Dive into a riveting episode of Washington Watch as Attorney General Pam Bondi navigates a turbulent House Judiciary Committee hearing, facing off against Democratic lawmakers over the handling of Jeffrey Epstein’s files. In this episode, Tony Perkins and Casey Harper provide detailed insights into the political dynamics at play, highlighting Bondi’s accusations of theatrical tactics by the Democrats. This episode offers a compelling look at the intersection of law, politics, and public perception in a high-stakes environment on Capitol Hill.
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 14 :
They are talking about Epstein today. This has been around since the Obama administration. This administration released over 3 million pages of documents, over 3 million. And none of them, none of them ask Merrick Garland over the last four years one word about Jeffrey Epstein.
SPEAKER 08 :
How was Attorney General Pam Bondi responding to Democrats during a heated House Judiciary Committee hearing on Capitol Hill today? Welcome to this February 11th edition of Washington Watch. I’m your host, Tony Perkins. Well, coming up, Attorney General Pam Bondi faced some tough questions on Capitol Hill today as a House Judiciary Committee hearing quickly turned combative. Democrats pressed her over the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein files, while Bondi pushed back, accusing them of political theater. We’ll talk to a member of that committee, Texas Congressman Chip Roy, a little later. Also, Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville will join us to discuss the latest developments in the DHS funding negotiations. Well, as I mentioned today on Capitol Hill, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi faced some tough questions from lawmakers in a fiery congressional hearing. It quickly escalated into a heated exchange as Democrats immediately, immediately grilled her over how the Justice Department had handled the files involving the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Joining me now is Washington Stand reporter Casey Harper, who has been ringside today. Casey, walk us through what unfolded in today’s hearing.
SPEAKER 13 :
Yeah, Tony, I’m glad I wasn’t too close. I might have caught an elbow. I mean, that clip you played showed just how tense the hearing was, and that wasn’t just a one-off. It was many times throughout the hearing as Attorney General Pam Bondi testified before the House Judiciary Committee. Now, that testimony is coming as both sides have been frustrated over the Epstein files and how they’ve been handled. Some lawmakers have complained about the amount of redactions in the documents, while others said that there wasn’t enough redactions, that some victims WEREN’T PROTECTED, AS BOTH SIDES ARE SORT OF POSTURING TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE’RE NOT GUILTY, THEY ARE. NOW, DURING THE HEARING, A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSWOMAN ASKED BONDI TO APOLOGIZE TO THE EPSTEIN VICTIMS, ACTUALLY HAD SEVERAL OF THEM STAND BEHIND BONDI AND ASKED HER RIGHT THERE, REALLY PUT HER ON THE SPOT, AND THAT’S WHAT you know, Bondi called theatrics. Now, she accused her of failing to protect some of those victims by releasing their information. So it comes back to redactions. Now, Bondi rejected the premise of the question sort of out of hand, and that was just one of many tense moments. But it’s worth noting that Bondi did call Epstein a monster, of course, and said she was deeply sorry for what the victims have been through. Here’s another clip.
SPEAKER 14 :
I’m a career prosecutor. And despite what the ranking member said, I have spent my entire career fighting for victims, and I will continue to do so. I am deeply sorry for what any victim, any victim has been through, especially as a result of that monster.
SPEAKER 13 :
So a lot of anger, Tony, but not a lot of answers out of that hearing today.
SPEAKER 08 :
You know, I watched, I wasn’t there, but I watched part of it on C-SPAN. And, you know, it is political theater. And this, of course, this is what has kind of consumed all of Capitol Hill in many ways is the political theater. And that was one of the arguments about not having cameras in the courtroom so that we don’t have people playing to the camera. yeah well they’re trying to go viral too yeah oh yeah i mean whoever can make the most outlandish statement and there were plenty of them there were plenty of them um but anyway on the other end of pennsylvania avenue uh prime minister benjamin netanyahu and president donald trump held a two and a half hour meeting focused primarily on iran so casey were there any takeaways from that important meeting
SPEAKER 13 :
Sure, that is a very important meeting coming at a very pivotal time. They discussed both Iran and Hamas, as you mentioned. But the takeaways coming out seem to be vague in general, at least for now. It’s hard to know everything that happens behind closed doors in those meetings. But one thing that’s important to point out is it comes just a day after President Trump reiterated his opposition to the annexation of Judea and Samaria. So, I mean, that was very interesting timing that he reiterated that commitment. Now, it’s also seen as an effort to coordinate ahead of next week’s meeting between American and Iranian negotiators. After the meeting, as I said, President Trump said in a post on True Social that nothing definitive was decided, but he did call the meeting, quote, very good. And he also said they discussed the tremendous progress being made in Gaza and the region in general. Tremendous was his word, not mine. And they agreed to keep working together so that the negotiations with Iran would continue. But there’s two big looming questions here, Tony. Is Iran going to give up their nuclear program? And is Hamas actually going to disarm? The answer to both of those could be no.
SPEAKER 08 :
All right, Casey, thanks so much. I think it is worth noting that Judea and Samaria, those are the biblical heartland. That’s the biblical heartland of Israel. And support is growing within the nation of Israel for the Jewish state to exercise sovereignty over this region, which has been blocked by the international community. And it’s interesting, as you mentioned, the timing of bringing that up. I think in many ways it’s to appease the surrounding Arab community.
SPEAKER 11 :
Yes, I think you’re right.
SPEAKER 08 :
Casey, thanks so much. All right, I want to continue with an assessment of today’s meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Trump. Joining me now to discuss this is former Pentagon official Dr. Michael Rubin, who is now Director of Policy Analysis at the Middle East Forum. He is also Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, where he specializes in Middle Eastern countries, particularly Iran and Turkey. Dr. Rubin, welcome back to Washington Watch. Good to see you back.
SPEAKER 18 :
Hey, thanks for having me, Tony.
SPEAKER 08 :
So as was just mentioned in his Truth Social post after the meeting, the president said, quote, there was nothing definitive reached other than I insisted that negotiations with Iran continue to see whether or not a deal, capital D, can be consummated, end quote. What do you make of that?
SPEAKER 19 :
You know, this is typical Trump. He really does sincerely want to get a deal, but where the Iranians may get him wrong is that he’s not willing, out of desperation, to be strung along. This is why we see reports of a second aircraft carrier heading to the region. And so the real mystery is what happened behind the scenes. And everything I hear is that behind the scenes, the two leaders, Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, are working in lockstep, and that extends to Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State.
SPEAKER 08 :
I don’t want to say rumors. There were sources suggesting that going into this meeting that part of the meeting was for the prime minister to provide new intel to the president and to his team regarding the ballistic missile program and where that stands in terms of Iran recovering. What do we know about that aspect of the meeting?
SPEAKER 19 :
Well, you know, The ballistic missile program is what determines the timing of any action. If we look back at the June 2025 12-day war, the reason why Israel launched its attack when it did was because the window of opportunity was closing, the window of opportunity that was opened when Israel earlier had destroyed Iran’s anti-aircraft missile system. So what the Israelis are probably doing is looking at how much the Iranians have reconstituted to let Donald Trump know that the Iranians are probably gonna try to drag you out past this point in time. And that’s the point where there’s gotta be a red line and you’ve gotta make a decision or else we’re gonna act unilaterally.
SPEAKER 08 :
For Iran to, if they’re able to get it back online, their ballistic missile program, For them to use it, I think, would almost be suicide because I think the United States would respond at that point. I think Israel would have a green light to respond. So is the concern that there might just be a standoff or they would actually use it?
SPEAKER 19 :
Well, there is a concern that Iran would use its ballistic missiles. Look, back in April 2024, Tony, Iran launched something like 300 missiles and drones at Israel, and a lot of people in Washington applauded that all but seven of them had been shot down or intercepted. The fact of the matter is that if those seven carried nuclear, biological, or chemical warheads, we’d be talking about a very different discussion about whether the interception, the interdiction was successful or not. But the danger with Iran isn’t that they’re suicidal, it’s that they’re terminally ill. And if the regime is collapsing, and make no mistake, the regime is teetering, what’s to stop the most ideological component of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps? Those with nuclear, potentially, missiles or chemical weapons from launching, knowing that there’s going to be regime change in 24 hours afterwards. The analogy here is to something like Romania and the last days of Ceausescu.
SPEAKER 08 :
So, Dr. Rubin, are you suggesting that this time around, those ballistic missiles may be carrying a different type of payload?
SPEAKER 19 :
Well, here’s the problem I have with U.S. assessments, that Iran still doesn’t have a nuclear warhead. We can’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Iran has already surpassed the enrichment levels of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs. But you don’t need necessarily a complete fission reaction and nuclear explosion to create devastation. If you launch nuclear material, 60 percent, 70 percent enriched uranium in a warhead that scatters over Tel Aviv, the economic impact of that is going to be immense. So Iran already has the capacity of severe destruction. And that’s what the United States and Israel are up against. And for that matter, the regional Arab states as well.
SPEAKER 08 :
So the risk is too high to wait and see if, in fact, they have it.
SPEAKER 19 :
That’s absolutely the case. And this is another problem I traditionally have had with U.S. policy. And we saw this, for example, Tony, in the case of North Korea. For every failed nuclear or missile test, we pat ourselves on our back. We have a big sigh of relief that they’re not there yet. But you can learn as much from a failed test. as you can learn from a successful one. And so time is not on our side. The issue is whether or not we’re going to be serious. I’d say over the last couple of administrations, we weren’t serious. We were kicking the can down the road, but eventually that road ends.
SPEAKER 08 :
And as you and I were talking last time you were on the program, just a couple of days ago, was that for Israel, there is no second chance.
SPEAKER 19 :
No, that’s absolutely the case. I mean, remember, Israel is the size of New Jersey, it’s the size of Massachusetts, and at its narrowest point, it’s only 8.2 miles wide. How long would it take to drive a tank across 8.2 miles? The fact of the matter is, Israel can’t afford to have this. And you know, the former president, Hashemi Rassanjani, once said, you know, let Israel… attack us. It will only take one nuclear weapon in Israel to completely destroy the Jewish state. And even if they respond, we have the strategic depth. He said the quiet part out loud. We’ve got to start listening to what their Iranian leaders say.
SPEAKER 08 :
Just about a minute and a half left, Dr. Rubin. But speaking about the width, breadth of Israel, were the president making a comment about not allowing Israel to exercise sovereignty over Judea and Samaria? That’s not only an issue of national identity, but it’s also a security issue as well.
SPEAKER 19 :
Well, it absolutely is the case. You know, past peace processes, especially in 2008, we’re talking about land swaps. But what makes Judea and Samaria unique, not just religiously, but in terms of international diplomacy, is technically they’re not occupied territories. They’re disputed territories because they have never belonged to a recognized sovereign state. And this is why everything should be open to negotiations. What the Palestinians have been claiming and those who cheerlead for them from the sidelines is that they want 100 percent before even the negotiations begin. And that’s not the way the world works.
SPEAKER 08 :
And we have found from the past that land for peace doesn’t work very well.
SPEAKER 19 :
No, that absolutely is the case. And again, it’s not about land. It’s not about development. It’s fundamentally about the ideology of Hamas and the eliminationless genocide ideology that the Palestinians now embrace.
SPEAKER 08 :
Dr. Rubin, always great to have you on the program. Thanks so much for your insights.
SPEAKER 18 :
Thanks for having me, Tony.
SPEAKER 08 :
Folks, I would say it’s one of those issues we need to be praying about. America wants to be on the right side of this issue, not only helping Israel defend itself, but making sure they get the land that belongs to them. All right, don’t go away. More after this. 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 15 :
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 10 :
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 21 :
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.
SPEAKER 24 :
It’s harder to ship alcohol in this country than it is to ship the abortion pill.
SPEAKER 11 :
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 22 :
As a doctor, I think it’s essential that there be human contact before the pill is prescribed.
SPEAKER 12 :
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 21 :
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 is now time to deal with this issue.
SPEAKER 10 :
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 15 :
Let your voice be heard. Text LIFE to 67742. Sign the petition. Tell the Trump administration to act.
SPEAKER 16 :
The world says love is love, but what does God’s Word say? This Valentine’s Day, discover the true meaning of love, the way God defines it, with Family Research Council’s free digital resource, Valentine’s Day, Love That Reflects Christ. Whether you’re reading on your own or sharing with others, this resource will encourage you and equip you to love the way Christ loves. Text VALENTINE to 67742 to get your free copy today.
SPEAKER 08 :
This is Washington Watch, and I’m Tony Perkins. Good to have you along. All right, negotiations over funding for the Department of Homeland Security are reportedly stalled over intense disagreements. We’re going to get an update here in just a little bit from… Senator Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, but the issue, at least what they say, the Democrats are saying, it’s the immigration enforcement tactics and accountability. Now, among the sticking points is the demand by Democrats for a ban on federal agents wearing masks during operations, something that was highlighted during a congressional hearing yesterday. It was an oversight hearing on the Department of Homeland Security. Here’s one of the comments.
SPEAKER 23 :
In America, we shouldn’t have secret police. We shouldn’t have masked government agents executing citizens in the streets. The Constitution does not give your agency the right to hide their faces while they kill Americans. People who are proud of what they do aren’t hiding their identity.
SPEAKER 08 :
Now, that was New York Congressman Tim Kennedy, a Democrat. Those comments, as was most of the others in the hearing, were a bit over the top. But the wearing of masks by law enforcement is a topic that I believe needs to be thoughtfully discussed. Joining me now is Justin Smith, former Colorado sheriff, former Colorado sheriff, who is now the executive director and CEO of the National Sheriffs Association. Sheriff, welcome to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 06 :
Good evening, Tony. It’s good to be on with you.
SPEAKER 08 :
I thank you for coming on and talking about this because I think Very few conversations take place that are thoughtful here. People just run to conclusions here in Washington right now on this. But the Department of Homeland Security believes that masking is important to safeguard employees from online harassment. Now, according to DHS, there’s been over a 1,300% increase in assaults against ICE officers. So there’s a significant issue here of the well-being and the identity of these agents, their families. I mean, I get it. I was a police officer for 10 years. I understand all of that. We only had our last name on our uniforms. They didn’t have the first name. So, you know, they make it a little harder to track down. But on the flip side. There’s some valid points made against the masking of federal agents. That kind of incites fear. So what’s being discussed in the law enforcement community at the state and local level?
SPEAKER 06 :
Well, I can tell you, Tony, that you did hit one of the important keys is doxing. Doxing is relatively new. Back 20 years ago, 10 years ago, this really was not an issue of getting somebody’s personal information on the web and threatening them and their family. So definitely there’s an understanding of that issue. But on the other side of it, there’s a recognition. As police officers, as human beings, we read other people’s faces. We pick up cues and things like that. And so I recognize that when the public cannot see the face of an officer, it does create some discomfort. We get that. There’s a reason that in local policing, we limit the use of masks, sometimes undercover officers, you know, that were involved in searching or serving warrants, sometimes SWAT teams for protection during the cold. But we are cautious in general. about when and where you might cover your face. So I understand that’s an issue. The real issue here is we need to get away from that and get to the transparency and accountability. I think the mask thing is a little bit of a diversion here that’s unnecessary. I think there’s ways to make sure you can still have that accountability and recognize the need to protect these employees and their families from doxing.
SPEAKER 08 :
So let’s talk about some of those ways that you can have that accountability. Because I think there are, as you pointed out, there are circumstances where it makes sense. But as a routine part of your uniform and equipment in normal policing, I think it’s problematic.
SPEAKER 06 :
I would agree with that. It’s not the first way to go. I think we need to recognize that there are ways for the accountability. And you mentioned when you were a police officer, you had your last name tag on your shirt. And any office I’ve ever known or any department, the standing rule, typically in state statute, if a citizen comes up and asks, you have to identify yourself and give a unique officer ID number. So if they have an issue, they got a question, they have a complaint, they can tie that to a person. I recognize we’re in a little different time, but I’ve heard suggested by other sheriffs that if they had a unique ID number that was prevalent on their uniform, you know, that might suffice to know what that individual is. Now, you still have to be careful about doxing. But when you go and codify things like this, you know, that gets really difficult. When is it too cold? When is there a medical need? When might you have dust or dirt or whatever? To codify that as a statute that you can’t, it’s more of a policy issue. As a sheriff, we set policies on how we were in uniform, when, how, and why. And so I think Congress has to be careful they’re not politicizing this. They’re really getting down to the accountability.
SPEAKER 08 :
And that’s so often it’s reactive here, and it actually creates more problems. But is there any concern that what the federal government does, let’s say they continue using masks and this becomes kind of standard, is there any concern that that begins to filter down?
SPEAKER 06 :
It does, you know, when you when you lack that, what might be seen as lacking transparency, you know, it does further degrade public trust. And we know it’s a worldwide issue. Trust in institutions has been down. And certainly you’re seeing some of that. And I’ll flip over the comment that was made by the congressman or senator about the wearing of masks. One of the things we keep in mind is these these officers and agents work are up against protesters who are also wearing masks to hide their identities. So it’s a two-way street.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, and I think, you know, there’s circumstances like in those environments where they’re in the street, there’s riots or there are people, there’s crowds. But if they’re just like… in normal stopping individuals and it’s becoming kind of a, it appears to be a routine undertaking by the federal agents there in these cities is wearing of the mask no matter what they’re engaged in. I think that, again, I’m kind of sensitive this year. It’s been a number of years since I was on the street. But when I was on the street, we had we had one uniform. We wore a class A. Well, we had two uniforms. We have a class A and we would have a regular uniform. We didn’t have these fatigues. And I think the way we law enforcement dresses affects the way they act. And I just think with their masks, there’s a sense of anonymity. And I just… It concerns me, Justin. I think it’s something we have to look at very closely. We’ve got about 30 seconds left. I’ll give you the last word.
SPEAKER 06 :
I agree. It comes down to one of those issues of that professionalism. You know it as officer presence, how you come across to somebody and you want to show authority, but you also want to show respect. And there has been a lot of debate about how we dress, how we look. and certainly the hiding of the face. Again, it makes people nervous. Look through COVID and see how we talked about how a lot of children had issues because they couldn’t read faces. And it was a developmental issue. So it’s a broad issue, and I appreciate that you’re looking at it sincerely.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, Justin, I’m consistent. I was against the mask back in COVID, and I’m kind of against them now, too. So, hey, thanks so much for joining us. Thank you. All right, folks, stick with us. Senator Tommy Tuberbill joins us next.
SPEAKER 15 :
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 02 :
What is God’s role in government? What does the separation of church and state really mean? And how does morality shape a nation? President John Adams said our Constitution was made only for moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. Join Family Research Council for God and Government, a powerful series that explores the connection between biblical principles and the American government, equipping you with truth to engage in today’s most pressing debates. We’ll uncover the foundations of our nation’s history and why it’s relevant for today. Join us to defend God’s plan for government because faith and freedom were never meant to be separate. You can view the course at prayvotestand.org slash godandgovernment or on the Stand Firm app.
SPEAKER 08 :
Welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us on this Wednesday. I’ve got to keep up with the day of the week. It’s been a long week already. Go to the App Store and download the Stand Firm app if you’ve not already done so. That way you have access to Washington Watch each and every day. You also can have access to our news and commentary from a biblical perspective, the Washington Stand, and my podcast, A daily devotional, Stand on the Word, all of that, plus, plus a lot, lot more is on the Stand Firm app. So go to the App Store and get the Stand Firm app. OK, a Friday night shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security looks all but certain as Senate Democrats in the White House appear to be locked in a standoff, according to the latest reports. Joining me now to talk about this and more is Senator Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, who serves on several Senate committees, including the Armed Services Committee. Coach, welcome back to Washington Watch. Good to see you.
SPEAKER 04 :
Thank you, Tony. Glad to be here. Welcome to The Clown Show.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, I was going to say, is it still halftime or did we get something worked out?
SPEAKER 04 :
Oh, no. You don’t get anything worked out up here. Democrats are bound and determined to blame everything on us. And we’ve got the House in the majority. We’ve got the majority in the Senate. We’ve got the White House. And we’re worried about this. This is the Democrats’ fault, folks. It is not Republicans. We are voting to open up you know, the government. And again, this is just, this is FEMA, this is TSA, and it’s the Homeland Security. And these people, Democrats, they hate authority and they hate law enforcement. So let’s blame it on them. It’s their fault. Let’s run them out of the country. They don’t want to protect our men and women in blue and go on with it.
SPEAKER 08 :
I bet there’s a lot of times you’d like to throw a flag, wouldn’t you?
SPEAKER 04 :
Oh my gosh, I mean you can’t make this up. Everybody worried about getting reelected in this or that and you know it polls this way, pose that. How about we pull it for America? How about we worry about what’s going on in our country and save this country before the crazies on the left run us in the ground? And we’re as much a fault because we won’t fight back. Let’s do away the filibuster. We can do it all. We can start next Monday or whenever we’re about concession, and we can just hit one bill after the other with 51 votes. But we won’t do that because, oh my goodness, it’s the tradition of the Senate. Hey, how about tradition of the United States of America for 250 years? And if we continue this tradition nonsense, it’s going to be over with for America. The crazies will take over.
SPEAKER 08 :
So Congress is scheduled to be out next week. So if there is not an agreement reached and I mean, it’s it’s Wednesday and it takes a little time to get something done. You know, Congress is out next week and there’s a lot of folks doing, you know, travel abroad. I mean, there’s not a whole lot of buffer left in the TSA budget and FEMA budget because it was all used up in the last shutdown. What happens with TSA?
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, they’ve got enough money to fund them for awhile, but they all know that up here. So it’s really not going to affect if they would shut down the airports immediately at midnight on Friday, whenever the deadline is. I mean, you’d have people up here scrambling, but you’re right. You just said people are traveling abroad. We’re not scheduled to be in session next week. So you got four, five, six, 737s with United States of America. They’re dressed in blue and white. they’re getting ready to take off as soon as they can with house members from both sides senators from both sides going to munich germany to the globalist security conference i’ve been to it a couple times it’s a disaster those people over there they’re so woke they can’t walk straight and uh what’s what’s happening is you know uh you know they just want to get out of town hey let’s close the government down but when we close it down let’s shut the airports down and see how long they last
SPEAKER 08 :
yeah just let me get home first okay let me get home first we just got a couple about a minute and a half two two and a half minutes left uh yesterday your colleagues in the house held a hearing on why political islam and sharia law are incompatible with the us constitution you actually have two pieces of legislation in the senate to ban sharia law tell us why this issue deserves attention now it’s one of the number one things going on the first thing we got to do by the way
SPEAKER 04 :
is we gotta change the voting bill. We’ve gotta get voter ID. If we don’t do that, it’s not gonna make any difference because they’re gonna cheat us out of all kind of seats this coming November because they can’t stand them not being in power. But the Muslim community has come to this country, the third world group that They don’t want to assimilate. They want Sharia law. They want to read the Koran. They want to go by the Koran. And it doesn’t work in our country. And folks, we are not changing for a third world group of people coming here that it’s not a religion, it’s a cult. And they are coming and taking over very, very quickly. And Barack Obama, who is a Muslim by himself, he brought all those people and put them in Minneapolis that cheated the heck out of this country out of $20 billion. And then Joe Biden, Or somebody I think it was Obama behind the scenes. He handled all that debacle in Afghanistan and then they brought another 100 to 150,000 of them in here. They can’t read and write and they’re not going to simulate. They’re going to take this country over, but under my dead body they’re going to do it. I’m telling you we are going to fight back. Chip Roy, all the caucus. We are going to fight these people and keep this country a Christian country. And Jesus went in the temple now and he ran them all out, all these tax collectors. And we’re going to do the same thing because Jesus would fight when he knew time was fight.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, and this is popping up in some places you would never imagine, you know, places like Oklahoma, Texas. I mean, the red conservative states. I mean, it is alarming. Coach, we’re out of time. Always great to see you. I hope you make it home in time before the TSA shuts down.
SPEAKER 04 :
Thank you. Thank you, Tony.
SPEAKER 08 :
Always good to see you. Coach Tommy Tuberville of Alabama. All right. You know, this is a concern. Next, we’re going to have we’re going to have two of the recipients of FRC Actions 100 percent award. And one of them is Chip Roy. He was a part of the hearing in the House yesterday. So we’re going to talk with him about that as well. Also, Congressman Brian Babbitt of Texas joins us. So don’t go away. More Washington Watch straight ahead.
SPEAKER 24 :
Should a Christian support Israel? That question has become one of the most emotionally charged issues of our time, both in the world and within the church. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins offers a clear biblical and prophetic answer. In his latest book, he examines Israel’s past, present, and future through the lens of scripture, revealing why support for Israel is not rooted in politics, partisanship, or cultural sentiment, but in the unchanging promises of God. Drawing from Genesis to Revelation, Tony Perkins demonstrates that the ultimate rationale for a Christian support for Israel is spiritual. Should a Christian support Israel invites believers to see beyond headlines and ideologies, returning to the foundation of God’s Word to understand His heart for His chosen people and the blessings that flow when we stand with what He has established forever. Text the word Israel to 67742 for more information.
SPEAKER 07 :
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 20 :
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 17 :
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 01 :
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 08 :
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. This is Washington Watch. I’m Tony Perkins, your host. Thanks so much for tuning in and making us part of your day. The website, TonyPerkins.com, lots of resources there for you. Also, you can access all of that through the Stand Firm app. Go to the App Store and get the Stand Firm app. You’ll have access to Washington Watch, the Washington Stand, our news and commentary from a biblical perspective, and our daily devotional, Stand on the Word. All of that is found on the Stand Firm app. Speaking of the word, our word for today comes from Exodus chapter 14. The children of Israel on their way out of Egypt face their first crisis, the Red Sea before them and the Egyptian army behind them. And guess what? Their enthusiasm melts into despair. Verse 11, then they said to Moses, because there were no graves in Egypt, have you taken us away to die in the wilderness? Why have you so dealt with us to bring us up out of Egypt? And Moses said to the people, do not be afraid. Stand still and see the salvation of the Lord, which he will accomplish for you today. For the Egyptians whom you see today, you shall see again no more forever. The Lord will fight for you and you shall hold your peace. And the Lord said to Moses, Why do you cry to me? Tell the children of Israel to go forward. How do we live for God in the power of God so that we don’t desire to go back to the bondage of the past? Well, we look to God in faith to overcome our fear of the obstacles and challenges that we face. And then we act. To find out more about our journey through the Bible, text Bible to 67742. That’s Bible to 67742. Well, early this morning, dozens of senators and members of Congress were in the family center of the Family Research Council right here in Washington, D.C. And they were here to be recognized for a 100 percent faith, family and freedom voting record. In fact, 263 members voted 100% with FRC and with your family this past year. Frankly, it was a very encouraging event to see that many members of Congress who were standing up for the family and boldly defending Christian faith. And one of those members of the House is Congressman Dr. Brian Babin of Texas, who is co-chairman of the Congressional Border Security Caucus and chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology. And he joins us now. Dr. Babin, welcome back to Washington Watch. Thanks for joining us.
SPEAKER 03 :
Always great to be with you, Tony, and Family Research Council. Thank you for what you do.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, thank you. I appreciate that. Let me congratulate you on being recognized today with FRC Actions Annual Award for members of Congress who scored a perfect 100% for votes cast on the scorecard in 2025. I tell you what, we really appreciate your stand for faith, family, and freedom.
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, this is why I’m up here. I mean, 100% up here to defend faith, family, and freedom. And I’ve also told many people in the past, Tony, that I serve for 17 reasons. And those are my 17 grandchildren that I want to have a future in a country of faith, family, and freedom. And we want to maintain that.
SPEAKER 08 :
It doesn’t it doesn’t happen on its own. I mean, you have to work for that. You have to fight for that. And, you know, I have seen and you’ve been you’ve been around a while. I don’t know if you’ve been here as long as I have, but I’ve been here a while. I’m encouraged. You know, a lot of people are discouraged by what they see in the news, and I know there’s a lot of bad stuff out there, but I’m telling you what, more and more men and women of faith are being called by God to run for public office, get elected, and many of them are coming here to Congress.
SPEAKER 03 :
There’s no question about it. I mean, we have some great members. And, you know, I have people saying, you know, the Congress is miserable. It doesn’t do its job. It doesn’t do this. You go up there and you do this, that, and the other, and nothing gets better. And I say, well, mainly, BECAUSE WE’VE JUST GOT TO HAVE MORE COMMITTED CHRISTIANS WHO ARE WILLING TO STAND UP FOR FAITH, FAMILY AND FREEDOM AND STAND UP FOR THE CONSTITUTION AND FOR THAT GREAT BOOK, OUR SCRIPTURE, AND THAT IS THE HOLY BIBLE. AND IF WE DO THAT, I THINK IF WE CAN GET THAT MAJORITY, AND I THINK WE’VE GOT IT NOW, SOMETIMES THEY DON’T ALWAYS STICK TOGETHER, AS YOU KNOW. BUT WHEN WE DO, WE GET THINGS DONE, AND I JUST, IT MAKES YOU FEEL, SLEEP A LOT BETTER AT NIGHT KNOWING THAT WE HAVE THE TRIFECTA NOW OF PRESIDENT TRUMP IN THE WHITE HOUSE, AND WE HAVE A MAJORITY IN THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, the mess that our country is in didn’t happen overnight. We’re not going to get out of it overnight, and it is a progression. And when you talk about having the majority, you’ve got the majority by about two seats. I mean, you don’t have much of a majority, so it’s very difficult. I talk to the speaker often, and he’s got one of the toughest jobs, I think, in the world trying to get the Republicans to keep together. I want to talk a little bit about the encouragement from the spiritual standpoint. Last week you participated in an event, which I think is one of my favorite events, the National Gathering for Prayer and Repentance, where literally dozens of members of Congress come and they pray. And these are not scripted prayers. These are heartfelt prayers. You’ve been a part of that. Every year we’ve had that. What does that mean to you?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, it’s just an enormous honor to be able to do it. I remember the first time, Tony, that we had it a few years ago. And, you know, we had been in despair after several years of Joe Biden and the eight years of Barack Obama, and then All of a sudden, we have open borders. Our police departments are being underfunded. We’ve got people of faith being arrested for just kneeling on the sidewalk praying in front of an abortion clinic and weaponization of our federal agencies. It really is. It sends you into a kind of a just a funk. of despair, thinking that your great country, based on God, the Judeo-Christian foundation that we have, is heading to ruination. And then so even before Joe Biden left office, we were beginning to have these prayer and repentance meetings at the Bible Museum. And it just felt so comforting. We knew God’s presence was there. You’re there with your own kind, with people, really, of the Judeo-Christian faith that are there with your own colleagues, your senators, your House members. and getting on our knees and praying to a Holy Father that we know wants to bless us and forgive us. And it’s just so comforting. And now, you know, we prayed and prayed, and all of a sudden, we’ve got a Republican in the White House who is doing a tremendous job for people of faith. He is defending faith all around the world and doing a great job. And then we have the majority IN THE SENATE, AND AS YOU SAID, WE’VE GOT A MAJORITY BUT A VERY THIN ONE IN THE HOUSE WHERE I SERVE. AND I CAN JUST SAY THIS. ON THAT THIN MAJORITY WHERE WE CAN ONLY AFFORD TO LOSE ONE, MAYBE TWO SEATS, WE CAN’T AFFORD TO HAVE ANYBODY THAT’S SICK. RIGHT. YOU KNOW, IT’S HORRIBLE. BUT THAT LITTLE THIN MAJORITY IS REALLY SEPARATING US FROM GOING BACK TO THE BIDEN AND OBAMA YEARS. I MEAN, IT’S THE ONLY THING.
SPEAKER 08 :
IT’S A THIN RED LINE BETWEEN US AND THAT MARXIST IDEOLOGY THAT WAS TAKING ROOT IN OUR GOVERNMENT. DR. BRIAN BABIN, ALWAYS GREAT TO SEE YOU, MY FRIEND. THANKS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US TODAY.
SPEAKER 03 :
THANK YOU, TONY. GOD BLESS YOU.
SPEAKER 08 :
All right. Dr. Babin was one, as I said, of 263 members of Congress that received the 100 percent award. And you can actually find out if your congressman was among them. You go to Tony Perkins dot com there in the program. The episode resources for today. You can actually get a link that will take you to that vote scorecard and you can see where they lined up on the issues. And if your member was 100%, I would encourage you to reach out to them. Send a note to their office and thank them for standing for faith, family, and freedom. And if they didn’t, well, ask them why they didn’t. Again, you can find that at TonyPerkins.com. All right, join him. Excuse me. JOINING ME NOW IS ANOTHER 100% AWARD RECIPIENT, CONGRESSMAN CHIP ROY OF TEXAS. HE SERVES ON THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, THE RULES COMMITTEE, AND THE BUDGET COMMITTEE. HE IS THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE 21ST CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS. CONGRESSMAN ROY, WELCOME BACK TO WASHINGTON WATCH. THANKS FOR JOINING ME.
SPEAKER 09 :
GREAT TO BE ON WITH YOU, JOHNNY. HOPE YOU’RE DOING WELL.
SPEAKER 08 :
I’M DOING WELL, AND CONGRATULATIONS ON RECEIVING THE 100% AWARD FROM FRC ACTION.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah, honored as always. Thanks for keeping score and holding our feet in fire. For some of us, it might be a little bit easier than others, but really honored.
SPEAKER 08 :
Yeah, for some, it’s the feet, others just patting them on the back. All right, let me ask you, today, I talked about this earlier in the program, explosive hearing in the Judiciary Committee. Attorney General Pam Bondi, I mean, this, it kind of looked like a circus.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah, there was a lot of barbs being thrown around by Democrats directed at the Attorney General. In fact, I missed a part of it because I was down on the floor running the rule for the Save America Act. But in the committee, we had a lot of spirited back and forth. But look, I focused my attention when I talked to her about the extent to which, one, the Save America Act is needed by virtue of the questions I asked her, which she validated, that they have been indicting and going after individuals who have been engaged in election fraud and voter fraud. And by the way, I asked her a simple question. When you do that, does that unring the bell on their vote? And the answer is no. That’s why you need something that’s prophylactic like the Save America Act. But in addition, we talked about their office where they deal with all of the judges, the immigration judges on the asylum claims, how the backlog is going down for President Trump because of his policies, how that’s helping them be able to carry out justice more effectively. And then I pressed her a little bit on on Epstein and making sure that we’re protecting victims while seeking truth, but reminding people that Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were both indicted by the first Trump administration. So we had a good back and forth, and hopefully people are seeing that we’re going after criminals and doing the work that they sent us there to do.
SPEAKER 08 :
Well, it was interesting hearing. Well, I’ll leave it at that, because I want to go back to the Save America Act. As you said, you were down on the floor. I was watching it, actually, on C-SPAN, watching you on the floor regarding the rule. Let’s talk about this, because I think this is extremely important, because you have states that are not protecting the vote, the sanctity of the vote. And that’s actually—let’s say, you know, you’ve got a blue state like California that doesn’t really care or they actually want— Well, they want bad things to happen. I’ll leave it at that. But that’s robbing people in Texas and other states. So it reaches beyond the border of that state that’s not securing the ballot.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah, it does. And I’ll take it one step further because you and I are both federalists. Right. Neither one of us are reflexively wanting to federalize law. But in this case, there is a direct constitutional underpinning. Right. Congress is given the ability to set the rules and standards for their own elections and federal elections alongside the states. But also we have purview over immigration and border security rights in the Constitution. But importantly, there are some states that want to do this and are being prohibited by federal judges from actually making sure that their voter rolls are checked against the federal database to ensure citizenship. Arizona, for example, has two sets of data, two systems, one for their state and local elections, one for federal. We fixed that. This, I think, is actually a pro-states, pro-limited government position by just setting a baseline of the standard Yes, we require it at a federal level for federal elections. But we make all the data available. We let states set a lot of the rules, require voter ID, require that you check citizenship. It’s not really complex.
SPEAKER 08 :
We do that now from a standpoint of the federal government sets the standard in some ways for federal elections. We determine when they’re going to be. And so this is not like earth shattering that we’re saying all right we’ve got this problem in our election system and therefore you know you’ve got to have an I.D. to make sure you vote so that we’re ensuring that it’s only American citizens who are voting in federal elections.
SPEAKER 09 :
That’s exactly right. And my Democratic colleagues have been trying to spin people up, making wild-eyed claims that women aren’t going to be able to vote because they make a name change when they get married or that somehow our men and women in uniform aren’t going to be able to vote. All of those things are false. The original version of the SAVE Act had protections, but we actually added some additional safeguards in this version just to clarify and make sure that if a woman was married and her names didn’t align, she could sign an affidavit. We’ve taken care of every possible option here. We’re empowering states to do it. Again, this pulls off the charts, Tony. You know this. Republicans is 90 percent. Democrats, it’s 71 percent. among Hispanics, blacks, whites, all over 70% support, overwhelming support across the country for voter ID and to ensure that only citizens vote. We’re moving it off the floor of the House, I hope, in the next hour here in the House. And then I hope we can push the Senate to actually move on it and engage a talking filibuster to do so.
SPEAKER 08 :
Congressman Chip Roy, one final question for you. Got a minute and a half left. Yesterday in the subcommittee on the Constitution and limited government, a hearing on Sharia-free America, why political Islam and Sharia law are incompatible with the U.S. Constitution. This is something that Congress has a responsibility to do to make sure that Our states have a Republican, a Republican form of government in the terms of it fits within our Constitution.
SPEAKER 09 :
Yeah, that’s right, Tony. I mean, look, some people are trying to say that having hearings like that are contradictory to the first amendment. I disagree. The United States of America was founded on principles that are central to Western civilization, our declaration, our constitution, the rule of law. Sharia is inconsistent with that. The hearing yesterday made very clear that Sharia is inconsistent with that. The other thing that we made clear was that Sharia is also central to the vast majority of Muslims. And therefore, when our immigration system brings lots of Muslims to America, you end up with problems like Epic City in Plano and these enclaves across the country and where you’re starting to see Sharia courts like we see in Scotland and England, where there are 85 in the United Kingdom Sharia courts alongside their civil courts. That is not something we can tolerate here. We need to be open about this. We need to be aggressive about this. Islamists Islamism and wanting to turn America into an Islamic state is real. It’s well-funded. We need to identify it, expose it, point out how it undermines our system, and then fight to change it.
SPEAKER 08 :
And we’ll continue to track that as that continues to be a topic of focus. Congressman Chip Roy, thanks for joining us today.
SPEAKER 09 :
Thanks, Tony.
SPEAKER 08 :
God bless. And folks, thank you for joining us as well. Until next time, 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.
