Trojan Horses: Covert Foreign Malign Influence Operations in America

The subcommittee on South and Central Asia will come to order, and the purpose of this hearing is to examine how foreign nations conduct covert propaganda and influence operations in the United States. And I now recognize myself for an opening statement. We're here today because America's adversaries, China, Cuba, Iran, Russia, and others are conducting covert influence campaigns to shape American thought and society through lies and censorship. These countries have one shared goal, to weaken the United States of America. For communist regimes, information warfare is a core pillar of their ideology. Joseph Stalin once stated that propagandists are " engineers of the human soul", and the production of souls is more important than the production of tanks. Xi Jinping uses the phrase quote " engineers of the soul" to praise pop- propaganda's key role in maintaining the Chinese Communist Party's power. These authoritarian regimes rely on lies and censorship. Free societies use robust debate and transparency to determine the truth. The purpose of today's hearing is to learn the facts, to uncover how adversaries secretly fund radical groups and amplify propaganda in the United States to divide Americans. I wanna be clear. People can hold sincerely held beliefs while also being secretly funded or amplified by adversaries. These are not mutually exclusive ideas. We, the people, deserve to know if speakers are being paid or amplified by America's adversaries, especially when determining how to debate the idea in its appropriate context. A person can also hold a legitimately held belief but unknowingly have their message artificially amplified solely to mislead the public by exaggerating support for those beliefs. Additionally, our adversaries can also spread lies while pretending to be American citizens. Anyone who is on social media has seen examples of this. In all of these situations, transparency is a key to ensuring Americans can engage in robust debate on issues facing our nation. Public diplomacy and countering foreign propaganda efforts are core tenets of America's soft power toolbox. A key methodology is to tell the truth and unmask our adversaries' attempts to hide their lies, not through censor- censorship. During the last administration, the Biden administration, the Global Engagement Center deviated from this bipartisan historical consensus by facilitating weaponized censorship of Americans. That was wrong and a direct violation of our core American value of free speech. Thankfully, Secretary Rubio and congressional Republicans put an end to that awful chapter in American history. And instead of censorship, we need to promote more speech. We need to expose our adversaries' methods, funding, and messaging through public analysis and counter-speech. A prominent example of these adversary efforts is Neville Roy Singham, who lives in China and uses his wealth, ironically earned by relying on capitalism, and relationships with the C C P to provide millions of dollars and personnel to extremist groups like Code Pink, the People's Forum, and the Party for Socialism and Liberation to destabilize American society and promote communist ideology. Some Americans knowingly joined forces with foreign adversaries as well. Just ask someone well known in Michigan, Hassan Piker, who last year joined a Chinese choreographed junket while repeating Maoist talking points in his pre-cleared CCP state-run interviews. Conversely, others do so unwittingly. People like Singham and groups like Code Pink and the growing communist propaganda in our country have become our adversary's Trojan horses to sow division from within. I, alongside President Trump, Secretary Rubio, and Undersecretary for Public Diplomacy, Rogers, see exposing foreign malign influence on American soil as a priority. I was proud to author last year's bipartisan State Department authorization provision that uh President S- Trump signed into law, authorizing Under Secretary uh to lead the synchronized and coordinated efforts to recognize, understand, expose, and counter foreign information manipulation and malign activities. But more work remains. This body must authorize the Assistant Secretary for Global Public Affairs' position to bolster our public diplomacy tool kit by providing strategic and truthful information, and not censorship of the past. Thank you to our witnesses. I look forward to learning more about how foreign adversaries are secretly trying to undermine America not just overseas but right here at home. And with that I yield back, and I, the chair now recognizes the ranking member from California, Representative Sidney Komlager Dove, for an opening statement.

Thank you, Mister Chair, and thank you to our witnesses for being here today. Today we are holding a hearing on covert foreign malign influence operations in America. While there is certainly reason to be concerned about malign influence from abroad, I believe we should also be concerned about the malign influence and corruption of this administration. To this day, the full committee has not held a single hearing on Trump's war of choice with Iran, his business deals with countries in the Middle East, or the lavish gifts he has accepted from foreign governments, simply because he wanted them. These scandals are concerning not only because they are unethical, but more importantly, because they pose risks to our national security, something this committee should care about and would have cared about if this was the Biden administration. So I plan to use my five minute opening to talk about what you won't be hearing in this subcommittee, " Corruption from this Administration". Last year, the Trump administration approved the export of five hundred advanced AI chips to the United Arab Emirates. Just a few months before that approval, a top UAE national security advisor, chairman of the Emirates Wealth Fund and controlling shareholder of the AI company G forty two, bought a forty nine percent stake in President Trump's crypto company, World Liberty Financial. A hundred thousand of those AI chips were then greenlit for direct sale to, you guessed it, G forty two. a company with ties to the People's Republic of China. We want to talk about foreign malign influence, but we're unintentionally selling advanced chips to our largest adversary. Did we have a hearing when that happened? No. Maybe that was an oversight on the committee's part. But surely we had an oversight hearing when the president accepted a lavish four hundred million dollar plane from the Qatari government. Well, you would be correct if you guessed again, no. The full committee apparently has no interest in asking whether a foreign government is buying influence with the President of the United States. What about a scandal that falls directly within the purview of this subcommittee? Just this summer, the President cut a billion dollar mining deal with Kazakhstan. Within weeks of that deal, investors with a firm called Dominares Securities, which is housed at Trump Tower in New York, and partly owned by the President's two eldest sons, Donald Trump Junior and Eric Trump, joined with other partners to take a twenty percent stake in a corporate entity related to the Kazakhstan project. Around the same time, Cantor Fitzgerald, an investment company controlled by Mister Luttnick's family and overseen by his sons, Brandon and Kyle Luttnick, helped one of the lead investors, working with Dominarity on the Kazakh deal, raise two hundred and ten million dollars in new capital, for a related entity. These fundraising rounds typically generate millions of dollars in fees for Cantor, and I don't remember here having a hearing when that happened either. These are just a few of the examples I have time to raise in my five minute opening remarks. But, Mister Sherman, I look forward to asking you why this committee is so willing to scrutinize foreign malign influence abroad, while turning a blind eye to the corruption and foreign influence taking place right here at home. There is a long list of questions this committee has yet to answer, and I intend to ask them. Thank you, and I yield back.

General Leidy yields back. Other members of the committee are reminded that opening statements may be submitted for the record and we're pleased to have a distinguished panel of witnesses before us today on this very important topic. Uh, first we have uh, Mister Mike Gonzalez, the Angeles y uh uh Arenado, right? y pluribus unum senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation. Not sure how you fit that on your business card, but Uh-huh. uh, then we have Doctor Matthew Johnson, a senior fellow at the Jamestown Foundation, Mister Sam Lyman, the head of research at the Bitcoin Policy Institute, and Mister Donald K. Sherman, the President and Chief Executive Officer at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, also known as CRU. Uh, this committee recognizes the importance of the issues before us, and is grateful to have you here to speak with us today. Your full statements will be made part of the record, and I'll ask you to keep your spoken remarks to five minutes pr- uh in order to allow time for member questions. And with that, I now recognize Mister Gonzalez for an opening statement.

Chairman Huizenga, Rookie Member, come like a dove. Members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify. The views I expressed in in this testimony are my own. Nations around the world take advantage of the open nature of American society to seek influence or cause us harm. This is the case whether it's outright enemies, such as China and Cuba, or shadowy non-government organizations or individuals seeking also to sow chaos, or to teach school children that America was responsible for the nine eleven attacks. As I explained in my written testimony, foreign groups carrying out these operations can be roughly sorted into two buckets, Islamist and Marxist groups. Organizations and individuals inspired by these two very different ideologies regularly form tactical coalitions. This is the so-called red-green alliance, red being the color of communism and green of Islam, and they unite to fight what they see as a common enemy, which again broadly we can define as the capitalist Christian West. Part of the reason is that sometime in the in the nineteen sixties, the Marxist left decided to abandon the Industrial Worker as the locus of revolutionary agency in favor of identity groups based on race, ethnicity, sex, sexual preference, et cetera. It is also worth noting that members of the Red-Green Alliance will create mayhem on our streets in college campuses, in the name of whatever the issue of the day is, whether Gaza, BLM, Cuba, ICE, the environment, Venezuela, social justice, Iran, et cetera. As David Horowitz used to say, the issue is never the issue, the issue is the revolution. They also tried to infiltrate and influence the K through twelve educational system, institutions of higher education, our government agencies, the lobbying firms that write far too many of our laws, et cetera. One implication is that we can't avoid a separate societal discussion on what the Sharia law is a foundational element of the religion of Islam, and not just of its political Islamist component. What matters here is what the majority of people who adhere to Islam believe. In my in my testimony, I also highlight China and Cuba as two communist enemies that finance and train members of the Marxist and Islamist networks and give and I give examples of how they do this. One of the main groups carrying out malign influence operations is the Council on the American Islamic. Relations, on American Islamic Relations, CARE. Like many such groups, some CARE founders have links to groups broken up by the government post nine eleven, groups set up by the Muslim Brotherhood, a transnational terror group propped up by Qatar and Turkey. The Muslim Brotherhood created Hamas and has ties with Hezbollah. Other Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood fronts are American Muslims for Palestine, and Students for Justice in Palestine, which coordinate action with Marxist groups such as Black Lives Matter, Code Pink, the People's Forum, the Answer Coalition, the Party for Socialism and Liberation, et cetera. Many of the leftist groups are financed by a millionaire, as you mentioned, Mister Chairman, who lives in Shanghai and is tightly connected with the Chinese Communist Party, Neville Roy Singham. Um, I'm told that Code Pink is not going to disrupt this uh this hearing, but if they did, it would be further evidence of the reach of the Singham network. Singham is married to Jody Evans, the co-founder of Code Pink, I know the co-founders are here with us, and his network funnels funds into the group. Unsurprisingly, according to press reports, various parts of our government have opened investigations into this network. China is also deeply involved in influencing our schools, universities, Hollywood, et cetera. As for Cuba, for nearly seven decades, the despotic Cuban regime has waged a sustained campaign of subversion against the United States. Today this regime deny, that denies freedom to Cubans themselves, works with the Zingham network and Islamist groups to undermine America's free market system. In December, two Venezuelan generals imprisoned in the US for narco-terrorist activities, wrote letters to President Trump explaining that Cuba's regime had hatched a plot to flood US streets with drugs to undermine America's moral fiber from within. The conspiracy, wrote one, was successfully executed with help from Colombian guerrilla groups, Cuban operatives and Hezbollah. A Cuban agent also trained protesters who stormed Columbia University's Hamilton Hall in April twenty twenty four. Cuban officials, including the foreign minister, meet with US activists and instruct them on legislative and street action. America is under threat from foreign influences, and if we want to remain a sovereign nation, we must bring accountability and transparency to our system. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing.

Thank you, Mister Gonzalez, and I now recognize uh uh Doctor Johnson for an opening statement for five minutes.

Chairman Huizinga, Ranking Member Kamlager-Dove, and distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My remarks summarize the longer written testimony I have submitted for the record. My central point is simple, to understand China's malign influence, we must understand how the Chinese Communist Party exercises power and competes. The party treats organization itself as a source of power, using institutions under its control at home and in seeking access to influential institutions abroad to shape perceptions and decisions in Beijing's favor. The party, in other words, is an organizational weapon. That phrase comes from Cold War scholar, Philip Selznick. His insight was that Leninist parties, of which the Communist Party is one, treat organizations throughout society as potential instruments of political power. They seek entry, access, legitimacy, influential positions, and the capacity to mobilize institutional resources toward political ends. Xi Jinping, the s- General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, has described organization in strikingly similar terms. At the fourth plenum of the nineteenth central committee in October twenty nineteen, she declared that " institutional advantage is the country's greatest advantage, and the competition between systems is the most fundamental competition between states." In June twenty twenty, speaking to the Politburo about party organization, He said that a tightly organized system, quote, a tightly organized system is where a Marxist political party's advantage and strength reside, end quote. He called the CCP's organizational system, quote, a powerful advantage that no other political party in the world possesses, end quote, operating, quote, as the body commands the arm and the arm commands the fingers, end quote. Then, in May twenty twenty one, she instructed the party to quote " turn our institutional advantages, organizational advantages, and talent advantages into communication advantages." And he called for a greater use of high level experts, international conferences, foreign mainstream media, differentiated messaging, IE targeting different different groups of of foreign societies, and a larger international circle of friends. The sequence is clear. Organization, from the Chinese Communist Party's perspective, is a source of competitive power. Party organization should run through Chinese society, and those advantages should be projected outward to shape foreign perception and decisions. Inside of China, political functions are embedded across universities, companies, think tanks, media organizations, professional bodies, and the state. These institutions retain specialized functions within their own sectors, but the party can mobilize them for common political missions. Abroad, Beijing cannot simply command an American university, company, journalist, think tank, or activist. It must gain access and cultivate relationships within institutions that shape perception, expertise, and decision making. But the public record does show that Beijing has an extensive repertoire of carrots and sticks, access to markets, officials, archives, data, research partners, conferences and funding on one side, the carrot side, visa restrictions, market pressure, intimidation, and legal or administrative costs on the other, for example, lawfare. China is already well positioned in media, universities, research institutions, and think tanks. More recently, its outreach has moved toward an American activist has moved toward American activist and political networks. DSA members traveled to China in twenty twenty five on a delegation coordinated in part by a provincial foreign affairs office. Code Pink launched its China is not our enemy campaign in twenty twenty following meetings in Beijing and has since pursued China focused advocacy and organized travel. Chinese university-based AI specialists have also appeared together with elected American officials in discussions promoting international cooperation and warning against a US-China AI race. None of these episodes alone establishes tasking or control. Together, however, they show outreach reaching networks that can educate, recruit, advocate, and mobilize. And my submitted testimony examines this dynamic in three areas. One is artificial intelligence and data centers. Uh, the other is political influence, uh, within American political networks. And the last is universities and research institutions. Uh, I realize I'm at time, so during questions Uh, it might be good to discuss the responses, which would include transparency, uh, counter-capacity, and how we address, uh, my central point that the Communist Party's competitive advantage is in fact organizational. Thank you. I look forward to your questions.

Great. Thank you, Doctor Johnson. Mister Lyman, you're recognized for five minutes.

Chairman Huizinga, Ranking Member Conliger Dove, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on how malign actors conduct foreign influence operations in the United States. A war is raging between the world's two superpowers for AI supremacy, and China is pulling all the levers of state to win it, including foreign influence operations. As head of research at the Bitcoin Policy Institute, I've spent the last several months meticulously documenting this foreign influence campaign. I welcome the opportunity today to share my findings on the nature and substance of these operations, specifically those that have targeted America's AI build-out. That China wants to beat the US in the AI race is a matter of public record. As far back as twenty eighteen, Xi Jinping singled out artificial intelligence as " an important strategic handhold for China to gain the initiative in global science and technology competition." But Beijing talks to its citizens one way about AI and to the rest of the world another. In global forums and especially in American settings, China is keen to portray itself as an AI dove. The line emanating from China's Western-facing propaganda is that the AI race between the US and China is a quote misleading narrative end quote. This line was parroted by Sui Lan, the CCP's leading AI ambassador, before an audience of US l- lawmakers earlier this year. And over the summer, presidency stated that AI development should not be a solo performance by any single country but quote rather a symphony of global cooperation end quote. But such statements contradict the facts, and the facts are these. China has launched complex bot networks and media campaigns to turn American public opinion against AI and data centers. In August, for example, X disclosed a network of roughly two hundred thousand suspected fake accounts from China, including some two hundred of which spread anti-data center messages in American debates over electricity prices grid reliability and the costs and of ai infrastructure. Alongside these bot campaigns, Beijing's English language propaganda outlets have been vigorously campaigning against American ai data centers. While China uses state media to warn US audiences that data centers are environmentally and economically dangerous, it simultaneously subsidizes up to half of the energy costs of its own ai data centers at home. Running parallel to China's propaganda campaign, the non-profits and political groups supported by Neville Roy Singham, a Shanghai-based Marxist, have waged an all-out information war on the US technology industry. Over the last decade, Singham has funneled two hundred and seventy-eight million dollars into a network of US-based nonprofits, that the New York Times identified as a " global web of Chinese propaganda". Singham himself has openly collaborated with Chinese Communist Party members and shares office space with a Chinese propaganda agency. The leaders of his nonprofits have openly collaborated with CCP media to rail against US policies. And those same nonprofits have been amplifying anti-data center messaging for months that directly echos the CCP's own messaging on American data centers. Deeply enmeshed in the anti-data center effort is the Party for Socialism and Liberation, or PSL, a Marxist-Leninist group with extensive foreign ties whose stated mission is to dismantle American capitalism. and whose leadership is drawn directly from the executives of Syngham's nonprofits. To put the PSL's impact in concrete terms, it has been a critical mobilizer in anti-data center efforts that delayed, scaled back, or blocked approximately twenty-three point six billion dollars in proposed AI infrastructure investment in roles ranging from lead organizer to one member of a broader coalition. Our research tracked twenty-one separate PSL campaigns across fourteen states that have contributed to ten data center moratoria, one permanent data center ban, and four rejected or scrapped data center projects. Before closing, I wish to be clear on one final point. Our research findings do not indicate the opposition to data centers is wholly astroturfed. Indeed, much American opposition to data centers is indisputably authentic. But two things can be true at once. First, there is a foreign influence campaign against American AI AI. And second, Americans have genuine concerns about the data center build-out that need to be heard. Acknowledging the reality of the former does not negate the reality of the latter. There are both organic and inorganic strains in the debate surrounding data centers in American AI and the American people deserve transparency to to understand which is which. The findings of our research are admittedly disturbing. A party that advances positions aligned with the Chinese government amplifies its messaging and seeks to abolish the US government through revolutionary means has distorted the discourse between public officials and American citizens on the topic of artificial intelligence. The network's methods and motivations in waging this campaign are worthy of investigation and I hope that this committee will be able to shine a spotlight on both. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to share my findings. I look forward to taking your questions.

Thank you uh very much, Mister Lyman uh and Mister Sherman, you are now recognized for five minutes for an opening statement.

Mister Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the chance to summarize my testimony on the impact of President Trump's stunning foreign conflicts of interest on our national security and how this corruption harms American safety and prosperity. My name is Donald Sherman. I am President of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a nonpartisan organization dedicated to fighting corruption and promoting ethical government. In the wake of revelations that President Donald Trump made over two billion dollars monetizing the presidency in twenty twenty five including over one hundred seventeen million dollars from overseas business today's hearing on foreign malign influences must examine the biggest enabler of them, the president himself. According to a Reuters poll, sixty nine percent of Americans believe Trump's business interests influence his decisions as president hardly surprising, when you look at the extent of his conflicts. Trump has expanded his bent business empire to profit off the presidency, creating fifty nine new companies since winning the twenty twenty four election. More than a dozen Trump branded real estate projects have been announced since Trump became a candidate for president again in twenty twenty two. The world has received the message that our government is for sale. Last year, the president accepted a luxury airplane gifted from a foreign nation. What could be a better analogy for the Trojan horse than that? The Secret Service had enough security concerns about the plane that they asked the president not to use the donated jet in the middle of an international trip. National security experts have repeatedly warned about the risks associated with Trump's business relationships with foreign nations. In Vietnam, for example, President Trump's company applied for five new trademarks after the administration lowered its tariffs on Vietnamese goods in twenty twenty five. Days before President Trump's second inauguration, an investment vehicle backed by the United Arab Intermer Emirates National Security Advisor, bought a forty nine percent stake in Trump's crypto venture, World Liberty Financial, for five hundred million dollars. Months later, the Trump administration handed over America's most sensitive AI chips technology to the UAE despite national security concerns. This type of corrupt profiteering from influence seekers is unprecedented, dangerous, and in some cases against the law. Richard Painter, former chief ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, warned that most of Trump's business appears to be in countries with quote, authoritarian governments or democratic governments gravitating toward authoritarianism, presenting serious national security challenges to the United States. It was this very concern that foreign financial entanglements could corrupt the presidency and country, which led our founders to enshrine the foreign emoluments clause in our constitution, barring the president and other senior federal officials from receiving profits, gains, or advantages from foreign governments without the consent of Congress. Trump's web of conflicts illustrates how right they were to be concerned. As one former National Security Agency official noted, quote, " Fundamentally, ethics policy ethics policies governing the executive and his cabinet are national security protections." Adding that, " Our founders viewed financial relationships between foreign nations and officials in offices of public trust, as a threat to the existence of the republic itself." End quote. While President Trump is certainly the primary source of these conflicts, his family's profiteering is also deeply concerning. For example, a company tied to Don Jr. received a six hundred twenty million dollar loan in taxpayer funds from the Pentagon after a senior White House staffer reportedly intervened. Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who serves as special envoy for peace, is involved in many of America's most serious national security decisions. Meanwhile, His private investment firm benefits from a two billion dollar investment, Kushner secured from Saudi Arabia's sovereign wealth fund. Special Envoy Kushner is reportedly soliciting even more foreign governments for his firm, yet there's still no evidence he's complied with the law and filed a financial disclosure statement, which would allow Congress and the public to question any potential conflicts. The examples of profiteering are seemingly endless. And the President has fired inspectors general, tasked with investigating corruption, and left IG vacancies at key agencies like State, NSA, and USAID. In closing, there is important work Congress can do to protect our national security, including conducting vigorous oversight of Trump conflicts, passing legislation to enforce the emoluments clauses, and additional legislation to ensure that companies owned or operated by a president or their immediate family members, are not eligible to receive government contracts. I urge Congress to take these actions to restore accountability and protect our national security and I look forward to your questions.

Gentleman's time has expired. Um with that um we are gonna have a uh short moment of business here. We do have some folks who have not verbally disrupted the committee as of yet uh but uh are uh in the determination of the of the clerk uh the uh the committee is going to suspend while the capital police restore uh order in the committee uh this has been deemed to be a protest by the clerk because of the nature of the shirts and what is happening now having having lived through this this morning with secretary Besant with four interruptions with people being forcibly pulled out uh within the first minute of his testimony i do appreciate the cooperation um but uh obviously um code pink and adjacent groups uh have made a living disrupting hearings and uh that is not gonna be stood for so uh mister gonzalez i'd like to start with you uh for americans who have never heard the name of uh nevil roy singham You started talking about the uh the Singham network, and it engages in those uh influence campaigns. And I'd like you to maybe unpack a little bit more what his connections to the Chinese Communist Party and the Cuban regime is, and some others. And you know, look, uh in Michigan we've uh we've become very uh familiar with a gentleman named Hassan Peiker, who has been coming into our state to campaign with a number of candidates. Um and uh and uh his time spent in China, I outlined in my opening statement as well. So, uh, uh, can you just enlighten us a little bit more about, uh, the Singham network?

Yes, it's extensive. It's got, um, it's got media outfits, such as Breakthrough News and the People's Dispatch, which are used to spread uh Russian and Chinese and Cuban propaganda in this country. Um, it uh, uh, According to Fox News today, and in fact this is many there are many many reports, it it has funded Code Pink, it funds the Answer Coalition, the People's Forum, and the Tri Tri-Continental Institute are two main things. The People's Forum is uh first of all is run by basically a Cuban agent, Manolo de los Santos, who spent many years in Havana, living in Havana, who who is constantly tweeting out pictures of himself with Cuba's puppet dictator Miguel Diaz-Canel, and I say puppet cuz Miguel Diaz-Canel is is a figurehead. The Castro family continues to run Cuba as if it were its own plantation. Um so the People's Forum one particular night, uh the night of April thirtieth, uh twenty twenty four, uh held a big rally for demonstrators who were coming from Colombia, in fact, Columbia University that is. They asked for the they delayed the the meeting for the people to arrive, Then they trained them, they gave them a Manolo Santos gave them a Cuban browsing speech. And then they they they gave them some there was some uh training on how to how to break into places and then they sent them they said go back and go back uptown. And they they they they they did. And then couple hours later they they they took over Hamilton Hall, but it disrupted Columbia. Uh the Columbia was not able to hold a a graduation that year for parents who had paid

Yeah.

uh, whatever you get paid to go to Columbia now, four hundred thousand dollars, and your your daughter or son, and and not be able to have a graduation because of all this. Uh, uh, uh, it's it really is a, uh, but that's a pattern. It's a pattern,

Right.

they disrupt our streets, they disrupt our campuses, they they push Chinese and Russian propaganda to unsuspecting Americans.

OK. Thank you. Um, uh, Mister Lyman, I'm gonna turn to you, you know, we have a unique situation in Michigan. There was something that was passed, uh, called Public Act two thirty three. Uh, it was a Gover- Governor Whitmer-led effort to pull away siting uh from local control uh of of uh wind and solar and battery facilities in Michigan and put it in with the Mi- Michigan Public Service Commission and it's that kind of things that have raised the uh ire of my constituents when it comes to data centers and what's been going on there and and on the ground in Southwest Michigan and I agree they have real concerns about energy use, water use, land use, uh, by these data centers. Um, and uh, they're they're legitimate concerns in things that should be discussed and and explored. But I I I I I truly don't believe that the Communist, uh, Chinese Communist Party shares the same legitimate concerns that my constituents do about the welfare of Americans as they race to catch up with the United States, uh, in the AI race. Can you please explain the CCP's connection to the AI data center debate, and do you think that the CCP's uh, what is their ultimate goal? You talked about transparency earlier, but I don't think that's transparent.

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the question. It's important for American citizens to understand that the Syngam network will campaign against certain technologies here in the US, while saying nothing of those technologies back in China, and data centers is a prime example. So we've seen that in the Syngam network, its non-profit groups have been campaigning against American AI data centers for years. At the same time, they've said nothing about the data center built out back in China. That's what's fascinating about China's own state media propaganda efforts. China has several English language propaganda arms that have for months been messaging against data centers, talking about how much data centers could rel- raise electricity prices and how much water they consume. Yet that same China state media has been celebrating back home major milestones reached with Chinese AI development. And that same Chinese government has been subsidizing the use of energy by AI data centers by up to fifty percent. So that is a documented double standard that we've seen with the Syngam Network's advocacy for years now. They've been campaigning not just against uh American AI data centers, but multiple arms of the US technology sphere uh for years. And they always campaign against the US companies, but never criticize the Chinese companies themselves.

Uh, we s- see that exact same thing when it comes to power uh production as well. Um. And my time has expired, Mister Johnson, I'm gonna come to you on a written uh question about uh the Communist Party's united front work department and what it is and uh their influence here, and with some examples. So we'll get that to you in writing and I'd remind all of the members are allowed to submit uh questions in writing through the chair to our witnesses today. Uh with that uh the chair recognizes the ranking member uh Miss Kamlager-Duff for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I also would just like to respectfully, um, register my objection to the removal of a few members of the public who were here, uh, exercising their freedom of speech by wearing T-shirts, but they certainly were not, um, being disruptive. Um, and that is something that Mister Gonzalez mentioned about supporting freedom of speech. So, I think it is harder to combat malign foreign influence when you have conflict of interest happening in the most high uh echelons of your government. Um and in this case I'm talking about the president. So, Mister Sherman, picking up on your and my remarks, in the UAE case, we've reported investments in the president's family's crypto business, followed by US decisions involving advanced AI chip exports to the UAE. including chips destined for G forty two. So from a corruption and a conflict of interest perspective, what safeguards could or would or should we expect to see to ensure a president's personal financial interests cannot influence national security or export control decisions?

Thank you for the question. Uh, I think it's important to note that, um, this is not a new concern. Uh, this is a concern that dates back to the founding of this country. It is why the foreign emoluments clause exists in the constitution, because our founders were afraid that gifts might uh, you know, lead a president or senior officials to view foreign nations in a positive light, or worse, that gifts and payments of a certain magnitude might lead to uh foreign leaders actually having financial leverage. over government officials. And so the this concern was so significant that it was codified in our founding documents. Now, of course, the foreign emoluments uh clause of the constitution has an explicit role for Congress. Congress should be asserting itself to register its approval or disapproval of the president operating a business that continues to solicit money from individuals in foreign governments or tied to foreign governments. Um, but we have not seen that.

So speaking of gifts and gifts of great magnitude, this four hundred million dollar Boeing seven forty-seven provided by Qatari for the president's use. So explain to the committee the concerns that the American people have and that members of Congress should have about a foreign government giving a sig- a sitting president a gift of this magnitude you started but four hundred million dollars is a lot. I would think he would wanna get something in return for that.

W- well, I think the committee understands the concern because the title of this hearing invokes the Trojan horse, which was famously a gift, uh, a malign gift. Um, and so I think, uh, uh, I think it's frankly quite clear, um, the potential impact of a gift on a senior federal official. One uh is the sort of influence seeking, right? Is this person uh, you know, that receives the gift putting American interests first? Or are they uh being influenced by the flattery of receiving the gift? But in the worst case scenario, as exemplified by the Trojan horse example, it's not just a gift, it is a malign gift that is uh intended to undermine American interests. And so, you know, I I think for the American public, particularly as we are a nation at war, the president's continued acceptance of gifts demonstrates that our government is subject to foreign influence out in the open. Um, and if you have enough money to pay for it, you can get influence from uh or over and access to the um, the highest levels of our government. I think the best example of this is when the president of South Africa was in the Oval Office and he joked to the president following the Qatar episode, " I'm sorry, I don't have a plane to give you." This is the message that the president is sending

Mm.

to our allies, to our adversaries, to any foreign government seeking to influence our government, and more importantly, sending it to the American public, that our president at the highest levels can be leveraged by flattery, can be leveraged by gifts, can be leveraged by payments to his business.

It also seems to me like these gifts, these deals, I also referenced the Kazakhstan deal, and I'm sure there are probably a number of others. You said this president started fifty-nine businesses since he's been in office, but it also suggests that this president and this country and our national security is for sale. Um, and I certainly would hope that that's not the case. And with that, Mister Chair, I yield back.

And only this time is expired. With that, uh the gentleman from Guam, Mister Moylan, is recognized for five minutes.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, and thank you for you for being here today. I appreciate your testimonies and I'm from the island of Guam. So we are very familiar with the PRC. We're the most western soil. I I just came in last week. It took me pretty much a day to get from Guam to DC. So that's how far we are at, uh, from Conus. And be- we got a strategic location because of, you know, where - where we're at, since - since, uh, Spanish-American War, since World War Two, since Vietnam War, uh, to today. And Guam stands at the forefront of this PRC expansionist activities in the Pacific. And this means Guam, alongside our other Pacific islands, are uniquely positioned to address malign influence. operations that the PRC may be conducting in this critical region. We're it, we're the last US oil. I'm glad we have allies, but we're the last US oil in the second island chain. So, um, addressed to you, Mister, uh, Gonzalez, and also Mister, you, Doctor Johnson, in your research, what kind of influence operations do you see the PRC conducting specifically in the Pacific Islands? And what are they testing out, uh, that they can prove to show uh the CONUS US that, you know, we have these capabilities. And what do you think Congress should be our best response to these kind of activities? Sir?

Uh, thank you, Representative Moreland. I've never been to Guam. I love to visit. I um, I don't have an answer to you cuz I haven't looked into it, but I I assure you as of today, I'm going to try to dig in because I I've heard that China is is getting involved in Guam. I'm sorry to hear that. You're right to raise the question. Maybe my colleagues here can give you a better answer. I will look this up and I can I can contact your office later if you like.

Um, yep. Uh, thank you very much for the question, Representative. Uh, I think speaking broadly, um, uh, to cite other examples, uh, more or less in the neighborhood that I'm familiar with, uh, the Australians have serious concerns about, uh, China's activity in Papua New Guinea and other Pacific islands. I think the main focus of concern is that there is, uh, a visible combination of, uh, political, uh, relationship building, followed then by, uh, economic cooperation agreements and security agreements that are the main concern, uh, at least of the Australian government in the region and, you know, to the extent that this impacts our national security as well, uh, I, I would think that they would be of concern here, here in Washington as they are to you. Uh, the, Only piece I would add there from a a broader strategic perspective, um, is simply that, uh, China views island chains in its neighborhood as, uh, as, uh, geographical features, uh, strategic features that contain China. Um, and so, uh, building influence in the Pacific islands and, you know, pushing, uh, farther eastward from Beijing's perspective, uh, is is high on the geostrategic list. So it's it's absolutely the case. i would agree that we should be concerned about events in guam

i appreciate your research continuing into that area and i thank you for your responses and yes uh uh the united states is very concerned guam is the homeland we're the oldest us territory there there is uh we have a missile defense uh our own golden dome being built in order to deter our aggressors we had the marines coming on over most of them coming on over from okinawa uh to protect the homeland as well we had the The Marine Corps barracks hasn't been built in the last seventy plus years is being built on Guam. We have an army battalion for our missile defense system coming into the island as well. We are a target. If if we were defenseless or not, we are a target. So, as your research continues, I really appre- appreciate that too. Uh, so, basically, um, in the increasing global and interconnected world, how can the United States continue to freely innovate and collaborate with different allies throughout the world, like the Pacific, uh, mitigating issues like forced technology transfers. Mister Gomez.

Well, we have a presence, uh, already in Asia, as you know, we're in Okinawa. Uh, we're also, um, uh, have a, an alliance with, uh, with Thailand, and, uh, we, we're not going to abandon that part of the Pacific to, to the Chinese. We have made that very clear. Um, the, I guess for the Japanese would be the best example, although with the Taiwanese as well, they're great producers of chips. Uh, we have a a a a a very, the the the the economics have really tightly knit in in our uh our industries with the the chip production in Taiwan but obviously that could be increased. And I'd love to find out more about what role Ch- Guam could play in that.

I, thank you all. Gentlemen, uh, thank you, Mister Chairman.

Gentlemen, the time has expired, uh with that, the gentleman from Texas, Mister Self, is recognized for five minutes.

Uh, thank you Mister Chairman and uh thank you Mister Gonzalez for risi uh raising the issue of the Red-Green Alliance. Uh, nobody wants to talk about this, the green part of the Red-Green Alliance. Uh, I will tell you I consider it one of the existential threats to our constitutional republic. Um, Frankly, if you wanna know the plans of of Islam across the United States, I have dozens of videos that I can share with you where they openly preach sedition against the US Constitution, the US government. This is a political ideology. Uh, let me explain it to you real simply. They divide the world in two, the Dar al-Islam and the Dar al-Harm. And They are commanded to wage war against the Dar al-Harb, which is the non-Muslim world. Uh, most of uh, and Sharia, as we refer to it, is the forcing function of that uh, worldwide um, command to dominate whatever culture they go into. Just recently, the Mayor of New York, Mister Mamdani, made comments that illustrate uh what I'm talking about. Uh he inverted the moral values of ICE in our immigration system. Uh played the victim card, says that border security is immoral, ICE is immoral, immigration laws are immoral. And this is what we are up against, and yet no one wants to talk about this. Uh, I think that it is a major issue. And uh, Mister Gonzalez, as I say, I appreciate you bringing it up. And I would uh ask you to expound upon your comments and your written testimony, if you would.