"Corrupt Joe Biden, who used his office to enrich himself and his family, to say the least, is now the foreign policy maven, particularly on China. That's the spin from the New York Times, which has beclowned itself badly, trying to tell the audience that something smelly is shinola."
Josh
Hawley: Counter China’s Plans for Dominance by Ending ‘Forever Wars’
2:34
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) wrote on
Tuesday that the only way America can counter Chinese domination is to end the
“forever wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Hawley
said that the United States has focused more on the response to the coronavirus
outbreak than the country’s engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, he
charged that America cannot respond to the Chinese Communist Party’s plans for
“domination” by remaining involved in Afghanistan and Iraq.
“Our
involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan is currently taking a backseat to the #COVID19 crisis,
but let’s remember, the only way we are going to be able to focus on #China and
counter Beijing’s plans for domination is to end the forever wars,” Hawley wrote.
“Can’t have it both ways.”
Our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan is
currently taking a backseat to the #COVID19
crisis, but let’s remember, the only way we are going to be able to focus on #China
and counter Beijing’s plans for domination is to end the forever wars. Can’t
have it both ways https://twitter.com/hawleymo/status/1247188890445910018 …
The
Missouri populist’s commentary follows as he said that the country must remain
“laser-focused” on preventing Chinese “domination.” He said that this proposal
will involve revamping America’s military posture towards countering an increasingly
aggressive China.
Hawley said this
week:
China
understands that the global pandemic is an inflection point. They are trying to
turn this to their advantage. Make no mistake, they are still pursuing their
global strategic ambitions. The need for us to laser focus on China’s economic
and military ambitions is going to be more urgent once we beat this pandemic,
not less.
Hawley’s
commentary echoes his foreign policy vision, which he unveiled in
November 2019 at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). The senator’s
foreign policy vision would replace the bipartisan foreign consensus that he
called “progressive universalism” with a foreign policy that would benefit the
interests of the American working class.
Hawley
said that the “burden of this nation’s long wars had fallen disproportionately”
on middle-class families.
He
said during his CNAS speech that instead of engaging in further conflict in the
Middle East, America should counter a rising and increasingly imperialist
China, which threatens the freedom of those in Hong Kong and Taiwan. He added
that China has increasingly deployed soft power to pressure American
corporations such as Disney and the NBA to “throw overboard free speech at the
first sign of Beijing’s commercial pressure.”
Hawley
said that “the point of American foreign policy should not be to remake the
world, but to keep Americans safe and prosperous.”
Sean
Moran is a congressional reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on
Twitter @SeanMoran3.
2:34
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) wrote on
Tuesday that the only way America can counter Chinese domination is to end the
“forever wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Hawley
said that the United States has focused more on the response to the coronavirus
outbreak than the country’s engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, he
charged that America cannot respond to the Chinese Communist Party’s plans for
“domination” by remaining involved in Afghanistan and Iraq.
“Our
involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan is currently taking a backseat to the #COVID19 crisis,
but let’s remember, the only way we are going to be able to focus on #China and
counter Beijing’s plans for domination is to end the forever wars,” Hawley wrote.
“Can’t have it both ways.”
Our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan is
currently taking a backseat to the #COVID19
crisis, but let’s remember, the only way we are going to be able to focus on #China
and counter Beijing’s plans for domination is to end the forever wars. Can’t
have it both ways https://twitter.com/hawleymo/status/1247188890445910018 …
The
Missouri populist’s commentary follows as he said that the country must remain
“laser-focused” on preventing Chinese “domination.” He said that this proposal
will involve revamping America’s military posture towards countering an increasingly
aggressive China.
Hawley said this
week:
China
understands that the global pandemic is an inflection point. They are trying to
turn this to their advantage. Make no mistake, they are still pursuing their
global strategic ambitions. The need for us to laser focus on China’s economic
and military ambitions is going to be more urgent once we beat this pandemic,
not less.
Hawley’s
commentary echoes his foreign policy vision, which he unveiled in
November 2019 at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). The senator’s
foreign policy vision would replace the bipartisan foreign consensus that he
called “progressive universalism” with a foreign policy that would benefit the
interests of the American working class.
Hawley
said that the “burden of this nation’s long wars had fallen disproportionately”
on middle-class families.
He
said during his CNAS speech that instead of engaging in further conflict in the
Middle East, America should counter a rising and increasingly imperialist
China, which threatens the freedom of those in Hong Kong and Taiwan. He added
that China has increasingly deployed soft power to pressure American
corporations such as Disney and the NBA to “throw overboard free speech at the
first sign of Beijing’s commercial pressure.”
Hawley
said that “the point of American foreign policy should not be to remake the
world, but to keep Americans safe and prosperous.”
Sean
Moran is a congressional reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on
Twitter @SeanMoran3.
China Advances
China Advances
Heading for direct conflict with the USA?
China and Iran have unleashed a harsh domestic repression against protesters, as natural disasters sweep across the two countries. China took an early lead:
Waters in 116 local rivers rose one to ten meters (3.3 feet to 32.8 feet). State news agency Xinhua quoted Chongqing city officials on July 2 saying that water levels of 12 rivers are higher than the upper limits, meaning the banks may burst at any time.
At least one person has died, and one is missing, the report said, adding that almost 60,000 have been affected by the floods in the city.
Local authorities in one area in Chongqing have warned those who live on the fourth story or below in buildings close to rivers to be prepared to evacuate.
Authorities are warning civilians to pay close attention to local rivers and streams. As of the beginning of the month, some 304 rivers had reached perilous levels.
And in Iran, official death totals due to coronavirus have reached a new high. Given that ALL Iranian data are probably falsified, the new death totals are especially dubious. They are both big countries, and do not dread a sudden or dramatic drop in population. Au contraire, the new data suggest that the threat to stability in Iran is diminishing, and therefore that internal stability is increasing.
Meanwhile, there has been a positive identification of a case of Bubonic Plague in China:
Months after the detrimental COVID-19 pandemic originated in China, the country is now reporting a positive case of the Bubonic Plague in a hospital in Bayannur, Inner Mongolia, according to the South China Morning Post.
Officials are asking residents and tourists to stay out of the grasslands overnight and avoid contact, especially consumption, of wild animals. If someone develops a fever, they are asked to report history with animals and travels in the grasslands.
Although we suffer from a lack of reliable statistics from Communist China, and while Iranian statistics are no more reliable than their official laboratory results, there can be little doubt that the regime is serious about staying away from wild animals. The disease is rare, but it can be lethal. And human beings should certainly stay away from plague-ridden wild animals.
Even promises from the supreme leader are unreliable:
Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei assured a doctoral student in a 2016 meeting that there was nothing wrong with criticizing the country's top official.
"Speaking against me is neither [reprimandable] nor is it a crime, I've said it many times," Khamenei said at the July 2, 2016, meeting with a group of handpicked students, including Mohammad Ali Kamfiruzi.
The young student had directly confronted Khamenei over rights abuses in the Islamic republic, including violating people's freedom of expression.
Four years later, the former student who became a lawyer has been given a two-year suspended prison sentence for offering mild criticism of Khamenei in a 2018 speech.
"Speaking against me is neither [reprimandable] nor is it a crime, I've said it many times," Khamenei said at the July 2, 2016, meeting with a group of handpicked students, including Mohammad Ali Kamfiruzi.
The young student had directly confronted Khamenei over rights abuses in the Islamic republic, including violating people's freedom of expression.
Four years later, the former student who became a lawyer has been given a two-year suspended prison sentence for offering mild criticism of Khamenei in a 2018 speech.
Kamfiruzi was the son of a man killed in the war against Iraq, and although his family is distinguished he must show up for constant checks from the authorities. His sentence is the result of extremely mild criticism of the Regime. The open question is whether the Chinese regime will take military action against the United States.
China's intent was to broadcast its willingness to establish militarily enforced no-go zones in international waters and to improve its ability to defend these strongholds from interceding American forces. The United States's exercises were designed to show that Washington intends to match Beijing's military activity and to dissuade China from believing it can deny U.S. carrier strike groups access beyond the first island chain of waters west of Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines and north of Malaysia. That U.S. intention reflects an understanding of Chinese war planning, which seeks to deter U.S. carriers from accessing those waters in fear of China's significant anti-ship ballistic missile force.
Regardless, the risk of a miscalculation or deliberate conflict is growing significantly.
China and the United States have faced each other in several scenarios in recent years, and here we have another case in which open conflict seems altogether possible, if not actually likely. The American Navy and Air Force are clearly superior to the Chinese, and the Chinese have shied away from direct conflict in the past, if it were clear that U.S. forces were stronger.
Will they stick to this model? Or will they change, and challenge us directly?
Pinkerton:
Josh Hawley Explains How to Take on China and Save America
23 May 2020213
9:33
On May 20, speaking from the Senate
floor, Josh Hawley, the youngest member of the chamber, laid out his plan for
fixing international trade, taking on the People’s Republic of China, and
thereby, too, saving America.
In so doing, Hawley, populist
firebrand that he is, showed that he was willing to overturn the stale
orthodoxies that have mildewed our economy and undermined our security.
In
his speech, Hawley laid out the core problem:
The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has taken advantage of the flaws built
into the current international economic system, embodied in the World Trade
Organization (WTO), that agglomeration of unelected globalcrats. As Hawley put it, “We must
recognize that the economic system designed by Western policy makers at the end
of the Cold War does not serve our purposes in this new era.” He added, “And we should admit
that multiple of its founding premises were in error.”
Those
founding premises, Hawley continued, trace back to the save-the-world
utopianism of our 28th president, Woodrow Wilson. Having entered World War One in
1917, Wilson had some strange ideas; for one thing, it would be “a war to end
all war,” and, he added, we must strive for “peace without victory.” Yes, such
concepts might seem a bit, well, unrealistic; you know, like the musings of an
ivory-tower professor. In
fact, Wilson had been a professor and subsequently, in fact, he held presidency
of Princeton University before winning the White House. So maybe now we can see the
origins of his vaulting but vacuous phrasemaking.
Indeed,
without a doubt, Wilson was a great talker; he wove webs of words and theories
that have bewitched many politicians since, inspiring them to be wannabe
Wilsonians.
For
instance, there was George W. Bush, who said he heard “a calling from beyond the stars,”
summoning America to wars of choice, aimed at “ending tyranny in our world.” Well, we know how that worked
out.
As
Hawley said, “During the past two decades, as we fought war after war in the
Middle East, the Chinese government systematically built its military on the
backs of our middle class.” Exactly. While we were liberating Fallujah for
the third or fourth time, the Chinese were hollowing out our economy.
Of
course, Bush wasn’t our only warlike president in the past two decades; we also
had Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, both of whom launched foreign interventions
as well, even as they were welcoming Chinese products and influence into the
U.S. Indeed, as an aside,
one wonders what Obama’s vice president, Joe Biden, thinks of all this: Has he
learned the lesson of Iraq and other quagmires? Has he rethought trade with
China? Those are certainly good
questions to be answered during the remainder of the 2020 campaign
season.
Okay,
back to Hawley. Having raised
serious questions about the status quo, he offered three specific answers:
First, we should withdraw from the World Trade
Organization. As Hawley put
it, the WTO was built on a false promise: the idea that the nations of the world
would converge around a fair and non-manipulated trading system; as the
Missourian put it, “they wanted a single liberal market to support a single,
liberal international order that would bring peace in our time.” Yet in the
decades of the WTO’s existence, the countries of the world haven’t come
together on much of anything—except, perhaps, to snooker Uncle Sucker.
And
we might pause to note Hawley’s slyly ironic use of the words, “peace in our
time.” That’s an allusion
to the catastrophically mistaken statement of British prime minister Neville
Chamberlain; back in 1938, Chamberlain made a wrongheaded deal with Adolf
Hitler, which he said would
bring “peace in our time.” Wrong!
Yes,
Hawley is saying, the stakes today are potentially that high; we can’t stay in
an organization that has “not been kind to America.” He added, “The WTO’s dispute
resolution process has systemically disfavored the United States”—and favored
China.
Second, Hawley says that having left the WTO, the U.S.
should negotiate new trade deals on a more reciprocal and bilateral basis; that
is, the U.S. should make a trade deal with, say, the United Kingdom—and then on
to another deal with the next potential trading partner. As Hawley explained, “We must
replace an empire of lawyers with a confederation of truly mutual trade.”
Indeed,
Hawley argues that a new focus on win-win trade deals—as freely determined by
the two countries actually involved in the deal, as opposed supranational
WTO-crats—deals that would offer a new opportunity for the U.S. to put together
better alliances, based on mutually beneficial economic and strategic
relationships:
We
benefit if countries that share our opposition to Chinese imperialism—countries
like India and Japan, Vietnam, Australia and Taiwan—are economically
independent of China, and standing shoulder to shoulder with us. So we should actively pursue new
networks of mutual trade with key Asian and European partners, like the
economic prosperity network recently mentioned by Secretary Pompeo.
We
might pause over one of the countries Hawley mentioned above, Taiwan. Its formal name is the Republic of
China (ROC), an island nation whose capital is Taipei. In other words, the ROC
is separate and very much distinct from the People’s Republic
of China, whose capital, of course, is Beijing. The two nations split in 1949,
when Mao Zedong’s Soviet-backed communists took over the mainland. In the decades since, the ROC,
population 23 million, has become a prosperous and free country, while the PRC
is merely … prosperous. (And,
of course, menacing.)
So
it’s notable that Hawley has become a strong champion of Taiwan,
which stands not only as a bulwark against the PRC, but also as proof that the
Chinese people, if given a choice, will choose freedom.
Third, Hawley wants to crack down on the ability of
international capital, including Wall Street, to hopscotch the world—and step
all over the people of the world. As Hawley explains about the current WTO
dominion,
There
is a reason why Wall Street loves the status quo. There is a reason why they
will object to leaving the WTO and resist major reforms to our global economic
system. That’s because they
are on a gravy train of foreign capital flows that keep their checkbooks fat.
Indeed,
underneath all the complexity of international finance, there’s a simple enough
bottom line; Wall Street, and global capital as a whole, profit from
international arbitrage. This
international “arb” is the system of playing off one country’s tax-,
regulatory- and wage-systems against another country’s—and seeking to profit
from both sides of the equation.
Indeed,
here in the U.S., in the last few decades, it’s been easy for financial
companies to play this arbitrage game. In
effect, they have issued the following ultimatum to American industrial
companies: “You must
outsource or relocate to China, because the taxes/regulations/wages are lower
there. If you do so, we’ll reward you by bidding
up your stock price here in the U.S. But if you don’t, maybe we’ll buy you,
replace the management, and then move to China. Or maybe we’ll buy your competitor, move it
overseas, where it can take advantage of the lower costs, undercut you—and put
you out of business.”
This
ultimatum, repeated thousands of times, reminds one of Marlon Brando’s famous
line from The Godfather: “I’m gonna make him an
offer he can’t refuse.”
Many
millions of lost American jobs later, we’ve learned how few companies have been
able to refuse this sort of “offer.”
Hawley
makes it clear: As a nation, we’ve dug ourselves into a deep hole. And in the meantime, the PRC is
on the move: On May 21, the South China Morning Post, a Hong
Kong-based newspaper under the sway of the Beijing government, reported on the PRC’s plan to allocate
an additional $1.4 trillion for technological mobilization. So yes, we face a clear and
present danger.
Fortunately,
a clear-eyed understanding of a threat is not the same as a downcast bowing
down to it. What we need to
do is build on our understanding—and turn that understanding into action.
Hawley
is just one senator, and in terms of seniority, a very junior one at that. And yet he thinks with a wise
historical sweep that could—and should—change the policy course of America. As he said:
We
can build a future that looks beyond pandemic to prosperity—a prosperity shared
by all Americans, from our rural towns to the urban core. We can build a future that looks
past a failed consensus to meet our national security needs in this new
century.
Yes,
if we can build that future for ourselves—reuniting the nation around a renewed
appreciation of the common good, as well as a newfound apprehension of the
common threat—then we have a fighting chance. And if America can pull together
an alliance of other like-minded nations, all fearful of the Red Dragon, then
we all have a strong prospect of success.
Because
darn few people anywhere wish to live in tyranny. And the Chinese Communist Party is
tyrannical.
Hawley:
‘Beijing Needs to Understand That the Free Ride Is Over — The United States Is
Back’
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/05/20/hawley-beijing-needs-to-understand-that-the-free-ride-is-over-the-united-states-is-back/
20 May 202039
1:36
Wednesday on Fox News Channel’s “The Story,” Sen. Josh Hawley
(R-MO) dismissed complaints from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) about President Donald Trump’s focus on
China for its part in the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Hawley scoffed at Pelosi’s characterization of Trump’s rhetoric
on the communist Chinese as a “diversion.”
“I would say if you think China is a diversion from the
challenges that the United States faces, then you’re not living in reality,”
Hawley said. “You need to come back to planet Earth. China is the
single-greatest national security threat to this country. More than that,
Martha — they’re the single-greatest economic threat. We’ve been losing jobs to
China for years. We’ve been losing manufacturing to China for years. Now
they’re building up their military, even as they unleash this pandemic on the
world. We’ve got to change our relationship with China and the time to do it is
right now.”
The Missouri Republican signaled things would be different
regarding the United States’ relationship with China from this point forward.
“We’re just getting started in terms of standing up to them as a
nation,” he added. “I can tell you — Beijing needs to understand that the free
ride is over. The United States is back. We are going to protect ourselves and
rebuild a better world for the 21st century.”
Dianne Feinstein
- Website
- SF
Office
(415) 393-0707 - DC
Office
(202) 224-3841 - Los
Angeles Office
(310) 914-7300
FEINSTEIN HAS SPENT HER ENTIRE
POLITICAL LIFE STALKING THE HALLS OF CONGRESS SNIFFING OUT DEALS THAT PUT
MULTIPLE FORTUNES IN HER HUSBAND, RICHARD BLUM’S POCKETS EVEN AS SHE SOLD OUT
AMERICA
The deal would impose no review
of human rights and impose no conditions for democratic reforms, supervised
multi-party elections and such. All that, and more, is already a done deal with
China, like the USSR a one-party Communist dictatorship that never produced a
single product the United States needs. This has come about, in large part, due
to U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein, San Francisco Democrat.
LLOYD BILLINGSLEY
After Feinstein was elected to the
Senate in 1992, Blum continued profiting off their ties to China. A the same
time, the freshman lawmaker was pitching herself as a “China hand” to
colleagues, even once claiming “that in my
last life maybe I was Chinese.” HARIS ALIC
FEINSTEIN HAS SPENT HER POLITICAL LIFE STALKING THE HALLS OF
CONGRESS SNIFFING OUT DEALS THAT PUT HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS IN HER POCKETS.
SHE HAS AVOIDED PROSECUTION BY VOTING AGAINST ANY ETHICS BILLS
AND HER HUSBAND, RICHARD BLUM'S HANDING OUT "CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION"
BRIBES TO EVERY DEMOCRAT OUT THERE!
IN THE November 2006 election, the voters demanded congressional
ethics reform. And so, the newly appointed chairman of the Senate Rules
Committee, Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is now duly in charge of regulating the
ethical behavior of her colleagues. But for many years, Feinstein has been
beset by her own ethical conflict of interest, say congressional ethics
experts.
“All in all, it was an
incredible victory for the Chinese government. Feinstein has done more for Red
China than other any serving U.S. politician. “ Trevor Loudon
After Feinstein was elected to the
Senate in 1992, Blum continued profiting off their ties to China. A the same
time, the freshman lawmaker was pitching herself as a “China hand” to
colleagues, even once claiming “that in my
last life maybe I was Chinese.” HARIS ALIC
“Our entire
crony capitalist system, Democrat and Republican alike, has become a
kleptocracy approaching par with third-world hell-holes. This is the
way a great country is raided by its elite.” ---- Karen McQuillan AMERICAN
THINKER.com
A high-profile U.S. senator with professional
and personal ties to China — including once employing one of its spies — is
backing former Vice President Joe Biden amid mounting questions over his son’s
business dealings with the communist regime.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), a
former chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, announced her
endorsement of the former vice president on Tuesday, claiming to have
witnessed Biden’s “fortitude” and leadership during their overlapping tenures
in Congress.
I’ve worked closely with Vice
President Biden and I’ve seen firsthand his legislative ability, his
statesmanship, and most importantly his moral fortitude (NO, IT’S NOT A JOKE,
BUT THEN FEINSTEIN IS THE MOST SELF-SERVING CORRUPT POL IN U.S. HISTORY).
During his time in Congress and in the White House, Joe Biden has been a
tireless fighter for hard working (ILLEGALS) MEXICAN families.
BLOG: FEINSTEIN LOVES BIDEN BECAUSE SHE WALLOWS IN CORRUPTION.
BIDEN HAD SPENT HIS ENTIRE POLITICAL LIFE SUCKING OFF BRIBES.
“He’s a
totally corrupt swamp thing, and here’s the worst part of his manifest
corruption – he doesn’t seem to realize that he’s corrupt, if not personally
than in terms of allowing his bum kid to leverage his position. He thinks it’s A-OK for his boy Hoover to cash in
all over the globe. After all, that’s what you do, right? That’s part of the
benefits package for being in the liberal elite. And all these people fussing
and fighting about the paternity test-failing dirtbag getting rich are totally
out of line. How dare they? HOW DARE THEY!”
He
wants to raise taxes, open the borders, let you pay for illegal aliens’ sex
changes, and spark a civil war by taking guns from the people who don’t commit
crimes.
THE OLD WHORE FEINSTEIN IS NOT ONLY ONE
OF THE MOST CORRUPT AND SELF-SERVING, SHE HAS BEEN A MAJOR INSTRUMENT IN THE
FALL OF AMERICA AS SHE TUCKS THEIR BRIBES DEEP INTO THE BOTTOMLESS POCKETS OF
HER PIMP HUSBAND RICHARD BLUM!
America’s China Dependency Syndrome
Lessons from the USSR.
April 28, 2020
Lloyd
Billingsley
“Made in China” has been a familiar label on products for years
but it wasn’t until March of 2020 that Americans learned of the perils that
might entail. China threatened to impose export controls on
pharmaceuticals that would plunge America into “the mighty sea of coronavirus.”
Sen. Marco Rubio told reporters the United States was “dangerously
reliant” on China for critical goods, including parts for technologies needed
to fight COVID-19. Since 2004, Chinese pharmaceutical companies have been
supplying 80-90 percent of U.S. antibiotics. Americans might wonder how they
landed in such a dependent position, and that invites a comparison with the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
The world’s first socialist state, established in the world’s
largest nation, never produced a single product the West wanted or needed. For
all its vast natural resources, the USSR was an economic basket case, and by
the mid-1980s in serious trouble.
Suppose that some U.S. senator had then offered a trade deal that
ignored the regime’s human rights violations and allowed state-owned Soviet
companies to manufacture goods for the American market, all marked “Made In the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.” These would include vital pharmaceuticals
and the deal would allow the use of Soviet steel, and Soviet labor, in major
infrastructure projects in the United States.
The deal would impose no review of human rights and impose no
conditions for democratic reforms, supervised multi-party elections and such.
All that, and more, is already a done deal with China, like the USSR a
one-party Communist dictatorship that never produced a single product the
United States needs. This has come about, in large part, due to U.S. Senator
Dianne Feinstein, San Francisco Democrat.
On a visit to Shanghai in 2006 Feinstein told James Areddy of the Wall Street Journal, “I’ve been coming to China for 31 years, so I’m not a newcomer.”
That would put her first visit in 1975, one year before the death of the Great
Helmsman Mao Zedong his own self. Feinstein was then a San Francisco
supervisor, and as mayor struck up a sister-city relationship with Shanghai. On
the 2006 trip Feinstein spent time with former Shanghai mayor Zhu Rongji, “a
good friend.”
Areddy asked about the Tiananmen Square massacre then turning 21.
Feinstein said it was a “a great setback for China in the view of the world,” a
public-relations problem for China, not a human rights issue. “It was just the
PLA (People’s Liberation Army)” and China “learned lessons from it.” Still,
Feinstein admitted, “we did not discuss it.”
As Ben Weingarten noted in the Federalist in 2018, Sen.
Feinstein’s ties to China are “way deeper” than any Chinese spy in her office.
Feinstein maintained a “strictly apologist line” on China’s human rights
atrocities, and Feinstein’s husband has “profited handsomely” during her career
in the Senate. Sen. Feinstein “served as a key intermediary between China and
the U.S. government, while serving on committees whose work would be of keen
interest to the PRC.” For two decades and three election cycles, Feinstein
harbored a Chinese spy who fed “political intelligence” to Beijing’s Communist
regime. Since that article, the dossier has grown longer.
As Rosemarie Ho noted in The Nation, Dianne Feinstein failed to support the democracy protesters in
Hong Kong. When the coronavirus hit these shores, Feinstein was uncritical of
China and one of the first to cry “racism” against those who pointed out the pandemic’s origin in Wuhan,
China.
Ben Weingarten wondered how a motivated and empowered prosecutor
would operate if tasked to explore “any links and/or coordination” between the
Chinese government, Feinstein and individuals associated with her office. Such
an investigation never took place with Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the most servile
apologist of Communist China since Anna Louise Strong, and
certainly the most influential. On the other hand, Donald Trump was thoroughly
investigated for “collusion” with Russia, which turned out to be a hoax.
It was the president’s tweet that brought Feinstein’s Chinese spy
to public attention. President Trump has access to all U.S. intelligence, a
major reason domestic and foreign foes alike are desperately trying to remove
him from office. In his April 19 press conference, the president called the
upper reaches of the DOJ and FBI “human scum,” and their inattention to
Feinstein, Hillary Clinton and other high-profile Democrats confirms that the
rot continues.
President Trump is now throwing down with the invisible enemy of
coronavirus and making progress despite opposition from Democrats and their
media allies. As they parrot Chinese propaganda, the president has already
started the decoupling process.
“We cannot outsource our independence,” the president said last Monday. “We
cannot be reliant on foreign nations. I’ve been saying this for a long time. If
we’ve learned one thing it’s let's do it here, let’s build it here, let’s make
it here.”
As with the USSR, we don’t need China for anything. And as Chuck
Berry said, anything you want they got right here in the USA.
Well, it looks like the
makeover has begun.
Corrupt Joe Biden, who used his office to
enrich himself and his family, to say the least, is now the foreign policy
maven, particularly on China. That's the spin from the New York Times, which
has beclowned itself badly, trying to tell the audience that something smelly is shinola.
To voters
unsettled by President Trump’s disruptive approach to the world, Mr. Biden is
selling not only his policy prescriptions but also his long track record of
befriending, cajoling and sometimes confronting foreign leaders — what he might
call the power of his informal diplomatic style. “I’ve dealt with every one of
the major world leaders that are out there right now, and they know me. I know
them,” he told supporters in December.
Brett McGurk,
a former senior State Department official for the campaign against the Islamic
State, said Mr. Biden had been an effective diplomat by practicing “strategic
empathy.”
And unlike Trump, Biden was oh so
personal, as well as "not an ideologue."
Mr. Biden
made a quick “personal connection” with the Chinese leader, even if he
sometimes confounded his Mandarin interpreter by quoting hard-to-translate
Irish verse, said Daniel Russel, an aide present at several of the meetings.
“He was
remarkably good in getting to a personal relationship right away and getting Xi
to open up,” Mr. Russel said.
Had enough? The translation, according to
Peter Schweizer's Profiles in Corruption is:
For Vice
President Joe Biden, effective diplomacy was about forming personal
relationships with foreign leaders. "It all gets down to the conduct of
foreign policy being personal." The vice president had a series of
important and tense meetings with Chinese officials on a variety of critical
matters in the bilateral relationship. The trip coincided with an enormous
financial deal that Hunter Biden's firm, Rosemont Seneca, was arranging with
the state-owned Bank of China. What Hunter did during the official visit to
Beijing we cannot know for sure. Other than a few photo ops with his father, he
was nowhere to be seen.
...and...
Approximately
ten days after the Beijing trip, Hunter Biden's Rosemont Seneca Partners
finalized a deal with the Chinese government worth a whopping $1 billion.
The deal was later expanded to $1.5 billion. As of this writing, the fund's
website says its investments amount to more than $2 billion.
It's
important to note that this deal was with the Chinese government--not
with Chinese company, which means that the Chinese government and the son
of the vice president were now business partners.
Now he's Mr. Congeniality, the perfect
opposite of President Trump who confronts China rather sternly on issues.
To the Times, that's a bad thing. To the average 'hey fat' out in the American
heartland as Biden puts it, Trump's diplomacy is actually standing up for
the interests of Americans.
It's also a disgusting double standard.
Trump is no China hater - he does his best to cut the best deal possible for
main street America by driving a hard bargain the Chinese know they have no
choice but to accept. Any time Trump says something concilatory to the Chinese,
it's denounced as sucking up to dictators, while any time Joe does it -
pocketing the profits, which any non-ideologue is adept at doing - he's Mr.
Personality.
As Mickey Kaus well observed:
When Trump does it it's coddling dictators,
with Biden it's Strategic Empathy! @michaelcrowley is
at least a bit skeptical. https://t.co/Pnc9SqxAk4
Here's the problem with this kind of
'personal' diplomacy. It is very personal indeed to Joe, given the wealth it
has brought is family members. It's also very dangerous, given that every
string and hook China's oligarchs can get into him makes him an even bigger
sock puppet than he already was. Combine with the world's dodgiest players
considering Biden a non-entity (Osama bin Laden considered Biden a fool) and
the picture is a very ugly one for America's interests.
Here's the second problem: This apparent
media makeover for Joe, painting him as the great personal-touch diplomat who
can get along with everyone is clearly the new party line being promoted in the
press, and we can expect to see lockstep echoing of this embarassing face-lift.
The JournoList talking points have gone out and now the shots are fired. As
those shots went out, attempting to boost Joe while taking down Trump, the
Chicoms themselves have been very active, too. Just days ago, according to a
report in the Daily Caller, the Chinese investment firm that made Hunter a very
rich man has quietly removed Hunter's name as a board member. That's to help
Joe win his presidential bid for sure, which ought to make voters very wary
given whose interests are being boosted. Worse still, the Caller reports, they
allowed him to keep his sizable stake in the company - worth milions at least.
No wonder he's comfortably ensconced in the Hollywood Hills these days, bored
and playing 'artist,' dodging release of his financial statements to an
Arkansas judge over a babydaddy case with a stripper looking for child support.
No wonder he apparently settled with the woman and swept the whole thing off
the front pages.
Now the makeover is on, with the media
ignoring the pocket-lining entirely -- the New York Times makes simply no
mention of it -- and the cash spigots still going.
The whole thing -- pocket-lining and media
coverup is a disgusting double-load of corruption that anyone with a brain
can see right through. The GOP must keep the heat onto this issue because it's
being distorted beyond recognition.
Photo
illustration by Monica Showalter with
use of images by Gage Skidmore,
via Flickr // CC BY-SA 2.0, Acaben,
via Wikimedia Commons // CC BY-SA 2.0, PxFuel public domain,
and SKopp
via Wikimedia Commons // public domain
We're not buying Joe Biden's 'tough on China' Act
Joe
Biden is running away from his record as the "pro-China" candidate so
quickly that his defenders in the liberal press can't make heads or tails of
it. Ordinary Americans are equally confused.
Biden
spent over three decades opening American markets to Chinese goods, ignoring
China's abhorrent human rights record, and dismissing the challenge posed by
our greatest rival for global leadership. The "made in
China" era coincided with the closure of tens of thousands of American
factories, stagnant working-class wages, and the loss of America's ability to
produce essential goods domestically — a vulnerability that took on incredible
significance when we learned that we were dependent upon China to produce the
medical equipment needed to combat the coronavirus pandemic.
This
disaster was facilitated by politicians of both parties, and no one was
more gung ho than Joe
Biden, poster child for the globalism that reigned supreme until the
2016 presidential election, which Donald J. Trump won by campaigning on a
platform diametrically opposed to the "open markets and open borders"
philosophy of the D.C. establishment. In the White House, President
Trump became the first American leader in decades to take a firm stand against
China's malfeasance and demand a genuinely fair and reciprocal trade deal for
American workers.
While
Joe Biden was the vice president of the United States, conversely, he was downplaying the consequences of
China's rise — even as his own family tried to get rich through
deals with Chinese state-owned companies.
How
is it possible, then, that Biden has suddenly tried to recast himself as the
"tough-on-China" candidate in the 2020 race?
Biden's
campaign even ran an ad claiming the
president had "rolled over for the Chinese" in response to the
coronavirus that Beijing unleashed on the world. It's one of the
most poorly executed flip-flops in American electoral history, coming just
months after Biden called President
Trump's life-saving ban on most travel
from China "hysterical xenophobia."
No
one is buying it. Everyone knows about President Trump's record of
success in bringing China to the negotiating table through strategic
counter-tariffs. The "Phase One" trade deal that was inked
earlier this year represents the first major trade concessions from China in a
generation. Even the fanatical free-traders who actually liked Biden's
globalism see right through his new façade. The libertarians at the
Cato Institute, for instance, published an article
acknowledging that Biden's reversal is "futile" and "inherently
lacks credibility."
Even
the intellectual left is aghast at Biden's fake toughness on
China. The Atlantic called it "utterly
futile" and "pointless — even dangerous." The New
York Times published an op-ed all but begging Biden to drop the
act.
If
even his own supporters are rolling their eyes at Biden play-acting as a China
skeptic, why are he and his team even bothering to attempt the deception?
The
answer is simple. Americans have finally woken up to the economic
and national security threat posed by China. The coronavirus pandemic made that
threat impossible to ignore. No one wants to go into this November
as the "pro-Beijing" candidate.
Unfortunately
for Joe Biden, he's been the "pro-Beijing" candidate throughout his
political career, and there's a decades-long record to prove it.
Ken Blackwell served as mayor of
Cincinnati, Ohio treasurer, and a U.S. ambassador to the U.N. He currently
serves on the board of directors for Club For Growth.
No comments:
Post a Comment