Posted on July 17, 2026 by John Hinderaker in 2020 Presidential Election, China, Media Bias, Trump administration

Did China Pay Liberal Journalists?

I would like to know the answer to that question! In his speech last night, President Trump said that the Communist Chinese had tried to pay American journalists to write negative articles about him. As I told Rowan Dean, I always assumed they did it for free. But seriously: is there evidence that American journalists are paid by the Chinese Communist Party?

Not really. I believe the just-declassified document that Trump referred to was a “CIA Note” titled “Sensitive PRC Reporting from 2018-2020.” That short document is a summary of reporting by, I take it, intelligence agencies. It is not clear when or why it was created. In any event, this is the relevant part:

It doesn’t say the Chinese paid journalists, is says they “sought to identify” journalists who had written negatively about Trump–that wouldn’t be hard!–and “pay them to write more negative articles.” If there was evidence of journalists actually being paid, we no doubt would have seen it. I think my original supposition holds: they did it for free.

The document is interesting, but not surprising. It says the Chinese wanted Trump to lose the 2020 election, and tried various means to weigh in against him. The fact that the CCP wanted Trump to lose is not in doubt; it is, as they say, over-determined. But the means specified in the document, including the idea of paying journalists, are not very exciting. Certainly there is no suggestion (here, at least) of any attempt to somehow manipulate vote totals.

Posted on by John Hinderaker in Democrats, House of Representatives, Protests

Our Violent Left [Updated]

Left-wing violence has become almost a daily fact of our political life. And I am not talking about the extreme left, I am talking about the left that represents the center of gravity in the Democratic Party.

Congressman Adam Smith illustrates the point in the tweet embedded below. Smith, the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, is a former supporter of Israel who voted with 102 Democratic colleagues to cut off military aid to that country. Smith says he cast his vote to send a message to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s government, with which he is “frustrated.”

But this is perhaps the more salient point:

I am deeply concerned about the tactics used by those on the far left to advocate for cutting off aid to Israel. To date, my family and I have had our home vandalized, a fire has been set in my driveway, my neighbors’ lives have been disrupted by demonstrations in the middle of the night, town halls meant to be forums for dialogue have been shut down, and a staff member has been physically assaulted. Those who engage in this type of behavior model a dangerous form of corrosive politics that seeks to intimidate those who disagree with them.

The left-wingers got their way: Smith voted with them. And one of those who organized protests at Smith’s house is now an opponent running for his seat in the Democratic primary:

Smith is running in a primary race against two anti-Israel candidates to his left, Kshama Sawant and Melissa Chaudhry. Sawant organized anti-Israel protests outside Smith’s home.

Smith may have knuckled under to liberal violence. Then again, he may simply have seen which way the wind is blowing in his party. That is what Kshama Sawant says:

The forces are complementary: vote our way or we will vandalize your house, threaten your family, and assault your staff. Also, vote our way or the majority in our party who are fine with vandalism, threats and violence will throw you out of office.

UPDATE: A reader who lives in Smith’s district forwarded an email he got from Kshama Sawant’s campaign:

Dear XXXXX, I’m Emily with 𝗞𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗺𝗮 𝗦𝗮𝘄𝗮𝗻𝘁’s campaign for 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗴𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀. Help us defeat AIPAC! Kshama is the socialist who beat the billionaires. As an independent socialist on the Seattle City Council, she built movements to win the highest minimum wage in the country, the Amazon Tax that funds affordable housing & unprecedented renters rights.

Kshama is running for Congress in your district fighting for 𝗮𝗻 𝗘𝗡𝗗 𝘁𝗼 𝗔𝗟𝗟 𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗮𝗶𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹, for national rent control & for taxing the rich to fund free healthcare for all. http://www.kshamasawant.org

𝗖𝗮𝗻 𝘄𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁 𝗼𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝘃𝗼𝘁𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗞𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗺𝗮 𝗯𝘆 𝗔𝘂𝗴 𝟰?

What strikes me is the priority given to the anti-Semitic element of Sawant’s campaign. Hey, I’m a Communist, but more than that, I really hate Israel! It is issue number one.

During the 1930s, most observers saw Adolf Hitler’s anti-Semitism, and that of his regime, as an offbeat quirk that was tangential to the Nazi party’s socialism. But that turned out not to be true: in the last days of the war, the Nazis prioritized shipping Jews to the death camps even at the expense of the slim military resources that remained. Anti-Semitism proved to be, not an odd afterthought, but the very essence of Hitler’s regime.

We see the same thing today in the Democratic Party. Anti-Semitism isn’t just one plank in the Democrats’ platform, it is the number one issue that real Democrats–socialists like Kshama Sawant–intend to advance.

Posted on by John Hinderaker in 2020 Presidential Election, election conspiracy theories, Election law, Voter Fraud

Election Security: What Did Trump Say?

I generally agree with Scott’s take on President Trump’s speech last night. I was on television last night, immediately following the speech, and I gave my impressions to Rowan Dean:

I have started looking at the newly-declassified documents, which don’t appear to be voluminous. They are interesting, to say the least, but I haven’t yet seen any evidence of more voter fraud than we already knew about.

The main point, in my opinion, is that Trump is basically right: our election systems are insecure and need to be upgraded. This shouldn’t even be controversial, and it wouldn’t be if election fraud were not a significant element of Democratic Party strategy. Industrial-scale hacking of our elections may not have happened yet, but does that mean we shouldn’t guard against it? Of course not.

And there is no way Joe Biden got anywhere near 81 million legitimate votes in 2020.

Posted on by Scott Johnson in Crime, Minnesota, Tim Walz

Our worst years

I dubbed Minnesota Governor Tim Walz “Governor Isuzu” a while back. The blather and lying come so naturally to him. It’s a gift of some kind. He perfected it during his reign as our one-man ruler by emergency decree during the Covid nightmare.

You know Walz is lying when his lips are moving. Walz knows he’s lying. We know he’s lying. He knows that we know he’s lying. He remains the shadow of a man incapable of embarrassment. Walz presents as an example of life imitating art, in this case the advertising art that created Joe Isuzu.

Laotian immigrant Tou Vang had serially raped a 10-year-old girl over a period of two years between 2002 and 2004. Minnesota Democrats on the pardon board (including Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison) unanimously voted to pardon Vang in a vain effort to shield him from deportation by the Trump administration. Vang had been under an order of removal entered in 2006 following his conviction. Bill Glahn wrote about the pardon for us here two weeks ago (with more here and here).

Governor Isuzu is in the news with his comments condemning Vang’s deportation (video below): “Did that make us any safer?…Did it improve the idea [sic] that we can’t all be judged by our worst day?”

It’s an utterly stupid rationale to begin with, especially in the context of sexual abuse, but “our worst day” is off by two years. Politically speaking, Walz’s service in office has to represent our worst eight years.

Posted on by Scott Johnson in Marco Rubio, Terrorism, The Left

On left-wing terrorism

Secretary Rubio convened a conference on the resurgence of transnational left-wing terorism and gave something like the keynote speech yesterday. He was introduced by Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau, who wrote us in 2020 when he was serving as our Amabassador to Mexico on the related phenmenon of lefist mob violence.

Secretary Rubio’s speech is deserving of our attention. Coincidentally, the adjacent post on Rep. Adam Smith provides a current domestic example of the political terrorism Rubio decries. I have posted the video below.

The State Department has posted the text along with Deputy Secretary Landau’s introduction and remarks by Stephen Miller as well as Secretary Bessent. The White House has separately posted snippets of those remarks here.

Secretary Bessent provided this quotable quote at the conference that you may have seen clipeed on the news yesterday: “[B]efore I proceed, I’m going to go off script for a minute, which is always dangerous, but I’m going to remind everyone in this room and all the media that I was the subject of an assassination attempt February of 202[5] by an addled left-wing activist two hours after being sworn into my job. So any of you who want to report that this is a fiction and does not exist, be there for the sentencing this August.”

Posted on by Scott Johnson in Democrats, House of Representatives, Israel

The uses of violence [updated]

The combination of anti-Semitism and violence on the left deamands attention. It is a toxic brew. Democrat Washington Rep. Adam Smith provides a recent example in connection with his vote against aid to Israel this week. Matthew Shea reports at Jewish Insider (links in original):

Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, indicated he voted to cut off military aid to Israel in part because of sustained personal threats against his family and his staff, part of what he described as a violent and relentless campaign of intimidation by far-left anti-Israel activists.

Smith voted on Wednesday to support an amendment introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) to strip $3.3 billion in U.S. aid to Israel from the 2027 State Department appropriations bill — a major reversal by the hawkish Democrat after he previously told Jewish Insider he planned to oppose the measure.

In a statement explaining his vote in favor, the high-ranking defense lawmaker said it was a “very close vote.” He said that despite voting to cut off U.S. aid, he was “deeply concerned” about the tactics used by far left activists to pressure him to support such a measure.

“To date, my family and I have had our home vandalized, a fire has been set in my driveway, my neighbors’ lives have been disrupted by demonstrations in the middle of the night, town halls meant to be forums for dialogue have been shut down, and a staff member has been physically assaulted,” Smith said in a statement on X.

The story gives no hint of perpetrators or law enforcement activity. There must be more to come on this sorry, sorry episode.

UPDATE: Smith has told JNS that the violence against him had nothing to do with his vote: “I was less inclined to vote in favor of this precisely because of what these lunatics were doing.” He added: “The main reasons I was hesitating so much on the vote was I didn’t want people to think that the pressure had anything to do with it.”

Posted on by Scott Johnson in China, Donald Trump, Election law, Intelligence, Trump administration

After last night

RealClearPolitics has posted the text and video of President Trump’s prime time speech last night. The White House has posted the Election Integrity documents cited in the speech. They can be downloaded at the linked page.

Looking for an accessible summary with some analysis of the speech, I found Politico’s story to be of use. John previewed Trump’s speech and anticipated that Trump would focus on election security with a look back to 2020. That’s more or less — I would say less — what Trump did. The speech emphasized capabilities — the harm that could be done by China with information it has gathered — rather than harm that was in fact done. Thus he asserted:

As one assessment states, quote, “We judge that United States adversaries, including, at a minimum, Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, as well as non-state groups, have the capability to compromise U.S. election infrastructure.”

That is some statement, made by supposedly great patriots of our country.

Allegations of harm done — something achieved with information gathered or vulnerabilities exploited in fact — appeared to me few and far between. This seems like thin stuff to me:

One email among intelligence analysts admitted that they had, quote, “deliberately massaged the Presidential Daily Briefing to withhold information regarding Chinese activities related to the election.”

It may be “a conspiracy so immense,” but what happened?

Trump also discussed illegal aliens registered to vote:

According to the DHS review of state voter rolls and public records, they identified approximately 278,000 noncitizens who are registered to vote in federal elections. Since Democrat states refused to share their voter files, the real number is actually much higher than that. Yet even this limited analysis found more than one-quarter of a million foreigners illegally registered to vote.

Democrats protect illegal aliens as critical component of their constituency. That is a problem. Trump sums it up:

Put together, these disclosures reveal an election system so broken and so vulnerable that no one can possibly defend it. It is not defensible.

As I say above, however, I would say the speech makes out little harm actually done to date. Watching Sean Hannity’s commentary on the speech on Fox News, I thought it was almost hilariously cautious about the implications regarding voting machines. Once burned, twice shy.

I thought Trump would take the opportunity to say something about our efforts to throttle Iran or something to address the economic concerns on the minds of voters. That proved not to be the case. The mention of Iran in passing in the first quote above was it.

The speech appears simply to have constituted a last-ditch attempt to promote the SAVE Act. Whatever the merits of the proposed law, the speech made a thin case that will leave the SAVE Act exactly where it is.