Tag: china

China Brings Back Masking for Vulnerable People as Summer Coronavirus Spike Sweeps South

The Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) began encouraging vulnerable residents – such as the elderly, pregnant women, and those with chronic diseases – to seek out Wuhan coronavirus vaccine products and use sanitary masks as the rate of coronavirus infections skyrocketed in July.

The Chinese state newspaper Global Times first announced in English the CDC warning of a spike in Wuhan coronavirus cases on July 26, insisting that the virus appears to be spreading much faster in southern China than in the north and that it does not appear to be causing severe infections in most people. Experts suggested that hot temperatures driving people indoors to air conditioning has created similar conditions to winter, when many do not go outside because of the cold and the limited air circulation facilitates infections.

Hong Kong’s South China Morning Post identified the culprit of the latest outbreak as the “Omicron NB.1.8.1 variant,” which is reportedly spreading at a “moderate” level but mostly a threat to the elderly or those with other health complications.

The Chinese CDC warned last week that it was documenting more cases of coronavirus than influenza this month, suggesting accelerating rates of infection. The vast majority of those diagnosed with the disease were reportedly between the ages of 15 to 59, suggesting that children and the elderly did not represent the majority of cases.

“The [Wuhan coronavirus] test positivity rate stood at 16.3 percent, up 4.3 percentage points from the previous week, while the influenza positivity rate was 12.6 percent, down 0.9 percentage points week on week,” the Global Times detailed.

The Global Times added that the Chinese government was now encouraging the elderly and those with health complications to “preventive measures, such as wearing masks in crowded places or on public transportation.” All were encouraged to update their vaccine product dosages, particularly pregnant women.

The state outlet China Daily reported an update on Wednesday from Beijing’s CDC discouraging residents from concern, stating that the rate of transmission in the capital city was “within normal cyclical fluctuations” and not straining medical facilities. Overcrowding in Chinese hospitals is a recurring problem during waves of respiratory infections, particularly those targeting children, as many parents choose to take their children to be hospitalized for intravenous treatment rather than attempting to treat respiratory symptoms at home. During past waves of respiratory infections citizens have documented chaotic scenes in city hospitals as emergency rooms failed to offer proper services to the large crowds of people flooding their waiting rooms and ran out of seats of IV fluid treatment.

“The [Beijing health] center said visits to fever clinics remain low across the city, hospitals have sufficient medicine supplies, and the latest increase in cases has not placed noticeable pressure on the healthcare system,” according to China Daily.

The current transmission data available from China indicates that the situation in southern China is more precarious. The U.S.-based Epoch Times, which conducted much of the early reporting exposing the calamity in Wuhan, China, as the coronavirus first began spreading in 2020, noted in its reporting on Wednesday that the gap between cases in the north and south had “widened significantly” and that one potentially complicating factor could be widespread floods in the region that have killed and displaced large numbers of people. The newspaper, citing biomedical science professor Xiaoxu Sean Lin, cited that flooding could potentially cause situations such as “population displacement, centralized sheltering, poor ventilation, overcrowded medical facilities, and compromised nutrition and rest,” all of which help spread respiratory illness.

Lin described the current reports out of the Chinese communist regime as “only the tip of the iceberg,” as many Chinese do not report symptoms consistent with a coronavirus infection, particularly when caused by a variant that only prompts mild symptoms to occur. The outbreak causing a rise in cases has been identified as “Omicron NB.1.8.1.” The South China Morning Post listed common symptoms as “fever and a sore throat.”

Citing Peng Jie, deputy director of the infectious diseases department at Southern Medical University’s Nanfang Hospital, the Morning Post noted that some experts are concerned about an “increasingly unpredictable” trend of coronavirus infections in the summer. While the Chinese CDC typically documents an increase in cases of all major respiratory diseases in the winter, state reports have explicitly noted that they have not documented a similar increase this summer of cases of influenza or respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), which also tend to spread more severely among children and the elderly.

Speaking to the Epoch Times, Taiwanese infectious disease specialist Cheng Yuan-yu posited the air conditioner theory for why coronavirus appears to be spreading at a faster rate.

“High outdoor temperatures drive people flocking to air-conditioned environments, which leads to spending extended periods in enclosed indoor spaces and has increased risk of indoor airborne transmission,” Cheng reportedly said. If this factor is driving infections, Cheng continued, that would mean situations such as “people going to work while sick, the confined environments of commuting, waning immunity, biases in testing and health care-seeking behavior” would result in more cases of people aged 15 to 59 being diagnosed with coronavirus, rather than children or the elderly.

The Wuhan coronavirus was originally identified in the eponymous central Chinese city of Wuhan as a novel pathogen in early 2020, though reports indicated that the first diagnosed case could have surfaced as early as November 2019. As a result of the Chinese Communist Party violently silencing those identifying a new virus, allowing “super-spreader” events to take place to obscure the spread of the disease, then engaging in human rights atrocities to imprison people in the city, the virus went on to infect millions of people around the world, killing over 7 million people.

Keep reading

China To Arm Iran With Hundreds Of MANPADS Despite Trump Warnings: Report

President Trump has repeatedly said that China’s President Xi Jinping has directly assured him that Beijing will not supply Iran with weaponry or military support.

But this week these ‘assurances’ have been called into question by an Reuters investigation. “Iran is expected to receive within weeks a first shipment out of up to 400 Chinese-made shoulder-fired air-defense missile launchers, three sources familiar with the deal told ​Reuters, as it rebuilds its defenses amid war with the United States,” the fresh report says.

“The purchase, valued at $60-70 million, is one of Tehran’s largest-known efforts to strengthen its short-range air ‌defences since the outbreak of its war with the U.S. and Israel, which exposed gaps in Iran’s ability to protect military sites and strategic infrastructure,” it adds.

The fresh report cites three anonymous sources and did not receive comment from the Iranian side. Some of the assertions of the Reuters report are surprisingly specific, such as in the following:

The contract covers the purchase of between 300 and 400 man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS), including Chinese-made QW-12 and FN-16 missiles, the sources said.

The deal was signed with Zhongqing Baoshang International Investment, a Hong Kong-based company that the sources said was acting as an intermediary between the Iranian ​side and the Chinese supplier.

The reporting even explores options being considered for delivery of the weapons, at a moment Iran is urgently seeking to replenish its air defense supplies after months of grinding tit-for-tat conflict with the US military.

“Two Western intelligence sources and an Iranian official said Tehran had also explored the use of overland routes to move Chinese military supplies and dual-use components ⁠more discreetly and ​reduce the risk of disruption,” Reuters continues.

MANPADS could prove especially dangerous for US helicopters and other low flying aircraft, and for Iran can serve as layer of short-range protection.

The opening days of Operation Epic Fury saw much of Iran’s anti-air units get taken out, especially across the Western part of the country, giving US-Israeli jets air superiority. However, at times the Iranians have claimed to shoot down some aircraft, and since then the US has seemed to operate from further afar.

Keep reading

‘UNACCEPTABLE RISKS’: Trump Bans Import of Chinese Humanoid Robots Over National Security Concerns

‘These are not the droids that you’re looking for.’

Chinese companies have been leaping ahead in the race to develop the best, most useful (and most lethal) humanoid robots in the planet, clearly taking the lead in this flourishing industry.

But now, the Chinese droids face a major obstacle in their path, as they lose access to the planet’s largest and most robust market.

Today, it’s been reported that the Donald J. Trump administration has banned imports of humanoid robots made in China.

Officials warn they pose ‘unacceptable risks’ to US national security.

The Telegraph reported:

“US regulators barred imports of advanced Chinese robotics on Tuesday, including bipedal robots and four-legged devices, arguing they could be used to spy on American citizens or controlled remotely.

Officials at the Federal Communications Commission said: ‘Foreign-produced advanced robotics devices present an unacceptable cybersecurity and safety risk. Advanced robotic devices collect data that could be leveraged by malign actors to surveil Americans, enhance the capabilities of foreign intelligence services, or to remotely commandeer the robots’.”

Keep reading

REPORT: Harvard Tops List of American Universities Taking Money From Foreign Countries – Including China

When it comes to accepting cash from foreign countries, including China, Harvard tops the list of American universities.

This is a major concern. Some might even call it a national security issue. China steals millions in intellectual property from the United States every year and higher education gives them direct access.

At the end of Trump’s first term, Senate Republicans began to focus heavily on this issue. Now they are looking at it again and Senator Tom Cotton is leading the charge.

FOX News reports:

Harvard tops nation in foreign cash haul as Cotton demands probe into China funding

One Ivy League institution has taken in more money from foreign countries, including China, than any other university in the country.

The U.S. Department of Education has, for years, compiled a list of federally funded universities that have taken in funding from abroad. The Trump administration sought to revamp the agency’s online reporting portal, and, in doing so, it has shown that one institution, Harvard University, has scored more foreign funding than any other college in the country.

Harvard is in the crosshairs of Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., for its ties to China and other foreign nations because of the reams of outside cash the university has taken in. And the Senate Republican, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, wants Education Secretary Linda McMahon to open an investigation into China’s cash flow into higher education.

“I remain concerned that millions in additional transactions with sanctioned Chinese entities may not have been reported,” Cotton wrote. “Therefore, I encourage additional scrutiny of financial ties between American universities and Communist China.”…

Cotton noted that since the portal was relaunched in January, reporting data has shown that federally funded universities accepted more than $6.8 billion from “Communist China — including more than $300 million from sanctioned entities.”

Cotton is right to go after them for this.

Keep reading

The AI Race With China Is a Lie Told by Big Tech to Justify the Data Center Invasion

As Big Tech races to build water-guzzling, energy-hungry data centers for its artificial intelligence, talk of an “AI race” between the United States and China has permeated public discourse. Pundits, politicians, and the media have all joined tech corporations in selling this narrative. And it’s giving license to Big Tech and their political handmaidens to ruin our communities, exploit our every action (both online and via AI-powered surveillance), and steal the wealth of human knowledge for private gain.

But the idea of an AI race between China and the US isn’t grounded in reality. The researchers, companies, and governments behind Chinese and US AI development are pursuing completely different goals.

The discourse in the US assumes that achieving artificial general intelligence (AGI)—computers that mimic human consciousness—would be so momentous and earth-shattering that clearly this must be the goal of anyone pursuing AI development. But that’s not the main goal of Chinese AI development. And a competition in which the competitors are running toward different finish lines isn’t a race.

If we allow the myth of an AI race with China to give Big Tech free rein, we face a more polluted, less equal world.

A Race Doesn’t Have Two Different Finish Lines

While the US is focused on artificial general intelligence (AGI) powered by Large Language Models (LLMs), Chinese developers are focused on AI embedded in products. It’s ChatGPT versus robots.

Yes, China is developing LLMs, although largely in an open-source way as opposed to the for-profit competition in the US. Recent news stories report that China is “catching” the US in LLM development. Indeed, the latest Chinese model outperforms leading US models. But this isn’t evidence of an LLM-AGI race. Instead, it shows that without making AGI its main focus, China is capable of developing its own models almost as quickly as US companies.

More to the point, LLM development in China is incidental to the country’s real goal for AI. Its focus remains on products embedded with AI and robots. Or, as AI policy researcher Liang Zheng says, in China, “The first priority is to use it to benefit ordinary people” (debatable, but indicates the kind of AI they are pursuing).

In the US, the first priority is to exploit people so that the tech oligarchs can profit. It’s chatbots all the way down.

This isn’t to argue that China is doing it “right” and the US is doing it “wrong.” Either approach will lead to a future in which citizens become increasingly disempowered. In which work becomes more scarce and less lucrative for most people. And in which a handful of billionaires grow wealthier and more powerful.

But the arguments being hauled out to support the destructive growth of hyperscale data centers are based on a fallacy. There is no need to “beat China.” China and the US are racing on separate tracks, in different races, with different finish lines.

These two separate approaches also explain the mind-boggling scale of the data center invasion we currently face. The massive hyperscale data centers—recent proposals would demand up to 5 gigawatts, enough electricity to power roughly 3.75 million US households—are only “required” because the US is racing toward AGI. Meanwhile, the embodied AI dominating in China does not require the same amount of computational power.

The truth is, we don’t need hyperscale data centers to “beat China.” We aren’t racing China. We’re killing ourselves so Silicon Valley can race itself.

Keep reading

China: Six-Year-Old Girl Subjected to Brain Gene-Editing Therapy Dies After Being Injected with Viruses

Neuroscientist Qiu Zilong of Shanghai Jiao Tong University is under investigation following the death of a six-year-old girl who was receiving gene-editing therapy during a human trial under his supervision. 

The child was administered an experimental treatment that involved injecting “trillions of viruses carrying the recipe for the base editor into her spinal fluid,” according to a report in Science magazine. 

Science told the heartbreaking story of how the girl bounced into Xinhua Hospital in Shanghai in March 2025, wearing “a pink jacket and blue pants decorated with cartoon bears.” She treated her visit to the hospital as if it were a vacation and her parents were confident she would receive the best of care at the hospital’s acclaimed pediatrics ward.

The child was suffering from a genetic mutation that was interfering with her cognitive development. The experimental cure involved using a gene editor — similar to the fabled CRISPR, but more advanced — to rewrite the mutated gene in her nervous system. The little girl became the first human being to undergo gene-editing therapy for her brain, an experimental procedure that cost over $860,000.

The details of what happened next have been kept secret until now by the arrogant Chinese Communist tyranny, which is very eager to displace the United States as the world’s leading biotech power. 

According to research by Science and Retraction Watch, a watchdog group that follows up on failed experiments and retracted scientific research, the hospital used a fast-track bureaucratic procedure that bypassed national regulations and Qiu and his team severely undersold the risks of the procedure to the girl’s parents. When the truth was finally revealed, international experts said the negative reactions observed during animal testing should have prevented the experimental treatment from advancing to human trials.

The process of gene editing involves using tailored viruses to deliver the altered genetic material to a patient’s cells — and the little girl had a fatal immune reaction to the bewildering cocktail of viruses injected into her spinal column. She died seven days after entering the hospital.

A hideous cover-up ensued, erasing all mention of the little girl and her fate from experimental literature. Most shockingly, Qiu and his team published an article about the animal studies in their gene-editing trial at Nature this year, but without telling the full story of the human child who died from the treatment or the enormous financial contributions her family made to the research.

Science noted that the hospital paid only a “modest fine to a local health authority” after the death of the child and Qiu was not publicly sanctioned until now. The girl’s parents said they came forward due to their anger at the lack of accountability although they still felt it was necessary to use pseudonyms.

“Learning the reality of these missing safeguards has fundamentally changed how we now view the entire project. We did not realize how unusual and dangerous many of the arrangements were,” said the girl’s father, a software engineer who asked to be called “Jason” in the story.

Dr. Qiu was another in a series of Chinese scientists who came to the United States for an education, then returned to Communist China in 2009, “as China was ramping up its efforts to lure its scientists back home.” 

Qiu was, somewhat ironically, an outspoken critic of “rogue geneticist” He Jiankui’s experiments using CRISPR to create genetically engineered human babies, but he still felt there was great potential in using gene editing techniques to address neurological disorders. His papers and video presentations caught the attention of “Jason” and his wife, who emailed the doctor in 2023 to say they were “willing and able to bear the costs” of getting his experimental treatment for their child. He responded to their inquiry in thirteen minutes flat.

Over the course of the next two years, Jason said he came under increasing pressure to pump money into the research, sometimes in dubious ways, such as paying members of his research team directly and informally.

The cost of the treatment increased dramatically and Jason was told that if he stopped providing the funds, everything he had already paid would be for nothing. Chinese law forbids charging patients or their families for unproven therapies, but this prohibition was circumvented by treating the huge sums provided by Jason’s family as “contributions” to advanced medical research.

Jason and his wife recorded all of their conversation with Qiu and other researchers, so they had a mountain of evidence to bring to the table when they decided to go public.

The general consensus from Science and its researchers is that serious medical work was conducted. The research was not a scam operation and Qiu does not appear to have taken any great portion of the money for himself, although he accepted some lavish gifts from the family. The researchers appeared to be reckless, disregarding evidence that their experimental treatment was dangerous and failing to take some precautions that might have been helpful, such as using more powerful preparatory drugs to suppress the little girl’s immune system.

Science and Retraction Watch referred to the case of “Baby KJ,” a Philadelphia boy named KJ Muldoon with a rare life-threatening metabolic condition that was saved by the world’s first personalized gene-editing treatment in 2025. Baby KJ’s landmark treatment and recovery were the kind of success Jason wanted for his child which Qiu evidently thought he could provide.

Jason referred to his child as “Mei,” a Chinese word that means “beauty.” The last week of her life was a terrible ordeal as her immune system fought to the death against the gene-editing viruses and lost. She began running a fever that Dr. Qiu confidently, and incorrectly, predicted would pass. Her kidneys failed, so she could not have any fluids. Qiu seemed baffled by her deteriorating condition.

In the aftermath of Mei’s death, her parents asked Qiu not to publish the paper he had been excitedly preparing for Nature, but he did it anyway — after removing the genetic data collected from Mei and her family and deleting a message of thanks to them.

Some of the international scientists who were excited by Qiu’s paper were later angry to discover he had already administered the experimental treatment to a young human patient who did not survive. Nature’s editors were annoyed to learn Qiu had not told them the full story before publication.

Qiu’s company had an insurance policy for the medical trial, but Mei’s parents received no settlement. Her shattered parents blamed themselves for not asking enough questions and apparently could not bear to speak with the friends who helped pay for Mei’s treatment.

The South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported on Sunday that Shanghai Jia Tong University has “established a special group to investigate” Qiu’s clinical study and the paper he published at Nature.

“The medicine school has always valued research integrity and standards, and resolutely opposes medical research that violates research ethics and regulations,” the university said.

Keep reading

REVEALED: Here Are the Mainstream Journalists on China’s Payroll

The identities were buried.

Foreign-agent filings reveal that operatives working for a Chinese Communist Party-linked influence organization planned free trips for American journalists based on the potential for “favorable coverage” and sought to “effectively disseminate positive messages” about Beijing.

But the filings did not plainly identify the reporters who received the access.

By cross-referencing the filings with archived newsletters, annual reports and contemporaneous accounts, this investigation has uncovered the names of prominent American journalists who participated in China trips organized or funded by the China-United States Exchange Foundation, or CUSEF.

The roster includes current and former journalists from The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, The Washington Post, NPR, the Associated Press, Vox, The Atlantic, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune and other major American news organizations.

In several cases, the trips were followed by columns and reports defending Chinese government policies, attacking President Trump’s confrontation with Beijing or presenting the decline of American manufacturing as unavoidable.

CUSEF was founded by Tung Chee-hwa, a former vice chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, a central component of the Chinese Communist Party’s United Front system.

A bipartisan congressional report explains that the United Front seeks to “co-opt and neutralize sources of potential opposition to the policies and authority” of the CCP. Its targets include foreign governments, universities, businesses, media organizations and other institutions capable of shaping public opinion.

CUSEF’s own foreign-agent records reveal how that strategy was applied to the American press.

Washington lobbyists and public-relations firms working for the organization described plans to recruit influential journalists, generate “favorable coverage” and “effectively disseminate positive messages to the media, key influencers and opinion leaders, and the general public” regarding China.

Keep reading

The US-Saudi Nuclear Deal Makes No Sense

A few points on the shocking U.S.–Saudi nuclear deal announced.

1. This reflects a weaker American bargaining position, not a stronger one.

The broader context is China. The Biden administration pursued a nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia, as part of a broader expansion of Trump’s Abraham Accords, in part to pull Riyadh closer to Washington and away from Beijing. But Washington’s position has deteriorated since then. The credibility of the U.S. security umbrella has weakened, GCC states have become more strategically autonomous, and Saudi Arabia has gained leverage by diversifying its partnerships.

The result appears to be that Washington had to offer substantially more to try to keep Saudi from drifting further toward China, while getting substantially less in return.

2. By any historical standard, this is an extraordinary Saudi victory.

Compared to previous negotiations, Riyadh has secured remarkable concessions. It no longer appears to have to normalize relations with Israel as part of the package. It is reportedly not required to sign a traditional Section 123 agreement that would deprive KSA of enrichment technology. And there are no comprehensive IAEA safeguards comparable to those Washington has long insisted upon elsewhere.

If these reports hold, Saudi Arabia has achieved what few thought Washington would ever accept.

3. Biden was going down the same path…

The Biden administration reportedly considered similar arrangements, but its efforts were derailed by the repercussions of the October 7 attacks.

Biden officials also understood the risks, although it did not prevent them from pursuing it and signalling willingness to offer Saudi major nuclear concessions. Some of the contingency ideas reportedly discussed bordered on the surreal: having American troops physically guard Saudi enrichment facilities from the Saudis themselves, or designing systems that would allow the United States to disable – or even destroy remotely – the facilities if necessary.

The fact that such safeguards were seriously contemplated should itself have been a warning. If your proposal requires extraordinary mechanisms to prevent your own ally from using the technology you are providing, perhaps the proposal is fundamentally flawed.

4. This may prove a stepping stone toward an even greater disaster: Security Guarantees for Saudi

As Rosemary Kelanic points out, this deal provides Riyadh with leverage it can use in the future to force Washington to provide it with security guarantees. Saudi Arabia can threaten to build nuclear weapons unless the U.S. offers it Article 5-level security guarantees – a disastrous move that would further entangle the US in the region militarily instead of allowing America to come home from the Middle East.

As Kelanic argues, there is ample historical precedent. South Korea and West Germany both advanced nuclear programs that alarmed Washington. Rather than allowing them to acquire nuclear weapons, the United States ultimately strengthened its military commitments and security guarantees in exchange for abandoning those programs.

As a result, this nuclear deal may prove to be a prelude to an even more damaging concession to Saudi down the road.

5. This likely weakens Washington’s negotiating position with Iran.

If there is eventually another U.S.-Iran nuclear agreement, today’s decision establishes an entirely new benchmark.

It becomes impossible to argue that Saudi Arabia may enrich uranium while Iran cannot, although Tehran was never going to accept zero enrichment in the first place. But proposals that earlier had been entertained – such as a 5- to 10-year moratorium on enrichment – may now also be out of reach.

Moreover, and perhaps more importantly, it becomes harder to insist on intrusive international inspections for Iran while accepting a far lighter non-IAEA inspection regime for Saudi Arabia. And it becomes much more difficult to portray enrichment itself as an unacceptable proliferation risk.

Washington has made the type of deal it wants from Iran more complicated.

6. Israel has every reason to be deeply unhappy.

Much attention will focus on the loss of the Saudi normalization card, which has been one of Israel’s strategic objectives.

But the more consequential issue may be that Saudi Arabia now appears to have a far more credible pathway toward a nuclear weapons capability should it ever choose to pursue one.

That represents a fundamental shift in Israel’s long-term strategic environment.

7. Is this about widening the war with Iran?

Possibly. One interpretation is that Washington made these concessions to secure greater Saudi cooperation in the current (or a future) confrontation with Tehran.

But Tehran itself does not appear particularly alarmed.

Saudi Arabia’s direct military contribution to a war with Iran would likely remain limited, and the Kingdom’s participation does little to alter Iran’s fundamental geographic advantages in the Persian Gulf. More importantly, Saudi leaders have spent years trying to reduce—not increase—the risk of becoming a battlefield in a U.S.-Iran conflict.

If that remains Riyadh’s strategic priority, this agreement is unlikely to fundamentally change the military balance in the war.

Keep reading

The Documents Washington Never Wanted Released

The White House has now released a series of declassified election-integrity documents that the administration says expose what it describes as the largest compromise of American voter data in history. The release followed President Trump’s heated nationally televised address Thursday night, where he argued that China systematically acquired sensitive voter information during the 2020 election cycle and that intelligence surrounding the operation was buried inside the bureaucracy rather than presented honestly to elected leadership.

For years, the focus has been on Russia while China quietly expanded its economic, technological, and intelligence footprint throughout the West. China does not think in election cycles. It thinks in decades as the ancient culture understands cycles. Every major strategic objective is pursued patiently through economic leverage, technology, data collection, academia, corporations, and political influence. Elections become merely another avenue for intelligence gathering and long-term strategic positioning.

According to the newly released material highlighted by the White House, Chinese actors allegedly obtained information on roughly 220 million American voter records. The administration claims the information included voter registration data, addresses, party affiliation, and other identifying information that could be used to map voting populations across the United States. President Trump described it as “the largest compromise of election data in history” and ordered further investigations into both the alleged intrusion and the government’s handling of the intelligence.

The administration further alleges that portions of this intelligence never reached the President in full during the 2020 election cycle and that internal disputes inside the intelligence community resulted in information being minimized or withheld. Those claims are now at the center of renewed investigations following the release of the declassified files.

Whether every allegation ultimately withstands scrutiny is now the question investigators must answer. It is important to distinguish between allegations contained in newly released documents and conclusions that have been independently established. Previous U.S. intelligence assessments issued after the 2020 election concluded they did not find evidence that China successfully altered votes or election infrastructure, although there has long been bipartisan concern over Chinese cyber activity and influence operations. Those earlier conclusions are directly challenged by the current administration’s interpretation of the newly declassified material.

Keep reading

Catherine Herridge Uncovers Shocking Revelations About The Biden Family

Investigative journalist Catherine Herridge has uncovered records pointing to Chinese blackmail efforts targeting the Biden family – documents that sat in plain sight for the legacy media, the FBI, and the CIA, only to be met with willful blindness.

In a recent appearance discussing declassified materials related to China’s 2020 election influence operations, Herridge described finding references to blackmail by China that were prepared for inclusion in the president’s daily brief.

“I found these records which are talking about blackmail by China,” Herridge explained, adding “It was for President Biden’s daily brief. I can conclude, I think, that it was probably about targeting his family.”

She noted that the findings, along with broader evidence of suppressed intelligence on Chinese influence, were ignored and buried in order to protect Democratic power, stating tghat “in the media or legacy media there was kind of a willful blindness. They didn’t want to look at the records. All you had to do was spend a couple of hours.”

Keep reading