the access to abortion because that would free her from being trapped by domestic violence. But it’s just the opposite, because if women can go for an in-person visit, then they would be required, they would be expected to do an individual screening for domestic violence. and to offer the woman resources if she’s being coerced into an abortion that she doesn’t want, or just offer, there’s all kinds of domestic violence resources, attorneys who can help with protection orders, there’s women’s shelters, there are hotlines, there’s all kinds of resources that women may not be aware of. And when they have to come out for a face-to-face doctor visit, that allows for the screening that the American College of OBGYNs has said is important.
SPEAKER 14 :
Dr. Shooping, let me ask you another related type of question. We have seen a rise in human trafficking, and oftentimes that is for sexual purposes. Does this not facilitate covering up the human trafficking of young women?
SPEAKER 21 :
The majority of women who are in trafficking will have one or more forced abortions. And that is a huge problem. But when the traffickers can get the pills so easily, it doesn’t even require a doctor visit, they can have as much as they want to coerce abortions at any time, to force the abortions.
SPEAKER 14 :
It’s a huge problem, but yet the policy remains in place that allows this to occur. It’s mind-boggling. Dr. Shuping, I want to thank you for joining us. Always great to see you, and thank you so much for joining with us and filing that brief in Louisiana.
SPEAKER 21 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 14 :
Dr. Shooping, I mean, this is important stuff, and I appreciate her insight on this. By the way, you need to weigh in on this. I think this is a defining issue. When abortion rates have gone up in this country after the overturn of Roe, Some may say I sound like a broken record. Well, I’m going to keep talking about this until we get it right as a nation on the policy. Abortion rates have climbed from 930,000 prior to the overturn of Roe to over 1.1 million. Why? Because of the abortion pill that’s being facilitated by the policy of the FDA. And it’s being used in cases like this, where women who want to keep their baby The men who impregnate them and will not care for them and want to get rid of the child are creating double harm because these drugs are very dangerous, not only for the baby, obviously, but for the mother as well. All right, don’t go away. We’re coming back with more on the other side of the break.
SPEAKER 12 :
When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them.
SPEAKER 16 :
A decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal That they’re endowed by their Creator. With certain unalienable rights.
SPEAKER 12 :
That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men. Deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Happy 250th. Happy 250th. Happy 250th. Happy 250th birthday, America. May God bless America.
SPEAKER 14 :
You see, America has freedom for a purpose. The question is, are we living by that purpose today? See, the founders understood we as a nation would be accountable to God for what he had granted to us. They sought freedom for a purpose, and that freedom was given to us as a nation for that same purpose, to serve God, to honor him, and to live as a people under his authority.
SPEAKER 23 :
At the 2026 National Gathering for Prayer and Repentance in Washington, DC, members of Congress, state leaders, evangelical leaders, and intercessors from across the nation united as one voice in prayer.
SPEAKER 04 :
Heavenly Father, thank you so much for this gathering. We do repent, and we ask for your continued favor and blessing over our nation, even when we don’t deserve it.
SPEAKER 10 :
I thank you that because of the shed blood and the glorious righteousness of your Son, Jesus Christ, a sinner such as myself can boldly approach your throne. You said that you helped to humble, and we’re asking just now that you would help us, Lord.
SPEAKER 05 :
When our God is marching on.
SPEAKER 15 :
Glory, glory to God.
SPEAKER 24 :
We pray that you humble us, help us to follow after you with all our hearts so that we can see righteousness exalted in this nation and this nation restored to you. We know that it’s not by our power, it’s not by our might, it’s by your spirit.
SPEAKER 14 :
Freedom has a name. His name is Jesus. And freedom has a purpose. It is to honor and glorify you. We pray that we would return to that purpose. Amen. Welcome back to Washington Watch. We’re told that Congressman Aguirre is still in the deposition. It’s running a little longer than anticipated, so we hope to get him a little bit later to join us when he’s able to step out. It may be that common sense is returning to the medical community or simply a realization that there’s a price to pay for bowing to the transgender ideology. Whichever it is, we continue to see welcome announcements like the one this week in a major New York City hospital that announced that it was shutting down its transgender youth health program. A hospital spokesman said the move to shut down the program was due to the medical director leaving the department and the, quote, current regulatory environment.” End quote. Now it’s worth noting that the hospital, this hospital in New York, Lagone, is one of more than 20 hospitals and clinics nationwide being investigated for subjecting minors to experimental drugs and radical surgeries. Also two months ago the Department of Health and Human Services had proposed rules that would prevent any federal funding from going to hospitals that provide this so-called gender affirming care to minors. So can we expect to see more announcements like this? Joining us now to discuss this is Admiral Brian Christine, Assistant Secretary for Health at the Department of Health and Human Services. He is also the medical doctor who has trained surgeons around the world. Admiral, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks so much for joining us.
SPEAKER 08 :
Thank you, Tony. Thank you for allowing me to be on here to speak with you about this incredibly important subject. And you’re right, we are winning. You mentioned there are multiple hospitals, actually more than 30 hospital systems that are now stopping their sex rejecting procedures on minors, including NYU Langone. That’s a great thing to see, and it’s because of the attention, the leadership of President Donald Trump, Secretary Kennedy. I think we’re winning this war, but we can never take our foot off the accelerator.
SPEAKER 14 :
I 100 percent agree with that. Let me ask you this question, Admiral. I don’t necessarily believe I call me, you know, cynical, but I don’t believe it’s a change of heart. I believe it is a policy driven decision based upon the money.
SPEAKER 08 :
I think you’re right. When they mentioned, they referenced NYU Langone, referenced the current regulatory atmosphere, what they’re saying is, yes, we are proposing rules where no federal dollars would go to institutions or individuals who perform these sex-rejecting procedures on minors. You’re exactly right. We are focusing attention. We are being very careful to watch them. You know, in the year 2019, to 2023, 14,000 minors had sex-rejecting procedures performed upon them.
SPEAKER 1 :
14,000.
SPEAKER 08 :
That’s not simply epidemiology. That is a social contagion against these poor, vulnerable children. And so the fact that we are pushing ahead, the fact that we have these hospitals refusing to do these procedures, I’m very glad they’re not. You know, just a couple of weeks ago, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons has released a letter saying that these procedures should not be performed on individuals under the age of 19. Countries like the United Kingdom are backing away from this. We see the American Medical Association saying now backing away from their prior more radical stance, saying that we shouldn’t be doing these on youths. So again, we’re moving in the right direction, but we have to keep pressure. to keep doing what we’re doing to protect these vulnerable children and to make them healthy.
SPEAKER 14 :
You know, Admiral, I want people to see very clearly what you just said. This would not be happening or would not have happened previously had there not been a gravy train, government funding for this. What this administration is doing is said, no, we’re not going to pay for this. We don’t agree with it. The evidence is very clear that this doesn’t help. It’s not effective. I mean, it just it defies common sense. And so when there’s no money, they stop doing it. And we also to add to this and this is obviously not necessarily in your lane, but, you know, as a doctor, I think you can appreciate this. The fact that you have to have malpractice insurance now that we have suits going forward. We had a doctor in New York that was sued and a plaintiff won two million dollars for malpractice. I think the dollars, the lack thereof or the dollars being extracted from them is going to help them come to a place of accepting what is common sense, even though they may not agree with it.
SPEAKER 08 :
no i think you’re right about that and you referenced the case in new york with a two million dollar malpractice award going to an individual fox variant uh who at the age of i believe 16 had right she had a double mastectomy i mean that’s just that that’s amazing that would be allowed to happen and you know in our gender dysphoria and minors report that’s a report produced by the department of health and human services released that back in the fall We looked at gold standard science. We looked at all of the science related to gender dysphoria in minors. And what we determined was that the best way to treat these vulnerable children is with compassionate, competent mental health care, not with sex-rejecting surgeries, not with castrating chemicals, not with cross-sex hormones, those kinds of treatments. surgeries, for instance, can have lifelong complications for these kids. Using cross sex hormones can cause infertility or demineralization of their bone, leading to fractures. In other words, doing those sex rejecting procedures can have terrible ramifications and irreversible harm, and that’s why our gender dysphoria report in minors, I believe. was probably the first shot across the bow, causing these individuals, these institutions, performing these horrible procedures to back away. That, and of course, with the loss of the resources, the loss of the money, just like you’re saying.
SPEAKER 14 :
Admiral Christine, one of the issues you just pointed out is the underlying mental health issues that needs to be treated. And obviously this is going to open the door in many cases for that to happen. But you have some states that has outlawed, absolutely outlawed that type of mental health. You cannot take a child that has gender dysphoria to a counselor to talk through the maybe underlying trauma that led them to be uncomfortable with their biological sex.
SPEAKER 08 :
You’re exactly right. And so 27 states have made it illegal legislatively to perform these sex rejecting procedures on minors. I’m very happy to say, being from Alabama, that Alabama was one of the very first. And I will tell you, Tony, when I stood with the state legislature in Alabama, When I argued for that legislation to be passed, I was really criticized by those from the left saying that you’re performing conversion therapy by saying that there should be mental health care. No, no, no. It’s exactly wrong. I’m proud of what we did in Alabama. I’m proud of the other 26 states. Competent, compassionate mental health care is what these children need. And I believe, as a Catholic Christian, I believe if the parents wish, I believe pastoral care is very important as well.
SPEAKER 14 :
I agree 100% because a lot of this is spiritual underlying.
SPEAKER 03 :
It is.
SPEAKER 14 :
But almost in almost every case, there’s trauma related to it and it becomes a mental health issue. Admiral Christine, I want to thank you for joining us. Thank you for the great work that you’re doing. We appreciate it greatly and look forward to talking to you again soon. Thank you. God bless you. All right, folks, stick with us. We’re back with more after this.
SPEAKER 19 :
The family is the oldest, most tested, and most reliable unit of society. It is divinely created and sustained. And yet, there are those who are always tampering with its values and structure. That’s why we need organizations like the Family Research Council that can effectively defend and strengthen the family.
SPEAKER 05 :
Family Research Council began over 40 years ago, like all great movements of God, with prayer. Today, rooted in the heart of the nation’s capital, FRC continues to champion faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview.
SPEAKER 04 :
FRC is one of those bright lights that helps us focus on true north. And I shudder to think, had they not been here, that it could have been worse, worse, worse.
SPEAKER 25 :
The Family Research Council is key. It’s one of a handful of groups that I think will determine whether our children live in a country that enjoyed all of the freedom and all the opportunity that we enjoyed in this great land.
SPEAKER 20 :
It’s just a wonderful parachurch organization that doesn’t seek to take the place of the church, but it seeks to assist the family and the church as we try to move forward successfully, not in a defensive mode, but in an offensive mode as we seek to live our lives according to the Holy Scriptures.
SPEAKER 03 :
FRC is not going to be whooped. You know, we’re going to fight. We’re going to take a stand. And again, we don’t retreat.
SPEAKER 14 :
You will never see in front of this building here in Washington, D.C., a white flag flying. We will never step back. We will never surrender. And we will never be silent. Welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks so much for joining us. All right. We’re told that the deposition is still going on. In fact, it looks like it’s going to go past the six o’clock hour. So we’re not going to get to don’t think we’re going to get to one of the members, but we’ll see. They’ve got the hotline, so we’ll see if they call in. I want to touch on the latest in what is happening between the conversations between the United States and Iran. And I want to bring in someone to give us some insight on this. He’s retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel Bob McGinnis, a national security analyst who has served at the Pentagon. He is a senior fellow for national security here at the Family Research Council. He’s the author of 14 books, including one that’s coming out this spring titled The New AI Cold War, Liberty versus Tyranny in the Age of Machine Empires. Colonel McGinnis, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 11 :
My pleasure, Tony.
SPEAKER 14 :
Good to see you. It’s been a while since I’ve seen you. All right, let’s talk. I want to talk Iran first, and then we’re going to talk about AI. You’ve been doing a lot of work on the AI topic. But first, let’s talk about the latest coming out of the conversations between the U.S. and Iran in Geneva. What do we know?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, this is third round of talks. And in fact, next week, you’re going to meet in Vienna for technical discussions. Evidently, you had the primary members of the conversation today, Witkoff for the U.S. and Eroji, the foreign minister for Iran, walked away somewhat optimistic that they’d made some inroads. And of course, even the Omanis who were there mitigating or trying to keep the parties together were rather optimistic. The markets, surprisingly, even settled down after the nervousness of our armada in the region and the talk of war. So we’ve basically kicked the can at this point. I think the sticky point, as the president is often to say, is about enrichment and about their ambitions to make a bomb. But it looks as if there at least appears to be at this point some progress.
SPEAKER 14 :
Colonel, you’ve been around a while. You’ve been tracking this for many years. Are they trustworthy?
SPEAKER 11 :
Oh, they’ve never been trustworthy, Tony. The reality is that, you know, just like Reagan said, you need to verify everything. And unfortunately, unless they allow our inspectors in there that we can trust to go to the facilities that we bombed last summer and to validate that they aren’t active, they haven’t created a new enrichment facility, they don’t have a weapons program, then we shouldn’t believe them. My concern, Tony, is that if we do go in and bomb the IRGC, the Ayatollah, the other mullahs and their oil infrastructure and so forth, who’s going to take over? We aren’t going to go in there like we did into Iraq in 2003. And there’s really not an organic movement inside that is organized and strong enough, in my opinion, to topple the regime. So it may be that we end up with maybe the mullahs go into exile, but the IRGC continues their authoritarian ways.
SPEAKER 14 :
What do we know about these reports of China providing military equipment to Iran at this present time?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, they’ve been doing that for a long time, much like the Iranians collaborate with the Russians. They’ve signed strategic agreements, the Iranians, with both the Chinese and the Russians. And, of course, the Chinese depend upon the ongoing supply of Iranian oil, which has helped the communist Chinese regime. So it’s scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours, and that’s what’s been going on.
SPEAKER 14 :
Is there concern about the vulnerability of our fleet? I mean, I think we’ve got about a third of our fleet over in that region, and there’s a few choke points there where you could cut off our fleet.
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, the Strait of Hormuz is very narrow. And of course, we’ve had confrontations with Iranians for decades. You know, a missile against the aircraft carrier would be potentially very damaging. Yes, they do have missiles hidden, even in places that haven’t been publicly announced outside of Iran. So that’s something we need to be concerned about. And I’m sure the president is quite aware of that. But we’re keeping the USS Ford off of Israel’s coast and the Med. And of course, the other aircraft carriers and other ships are being kept outside of the Gulf, in the Gulf of Oman, Indian Ocean area, so that they can still launch F-18s if necessary, if they’re given the order. So, you know, there’s a lot of, you know, risk here. We have 18 bases, of course, in eight different countries. A lot of other capabilities that we’ve flown in over the weekend. We flew F-22s out of England into southern Israel. So there’s a lot of capability there. And I know we’re on a high level of, I suppose, defense getting ready to do something. But we aren’t at the point of decision as yet, as far as I can tell.
SPEAKER 14 :
Colonel, final question. We’ve got just a minute left and we’ve got to go to a break, but how long can we stay in that type of high level of readiness and alert?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, that’s a good question and a hard one to say. You know, the aircraft carriers, of course, the Ford has been deployed for a long time. They need to go back to home base and refit and change crews. And so they really get exhausted after a while. The same thing with some of the Air Force aircraft. And we’ve taken resources out of the South China Sea, which of course is a very dangerous place, and the Chinese are rattling their sabers toward and that’s why we’ve had a significant presence there. So I would think that the president is very cognizant of this. He’s going to withdraw those forces as soon as possible, but they’re serving a role now.
SPEAKER 14 :
All right, we’ll leave it there. We’ll be back in a moment, folks. Stick with us. We have state leaders that want to keep the deadly drugs out of their states. Maybe if these abortion pills were coming by boat, the administration would change its tactics. It’s time to respect the rights of the states, and it’s time to end death by mail.
SPEAKER 02 :
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, alongside Senator Lindsey Graham, led a press conference on Capitol Hill, urging the Trump administration to end the Biden-era policies that have allowed dangerous abortion drugs to be shipped across state lines. They were joined by state attorneys general, pro-life advocates and multiple Republican congressmen.
SPEAKER 06 :
There are more abortions today in the United States than when Roe versus Wade was the law of the land. And why is that? It’s because of the chemical abortion drug, Mifeprestone. Nearly 70% of the abortions that are committed in the United States today are committed because of Mifeprestone.
SPEAKER 26 :
The federal government is allowing a chemical abortion pill to be sent through the mail that wipes out every state unborn protection law in the land. It’s harder to ship alcohol in this country than it is to ship the abortion pill.
SPEAKER 15 :
And that should never be the case. This is a drug that takes the life of every child. So there is always a death that’s involved in this drug, but is also incredibly dangerous for the mom as well. We think that we should require a doctor to be able to get access to this drug.
SPEAKER 18 :
As a doctor, I think it’s essential that there be human contact before the pill is prescribed.
SPEAKER 13 :
It’s not about a national abortion ban. It’s about validating Dobbs and preventing other states from nullifying the legislative policy choices that have been made by our states and facilitating the illegal, unethical, and dangerous drug trafficking of abortion pills into our states without any medical oversight whatsoever.
SPEAKER 26 :
We can simply fix this if we have the courage to do it. So what are all of us telling the administration? You’ve been a great pro-life president, Mr. President. It’s now time to deal with this issue.
SPEAKER 06 :
We want to protect life, and we want to give voice to the American people and their right to protect life state by state, city by city, and yes, here in the United States Congress. That’s what this fight is about.
SPEAKER 02 :
Let your voice be heard. Text LIFE to 67742. Sign the petition. Tell the Trump administration to act.
SPEAKER 09 :
The Stand Firm app brings trusted Family Research Council resources together in one place. Stay informed with news articles from the Washington Stand, watch interviews from Washington Watch, explore courses produced by FRC, and find many other resources to equip you to engage culture and government from a biblical perspective. Download the Stand Firm app today by texting APP to 67742, or by searching for Stand Firm in your app store.
SPEAKER 14 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks so much for joining us today. The website Tony Perkins dot com. By the way, this Sunday we have one of our new pray vote stand chapters is going to be launched in my actually my home. Parish, equivalent of a county for the rest of the country, in East Baton Rouge Parish. It’s going to be at First New Testament. And I’ll be actually speaking there Sunday morning at 9 a.m. at First New Testament. If you would like to find out more about how you can be a part of this Pray, Vote, Stand chapter, you don’t have to be a member of that church. It is for the entire community, and they’ll be starting Sunday night with our God and Government course. It’ll be a six-week course that they’ll be doing. You can find out more. Go to TonyPerkins.com, and there’s a link there in our resources if you’d like to join us on Sunday morning and Sunday evening for the God and Government course. Well, our word today comes from Leviticus chapter 5. If a person sins in hearing the utterance of an oath and is a witness, whether he has seen or known of the matter, if he does not tell it, he bears guilt. Or if a person touches any unclean thing and he is unaware of it, he is also unclean and guilty. Now, the Old Testament speaks to the physical, where the New Testament emphasizes the spiritual. The focus on external holiness shows us that holiness matters. But it is not merely about clean hands. It’s about a clean heart. It’s not about soiled clothes. It’s about a polluted mind. As followers of Christ, we’re called to holiness. Remember what Jesus said about adultery in Matthew chapter 5? You have heard that it has been said to those of old that you shall not commit adultery. But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. You see, it’s not the hands, it’s the heart, because the hands follow the heart’s instructions. To find out more about our journey through the Bible, text Bible to 67742. That’s Bible to 67742. For the past two years, OpenAI, the creators of ChatGPT, has been publishing threat reports that have shown how threat actors using AI have posed a threat to various parts of the country. They have also been sharing these insights so that the AI industry and wider society can be better placed to identify and prevent malicious uses of AI. Well, yesterday, OpenAI revealed how law enforcement in China tried to use ChatGPT to plan a covert influence operation targeting Japan’s prime minister, who has been critical of the Chinese Communist Party. It’s interesting. What is the future of AI? Considering how fast it’s accelerating, how is AI transforming warfare and geopolitics? And closer to home, how is it shaping conscience discernment and cultural norms? Well, joining us now to continue our conversation is retired U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel Bob McGinnis, a national security expert who, as I mentioned, served at the Pentagon. He’s currently a senior fellow here at the Family Research Council for National Security. Author of 14 books, including a new one coming out this spring titled The New AI Cold War, Liberty versus Tyranny in the Age of Machine Empires. All right, Colonel McGinnis, thanks for sticking around. Switching topics, we’re going to go from Iran to AI. But I want to start, what caught my attention here was that ChatGPT basically spilled the beans on the CCP. And I started thinking, you know, people are using this AI out there. And, I mean, who’s looking at this and what’s happening with it?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah. 700 million people use AI reportedly every day, not necessarily just chat with Jim and I, Claude and others, Tony. What’s interesting is that China has now become basically an AI machine state. And what I mean by that is that they use AI in every aspect of governments, surveillance of the people, certainly censorship, predictive policing, social scoring. Their military has really embraced artificial intelligence. So it’s become like an operating system for the Chinese Communist Party. in China. And that, of course, they’re spreading elsewhere across the world, which is really quite a statement to the United States. And I know President Trump has created his Genesis mission, which of course is trying to make sure that we don’t fall behind the Chinese, because they want to dominate the world, and AI is going to help them do that.
SPEAKER 14 :
So in this particular case, and I want to get on beyond this, but again, the facts of this really perked my attention, is that a Chinese law enforcement official disclosed to ChatGPT a vast influence operation. Basically, I guess, I don’t know, trying to get more information for his plan and put all this information in there. And that’s what made them aware of what they were trying to do. My question is, the Chinese have their own, the DeepSeek. Why would they use an AI service that could expose them in what they were doing?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, it’s not as sophisticated at the DeepSeek as Chad or Claude. I took a course at Massachusetts Institute of Technology this past summer, and And I dealt with various GPTs around the world. And the professors there said, look, don’t depend upon the Chinese GPTs because they have serious issues, one of which, of course, is surveillance. Now, if they come to us, we have protocols at OpenAI or Google or other, you know, like Elon Musk, XAI, and so forth, they have protocols that kind of monitor some of this. Now, they’re not doing a very good job with our adolescent children, but they’re doing a reasonably good job of protecting their own interests. And of course, the Chinese have been stealing left and right some of the technology, draining Chat and Claude and others of their technology so they can feed it to their own AIs. This is quite a contest and one that I argue in the new AI Cold War is very, very significant and is going to, I think, direct a lot of major decisions going forward in this world.
SPEAKER 14 :
Well, let’s talk about the personal side of this. Let’s move it away from the Cold War between countries. And the maybe, I mean, the personal, the moral, the spiritual, the ethical aspects here. I mean, I was thinking about this, you know, this Chinese official using chat GPT, you know, for his, you know, purposes of trying to taint the Prime Minister of Japan, or the President of Japan. So what about people that are using this? Let’s say somebody using it for something here in the United States, a public official, or maybe in the future they’re a public official. This information is all out there. I mean, this can be used against them in the future. I mean, people, I think, think they’re having a private conversation. It’s not so private, is it?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, there are levels, and the various GPTs do give you some sense of privacy if you’re willing to pay enough to maintain that insight. But otherwise, most of this data is just thrown into one big bucket. And you can access that data if you know how to do that. Not everybody knows how to do that, obviously. But it’s something that people should recognize. And the data that they’re accessing, in some cases, is very personal. So we need to be concerned about that. We need guardrails. Unfortunately, I don’t think that a lot of… The Federal Guard rails, as yet, have gone nearly far enough to protect our individual interests, our privacy, much less our freedoms.
SPEAKER 14 :
You published a piece this week at the Washington Stand, and folks, you can see it. Go to TonyPerkins.com, and it’s up there. But you argue that AI is not just a tool, but a formation system. What do you mean by that?
SPEAKER 11 :
Yeah, it shapes what we see. It rewards what we repeat when you scroll through. It knows your interest and not so much your interest. It normalizes what I call deliberate choice. And so when it shapes attention and habits and Even the perceptions of truth, it’s forming in us a way of really looking at the world and ultimately it shapes our character if we do it enough. And most of us don’t even know that we’re using AI. If you’re shopping online, if you’re using your phone, iPhone, if you’re using other things that work, most everything today, Tony, has an AI component and it’s going to only increase. And so as agents of the Lord Jesus Christ, as image bearers, as we’re told in Genesis 1, we need to recognize what is going on here. And unfortunately, there’s a lot of deception that is perpetrated by AI. And as a result, Even those that know the Lord are being deceived. And so we need to be incredibly careful going forward.
SPEAKER 14 :
So AI, is it amoral or is there an underlying agenda?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, as a tool, it’s really neutral. However, every algorithm is written by a human being with some assistance from AI. And as a result, you get the values that are embedded in there. If it’s a government AI, like the Chinese, they use it for their own nefarious reasons. If it’s an AI designed by a perpetrator of some sort of scam, it’s going to do what it’s told to do. It doesn’t have a conscience. It doesn’t have anything other than the directions and the algorithm, the formula that it’s been given to operate on. And so we need to recognize that this is something that we can use. But if we dismiss our own discernment that the Lord has given us, then we really risk falling trap. And our children, I think, become far more vulnerable, especially if they’re engaged in social media that is being really spun up with, you know, some terrible material that is going to really harm them for the balance of their lives.
SPEAKER 14 :
So I guess there’s a lot of risk here for those that maybe outsource moral choices, but what do you see is the greatest spiritual risk that AI poses to believers today?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, they become They become deceived and they treat it almost as an idol and where you relegate to the AI what is truth. You allow it to displace your own conscience. You normalize the deception that it perpetrates on you. And of course, the conditions that it creates really pulls you away from obedience to God. So it’s not evil as a machine, but it’s what’s behind it and using it, telling it what to do, that becomes a very serious spiritual problem that we all need to be aware of, and we need to run from it as much as we can. Now, engage the technology, but we need to cause the policy out there in Washington and elsewhere to really guard it. against these terrible things that it can do if it gets out of hand.
SPEAKER 14 :
So let me use a very basic comparison and help. help me walk through this. So like the television, when we were younger, there was like three basic stations and you could very carefully monitor what you’re watching. And most of it was Andy Griffith, leave it to Beaver. Today, it is horrible. So the machine in and of itself, the television was not bad. It’s been used for good purposes. Does AI have any redemptive purposes?
SPEAKER 11 :
Well, it can be used well. It can spread the gospel. It can help us study the Bible. It can broadcast, obviously, throughout the world the good news of Jesus Christ. However, who controls it? Is it government? Is it a good organization? Is it a church that we trust? Or is it some nefarious organization? people out there that are doing things to harm us. It’s not necessarily filled with evil, but it can be if it’s in the wrong hands. And that’s the problem in today’s world. On the Christian side, we don’t control the AI. It’s in the hands of some pretty money-grubbing people that run these high-tech companies that are wanting to advance their own benefit at the expense of others. And so we need to be cognizant of that. And I know in the article that I had in the Washington Stand the other day, Tony, I outlined five questions. Does this preserve human dignity at better? Does it elevate truth or merely optimize convenience? Does it build virtue and judgment or create dependency? Does it serve human beings or slowly replace them? And finally, is responsibility clearly retained by a person? We need to answer those with discernment and then act accordingly so that we can protect ourselves and our families and our communities.
SPEAKER 14 :
That almost sounds like a letter from Paul. Is it pure? Is it holy? Is it good? So it’s something we have to have our eyes wide open on. But let me ask you this. We just have about a minute and a half left, Colonel. Can AI become a tool in the hands of spiritual darkness? There’s no doubt.
SPEAKER 11 :
and it has been in some cases. I think that the suicides that are now being contested against the lights of meta and open AI and so forth that were driven, driving chatbots that young teenagers got advice about ending their lives from. That’s a horrendous situation. But there are thousands of court cases in the United States right today that are contesting or swearing that their children or themselves were hurt. And we’ve seen this all across the world. You can’t be too careful. Yes, it can do great benefits for health, agriculture, it can run entire factories, and it’s going to help us in future robots and so forth, but it can also be incredibly destructive if it’s in the wrong hands.
SPEAKER 14 :
Just another thing that as Christians we need to be discerning, prayerful, and measure all things according to the Word of God. I also see it as potentially factoring into what we read in the book of Revelation. It certainly looks like it could facilitate some of that. Bob McGinnis, always great to see you, my friend. Thanks for joining us. Thank you, Tony. Well, folks, something else to add to your prayer list, but be discerning before jumping in to the AI. All right, we’re out of time for today. Thanks for joining us. Until next time, keep praying and keep standing.
SPEAKER 05 :
Washington Watch with Tony Perkins is brought to you by Family Research Council. To support our efforts to advance faith, family, and freedom, please text GIVE to 67742. That’s GIVE to 67742. Portions of the show discussing candidates are brought to you by Family Research Council Action. For more information, please visit TonyPerkins.com.
