Dem OLIGARCHY?! Pelosi-Feinstein-Newsom Family Business, Political DYNASTY EXPOSED:
“Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton Foundation (TWO GAMER LAWYERS - OWNED BY GEORGE SOROS) (WHAT ABOUT THE CHINA BIDEN PENN CENTER?) and the Obama (TWO GAMER LAWYERS - OWNED BY GEORGE SOROS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden family (FOUR GAMER LAWYERS - JOE, HUNTER, JAMES, FRANK - OWNED BY GEORGE SOROScorruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders families, as Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS (WANTS TO BE OWNED BY GEORGE SOROS) AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, LAWYER CHUCK SCHUMER, OWNED BY GEORGE SOROS, AND GEORGE SOROS’ RENT BOY GAMER LAWER TONY BLINKEN, GEORGE SOROS RENT BOY,AS WELL AS CON MAN ADAM SHIFF) AND HIS CORRUPTNESS BOB MENENDEZ STILL EVADING PRISON.
BRIAN C JOONDEPH
Gavin ‘Gruesome’ Newsom weds his state to a foreign communist province to ‘fight climate change’
The fact that a seedy and unregulated Chinese-linked lab containing bioweapons can somehow operate right next door to a naval base in California undetected for months while the FBI simultaneously hunts down every single American that breathed near D.C.’s capitol or mentioned anything about stolen elections on social media, makes even more sense in the context of Gavin Newsom’s recent press release—anti-American actors have friends in the highest of places.
On August 3rd, Newsom’s office announced that California had partnered with the Chinese province of Hainan to “fight climate change.” What a strange marriage, considering China remains the number one producer of CO2 in the world, and emits more than twice as much as the United States. The objective of the accord, signed by both Newsom and Hainan’s Vice Governor Chen Huaiyu, read:
The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding is to establish a flexible framework between the Participants in order to permit them to collaborate on protecting the environment, combating climate change and advancing clean energy development.
So what do those collaborative efforts look like? Among other things, the scheme iterates the “implementation of carbon neutrality plans” and the “deployment of zero emission vehicles” along with the “phase-out of fossil fuel” engines.
Almost sounds like wartime language if you were to ask me; “neutralizing” carbon strikes a familiar chord with, “You are the carbon they want to reduce.”
Furthermore, how do Newsom and Chen intend to coordinate their efforts? From the text:
The Participants [California and Hainan] respectively designate the Hainan Provincial Development and Reform Commission, the Department of Ecology and Environment of Hainan Province, the Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of Hainan Province, the Department of Industry and Information Technology of Hainan Province, the Department of Education of Hainan Province, the Department of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of Hainan Province, the Department of Transport of Hainan Province, and the Hainan Provincial Administration for Financial Regulation, as well as the California Environmental Protection Agency and the California Natural Resources Agency, in coordination with sister agencies such as the California State Transportation Agency, to establish the creation of an action plan to implement the objectives of this Memorandum of Understanding [emphasis added].
Eight state agencies from Hainan, from education to “rural affairs” to IT, and three California bureaus, “designate[d]” to enact the measures outlined in the MOU; California is acting like a sovereign nation, and after all, it has every right to.
Obviously though, Newsom’s political methods are nefarious in nature—tightening ties with communist regimes is not in the best interest of the people. But why don’t the Republican governors who rant against Joe Biden, a corrupt and rogue FBI, a tyrannical IRS, or any other federal abomination act like the executives they legally are?
Why can’t I buy incandescent light bulbs anymore? Well, because Kay Ivey won’t stand up to the Department of Energy. Why do Texans have to deal with endless invaders and the fallout that inevitably accompanies the hordes? Because Greg Abbott won’t defy the diktats of the Department of Homeland Security. Why do Tennesseeans seeking a tax haven still have to pay the federal pizzo? Because Bill Lee won’t expel IRS agents and defend his borders against D.C. stormtroopers.
Like the federal president, each governor is the top executive; therefore, each governor is bound to execute the law of his land, which at the root of it, is each state constitution, respectively.
Alabama didn’t ban incandescent light bulbs; a bunch of unelected bureaucrats did. Texas didn’t erase the statutes on the books regarding the immigration process; Alejandro Mayorkas just has no respect for the rule of law. Tennessee didn’t enact an unapportioned direct tax (in direct violation of Article I, Section 2), rather Abraham Lincoln and corrupted federal interests seized an opportunity to obliterate the prosperity and economic freedom envisioned by the Founders.
Republican governors are playing into a system of a federal government supremacy over subject States—I suspect it’s an orchestrated slow boil—and it’s incompatible with the Union’s original design. The created, or the federal government, is never greater than the creator, or the States.
Image: John Trumbull, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.
Rubio Asks DOJ To Investigate Chinese Funding of Left-Wing Activists
'Combatting Beijing’s malign influence must be a key objective for the DOJ,' Rubio says
Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) is calling on the Department of Justice to investigate U.S. left-wing activist groups linked to an international Chinese Communist Party funding network and slammed the Biden administration for being "unaware or ambivalent to this growing threat."
Rubio, one of the top China hawks in Congress, said he is concerned that "far-left organizations that are reportedly tied to the Chinese Communist Party" are "operating with impunity in the United States," in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland obtained by the Washington Free Beacon on Wednesday. He called on Garland to investigate whether the groups violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act by failing to register as agents of China.
The senator’s letter follows a bombshell New York Times report that uncovered a dark-money network run by an American tech mogul, Neville Roy Singham, that promotes pro-Chinese government propaganda through an array of U.S. left-wing nonprofit groups.
Some of the organizations receiving funding from the network include Code Pink, No Cold War, the United Community Fund, and the Justice and Education Fund, according to the Times. The groups have pushed progressive policies alongside pro-China talking points, such as downplaying the government’s genocide against Uyghurs.
The Foreign Agents Registration Act requires groups and individuals that engage in political activities or lobbying on behalf of foreign interests to register as foreign agents. The DOJ has ramped up its enforcement of the law in recent years, bringing high-profile FARA cases against former professor Gal Luft, who allegedly failed to register his work for a Chinese think tank that also paid Hunter Biden, and against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who pleaded guilty after failing to disclose his work for a pro-Russia political party in Ukraine.
"Combatting Beijing’s malign influence must be a key objective for the U.S. Department of Justice," wrote Rubio. "Unfortunately, it appears the DOJ is either unaware or ambivalent to this growing threat."
The senator asked the attorney general to "immediately investigate" Code Pink and seven other groups for "potential violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act."
"The CCP is our greatest adversary, and we cannot allow it to abuse our open system to promote its malign influence any longer," wrote Rubio.
Published under: Biden Administration , CCP , China , Department of Justice , FARA , Marco Rubio , National Security
Biden Signs China Investment ‘Ban’ Republicans Call 'Riddled With Loopholes'
President Joe Biden on Wednesday signed an executive order that will narrowly prohibit certain U.S. investments in sensitive technology in China and require government notification of funding in other tech sectors, restrictions that critics slammed as toothless because of their limited focus and vulnerability to loopholes.
The long-awaited order authorizes the U.S. Treasury secretary to prohibit or restrict certain U.S. investments in Chinese entities in three sectors: semiconductors and microelectronics, quantum information technologies, and certain artificial intelligence systems.
Biden said in a letter to Congress he was declaring a national emergency to deal with the threat of advancement by countries like China "in sensitive technologies and products critical to the military, intelligence, surveillance, or cyber-enabled capabilities."
The proposal targets investments in Chinese companies developing software to design chips and tools to manufacture them. The United States, Japan and the Netherlands dominate those fields, and the Chinese government has been working to build up homegrown alternatives.
Republicans said the Biden order did not go far enough.
House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Michael McCaul praised the move to restrict new outbound investments in China but said "the failure to include existing technology investments as well as sectors like biotechnology and energy is concerning."
Republican senator Marco Rubio said the Biden administration's "narrowly tailored proposal is almost laughable. It is riddled with loopholes, explicitly ignores the dual-use nature of important technologies, and fails to include industries China’s government deems critical."
The restrictions will take at least a year to take effect and must first pass through multiple rounds of public comment, including an initial 45-day comment period.
During a trip to China last month, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said Biden's restrictions would not "affect U.S. investment broadly in China" or "have a fundamental impact on affecting the investment climate for China."
The move could fuel tensions between the world's two largest economies, although U.S. officials insisted the prohibitions were intended to address "the most acute" national security risks and not to separate the two countries' highly interdependent economies.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer praised Biden's order, saying "for too long, American money has helped fuel the Chinese military’s rise. Today the United States is taking a strategic first step to ensure American investment does not go to fund Chinese military advancement." He says Congress must enshrine restrictions in law and refine them.
The order is aimed at preventing American capital and expertise from helping develop technologies that could support China’s military modernization and undermine U.S. national security. It is focused on private equity, venture capital, joint venture, and greenfield investments.
Most investments captured by the order will require the government be notified about them. Some transactions will be prohibited. The Treasury said it anticipates exempting "certain transactions, including potentially those in publicly-traded instruments and intracompany transfers from U.S. parents to subsidiaries."
A spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday but the embassy said Friday the United States "habitually politicizes technology and trade issues and uses them as a tool and weapon in the name of national security."
The regulations will only affect future investments, not existing ones, an administration official told Reuters.
The Biden administration said it engaged with U.S. allies and partners as it developed the restrictions "and will continue coordinating closely with them to advance these goals." It added the executive order reflects discussions with the Group of Seven countries.
Regulators plan to issue an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to further define the scope of the program and a comment period to solicit public feedback before making a formal proposal.
Sources previously told Reuters investments in semiconductors that will be restricted are expected to track export control rules for China issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce in October.
Emily Benson of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a bipartisan policy research organization, said she expects investments in artificial intelligence to be prohibited to military users and uses, and that other investments in the sector will only require notification to the government.
Benson said the burden will fall on the administration to determine what AI falls into the military category.
"They will have to draw a line of what constitutes a military application of AI, and to define AI," said Benson, director of CSIS's project on trade and technology.
The regulations concerning AI are still in development, the person briefed on the order said. The person said the same was also true for quantum computing but that it was expected to prohibit certain sensors and other things related to the technology.
The person added that there could be potential exemptions related to universities and research.
(Reporting by David Shepardson, Andrea Shalal, Stephen Nellis, Max Cherney and Karen Freifeld; additional reporting by Idrees Ali; Editing by Lincoln Feast and Jonathan Oatis)
Published under: China , Joe Biden
House Digs Deeper Into Chinese-Owned Battery Company's Rescinded Grant From Biden DOE
DOE official says 'in-depth vetting began' only after announcements of billions in funding, which boosted stock prices for grantees
House Republicans have voiced concerns about the Biden administration's energy-related spending, questioning a Department of Energy (DOE) official about how a Chinese-owned battery manufacturer was on pace to get hundreds of millions in taxpayer money before the Biden administration rescinded the money in May.
That company, Microvast, somehow qualified for a $200 million grant to build a battery separator facility in Tennessee as part of spending doled out through the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL).
The Department of Energy announced the decision in October 2022 as part of $2.8 billion in what its announcement repeatedly described as "funded projects" for the U.S. battery sector.
Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said the money would "supercharge the private sector to ensure our clean energy future is American-made."
"Shortly after the announcement, Microvast's association with the Chinese Communist Party became apparent," Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) said in his opening statement at the June 21 hearing.
"According to Microvast's own SEC [Securities and Exchange Commission] filings, the government—referring to the People's Republic of China—'exerts substantial influence over the manner in which we must conduct our business activities, and may intervene at any time with no notice,'" Griffith continued.
"Uncertainties with respect to the PRC legal system could limit the legal protections available to you and us," that same filing states. It also describes the firm's receipt of Chinese government subsidies and states that "most of [Microvast's] current customers" are in China.
Obama Commerce Department Official Appears in Filing
Another notable name that crops up in the filing is Stefan M. Selig, who was a member of the board of Tuscan Holdings Corp., a blank check company that entered a business combination with Microvast.
Selig served as undersecretary of commerce for international trade at the U.S. Department of Commerce under President Barack Obama, where he described the Trans-Pacific Partnership arrangement as "a win for American businesses and workers."
When President Donald Trump took office, he removed the United States from that trade deal soon after his inauguration in 2017, saying he preferred bilateral trade deals over regional or multilateral agreements.
Pressure Mounted Over Chinese Battery Firm
December 2022 reporting in the Washington Free Beacon helped draw attention to Microvast's close ties to China.
Soon, pressure began to come from top lawmakers, including Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).
In a Dec. 7, 2022, letter to Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, Barrasso explained his concerns about Microvast.
One big issue was already evident to the federal SEC, thanks to a 2020 law that sailed through the House and Senate with unanimous votes before being signed by Trump: the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (HFCAA).
"Before Microvast received its grant from DOE, it was listed by the SEC in May of 2022 as a company not in compliance with the [HFCAA]. This law is intended to prevent companies that employ China-based auditors, as does Microvast, from obscuring their financial records from U.S. regulators," Barrasso wrote.
In an April 2022 statement issued after that move by the SEC, Microvast described the HFCAA as "part of a continued United States regulatory focus on access to audit and other information currently protected by laws in jurisdictions outside of the United States (in particular, China)."
Earlier this year, Barrasso, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), and others questioned DOE Deputy Secretary David Turk about the money then apparently destined for Microvast.
Although the DOE's October 2022 announcement spoke rather definitively of "funded projects," using the word "will" rather than "may" or "might," Turk told the senators in February this year that the firm was merely "selected to negotiate an award."
"There are no taxpayer funds going to Microvast or to any of the other 20 companies [announced last year] right now," he said.
In another letter to Turk sent several weeks later, Barrasso questioned Turk on what he characterized as "misleading claims" in the earlier funding announcements.
"Companies and investors clearly believe award negotiations are a formality. They believe the Department’s award announcements are meaningful, as is evident by looking at the share prices of publicly traded companies selected for awards. Of the twenty companies selected for awards, share prices of those that were publicly traded averaged an increase of almost 14% between the day before and day of the Department’s respective award announcement," the Wyoming lawmaker's letter states.
On May 22, the DOE announced that Microvast wouldn't be getting any money.
"The company was selected for an award and going through contract award negotiations. No money has gone out the door. It would be inaccurate to say ‘DOE canceled a grant’ or that ‘DOE pulled back an award’ as no award has been provided," the DOE told The Epoch Times at the time.
The decision came just a day before a May 23 House hearing probing the flow of public money to what Griffith and Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) characterized as "shell companies with deep ties to the Chinese Communist Party."
The DOE declined to send a witness and didn't clarify why, according to Republican lawmakers' announcement of the June 21 hearing.
As federal agencies are under increased scrutiny from a divided Congress, there have been several instances of their noncompliance with congressional requests.
The Environmental Protection Agency didn't send a witness to a May 17 House hearing on its April vehicle tailpipe emissions proposals.
At a June 21 hearing on the same theme, EPA official Joseph Goffman blamed his absence on scheduling. Yet Goffman's official calendar is blank for May 17, the date of the previous hearing—a discrepancy on which The Epoch Times has sought comment from the EPA.
When Rep. Pat Fallon (R-Texas) asked Goffman what took priority over a House hearing, the bureaucrat dodged the question.
"Let me assure you, Mr. Chairman, that I am pleased to be here today," he told the lawmaker.
'In-Depth Vetting' Comes Late
At the June 21 hearing on Microvast, Griffith and his colleagues questioned David Howell, principal deputy director of the DOE's Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains.
The Virginian asked Howell how companies are vetted by the DOE for funding.
The DOE official said "detailed negotiations are started" over BIL grants after selections are made.
"Most of us did not understand that, because it appeared from the press statements that these people were awardees," Griffith said.
"The in-depth vetting began the day after those announcements," Howell said, before stating that previous "in-depth vetting" of the applicants focused on "technical capacity and capabilities of the companies."
Griffith pressed Howell on the official's assertion that Microvast is "a majority-U.S. owned company."
"If they're majority U.S.-owned ... why would they say that they could be stopped or change course because of what the government said in China?" he asked.
"Simply because Microvast's major production operations are in China," Howell answered.
"All of the other companies that you vetted do not have that problem?" Griffith asked.
"That is correct," Howell responded.
Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) asked how Howell has since enhanced the process of vetting companies for awards.
The deputy director drew attention to the language on "foreign entities of concern" in the BIL, saying it was "actually the first time that the Department of Energy actually received that type of language in appropriation."
Castor appeared to defend Microvast, calling it "a U.S. company" with an owner who is "a U.S. citizen, as far as I know."
"I'm sure there are a lot of American companies that are doing business in China that are not arms of the Chinese Communist Party," she said.
No comments:
Post a Comment