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.
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.
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’
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
Senator Who Employed Chinese Spy Endorses Joe Biden for President
HARIS ALIC
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.
Feinstein said in a statement:
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.
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:
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.
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