The Defense Department’s nearly $1.45 trillion budget request — the largest ever for the Pentagon — was ostensibly the reason for the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Thursday. But anyone who hoped for details on how that money might be used would have been left wanting.

For three hours, senators questioned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Pentagon’s comptroller, Jay Hurst. But for the most part, the session focused on the U.S. war against Iran and Mr. Hegseth’s tenure.

Here are the main takeaways.

Hegseth said Democrats were the enemy.

At the hearing’s outset, Mr. Hegseth condemned members of Congress who have questioned or challenged the Iran war, just as he did a day earlier during a House Armed Services Committee hearing.

“I’ll say it again today, the biggest adversary we face at this point are the reckless naysayers and defeatist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans,” he said.

Democrats asked about civilian deaths in the war.

Democratic senators questioned Mr. Hegseth on his gutting of the office that works to reduce harm to civilians in combat, which the Pentagon created in 2022 in response to New York Times reporting about noncombatants killed during the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The defense secretary dismissed their concerns, and did not answer a question from Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat of New York, about why he cut about 90 percent of the employees from the civilian protection office.

Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, asked about the Pentagon’s investigation into U.S. Tomahawk cruise missiles that hit a girl’s elementary school, killing 168 people on the first day of the war. Mr. Hegseth would only say that the attack remained under investigation.

Two Republican senators, Mike Rounds of South Dakota and Dan Sullivan of Alaska, asked Mr. Hegseth and General Caine if U.S. forces ever deliberately targeted civilians in conflict. Both men said no.

Hegseth and Caine did not respond directly to questions about women in combat.

Senator Mazie Hirono, Democrat of Hawaii, asked General Caine three times for his opinion on whether having women in combat units lowered standards if they meet the same physical fitness standards of men, and each time the general avoided answering directly.

General Caine said that “standards” were set by “civilian leaders” and offered a tepid declaration that women “continue to perform well across a range of” military specialties and assignments, but did not make a clear statement of support for their continued assignment to combat units.

Mr. Hegseth said that “the highest male standard for every combat arms position” should be the standard for whether women are allowed to serve in those roles.

Christian nationalism and race were also tense issues.

Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, asked Mr. Hegseth about his removal of women and Black men from senior leadership positions.

The senator said that Mr. Hegseth had “an intense interest in Christianity, in nationalism, and in not recognizing the talents of women and nonwhite men.”

“And that’s the wrong direction,” he added.

Mr. Hegseth appeared to be incensed.

“I don’t know what you’re insinuating, senator, but I am not ashamed of my faith in Jesus Christ,” he replied, calling Mr. Reed’s comments a “smear” on his character.

Mr. Reed pressed forward, asking about the secretary’s monthly Christian prayer services in the Pentagon auditorium and his tendency to give a Christian rationale for war.

“I’m sorry, Mr. Secretary,” the senator said. “Stressing the need for more Christianity in the military forces doesn’t seem like a neutral position in which you tolerate and accept all religions.”

Hegseth was accused of using antisemitic language.

Senator Jacky Rosen, Democrat of Nevada, accused Mr. Hegseth of using antisemitic language when he compared members of Congress and the news media to the Pharisees who criticized Jesus of Nazareth for performing miracles.

“It’s a problematic and weaponized term that casts Jewish communities as hypocritical or morally corrupt,” Ms. Rosen said of the defense secretary’s use of the term Pharisee.

“Words matter — what you say, how we choose to say it,” she said. “How do you justify using this language as secretary of defense?”

“I feel like it’s a pretty accurate term for folks who don’t see the plank in their own eye and always want to see what’s wrong with an operation,” the defense secretary said. “As opposed to the historic success of preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapons.”

“So I stand by it,” he added.

Democrats focused on the war’s harm to the U.S. economy.

Democrats repeatedly steered the discussion to the economic impact of the Iran war on Americans, specifically the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil flows.

“We can try and tell the American people that it’s going great and we’re killing it,” said Senator Elissa Slotkin, Democrat of Michigan, “but until the Strait of Hormuz is open, I don’t think we can credibly say that with any seriousness.”

There was a rare moment of agreement across party lines.

Senator Gary Peters, Democrat of Michigan, asked Mr. Hegseth when the war with Iran would end. The senator noted that the United States could continue to have tactical successes while still not creating the political conditions for the two countries to negotiate its end.

Mr. Peters asserted that the United States would not be able to end the war until it took control of the Strait of Hormuz.

That spurred perhaps the lone point of agreement between members of the Democratic caucus and a senior Republican on the committee.

Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said he welcomed the question from Mr. Peters.

“Let me observe that I very much appreciate the senator from Michigan suggesting ways in which our efforts in Iran could be more successful,” he said. “I do appreciate that.”

Eric Schmitt, Helene Cooper, Robert Jimison, Greg Jaffe and Megan Mineiro contributed reporting.

The Justice Department on Thursday accused the Biden administration of pushing policies that were unfair to Christians, releasing a report that amounted to the latest rhetorical broadside by the Trump administration over what it calls the “weaponization” of government.

The 197-page document, released by a task force led by the department, sought to portray what President Trump’s advisers contend was anti-Christian bias among those who worked for President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who is Roman Catholic. The report, which refers to decision-making at more than a dozen agencies, comes weeks after Mr. Trump publicly attacked the pope.

“The Biden administration’s policies regularly clashed with a Christian worldview and burdened traditional religious practices,” the report said. “These conflicts frequently arose over abortion, gender ideology, and sexual orientation.”

The document is the Justice Department’s latest effort to argue that it is removing purported political bias from the work of prosecutors. But critics say that the department under Mr. Trump has abandoned its tradition of operating independently from the White House, including by pursuing the president’s rivals, like James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, who was indicted this week for posting a photograph last year of seashells on a beach arranged to say “86 47.” The administration argues that the image was a coded threat to kill the president.

Earlier this month, the Justice Department issued a report accusing Biden-era prosecutors of unfairly pursuing anti-abortion activists through the use of a law that makes it a crime to obstruct or intimidate a person seeking abortion services or participating in a religious service at a house of worship. The Trump administration, in turn, has charged dozens of protesters, as well as the former CNN anchor Don Lemon, with violating the same law during a demonstration inside a church in St. Paul, Minn.

In a statement accompanying the release of Thursday’s report, Todd Blanche, the acting attorney general, vowed that the department would “continue to expose bad actors who targeted Christians, and work tirelessly to restore religious liberty for all Americans of faith.”

The report sharply criticized a leaked internal memo from 2023 by the F.B.I.’s field office in Richmond, Va., that said far-right extremists could be attracted to Catholic churches or groups.

For decades, the F.B.I. has worked to develop sources at churches, universities and mosques, but the Richmond memo quickly became a talking point on the right. Republicans argued that it showed the bureau was targeting Catholics.

F.B.I. officials quickly withdrew the memo after it was leaked, and an internal investigation found no evidence of “malicious intent.” But the new report argues otherwise. The memo, the report asserts, stemmed from a “misplaced reliance on baseless allegations from the Southern Poverty Law Center and the religious affiliation of a single law enforcement target who happened to identify himself as a ‘radical traditional Catholic.’”

Earlier this month, the Justice Department charged the S.P.L.C. with fraud, accusing the group of paying informants inside hate groups not to fight racism and extremism, but to promote them. The group has denied the charges and called it a politically motivated prosecution.

The new report also criticized a memo issued in 2021 by Attorney General Merrick B. Garland in response to concerns raised by the National School Boards Association about purported threats to local education officials, as parents and teachers grappled with restrictions enacted during the coronavirus pandemic.

Mr. Garland’s memo ordered the creation of a task force of Justice Department prosecutors and F.B.I. investigators to use their “authority and resources to discourage these threats.”

That directive, however, raised significant internal concerns at the F.B.I. and Justice Department. One senior prosecutor warned that “the vast, vast majority of the behavior cited” by the National School Boards Association did not violate federal law.

“Almost all of the language being used is protected by the First Amendment,” the Justice Department lawyer warned shortly before the Garland memo was issued.

While the Trump administration report cites the Garland memo as an example of anti-Christian bias, the document leaves unclear how school board fights over masks, remote learning and safety in public schools constitute a religious issue.