An investigation by the Oversight Project linked visitors of left-wing activist group headquarters to the Chinese government and Iran.
The Oversight Project is a right-wing advocacy group that has contributed to lawsuits against former President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden, among others.
In data dump on X, the organization placed visitors of two activist groups in San Francisco to multiple locations in Iran and a Chinese consulate stateside.
'The only solution to the deepening crisis of capitalism is the socialist transformation of society.'
The Oversight Project sifted through ad data from devices belonging to visitors of the headquarters of two groups: the Party for Socialism and Liberation, and Act Now to Stop War and End Racism, aka ANSWER.
Data from visitors of the San Francisco headquarters, which the Oversight Project alleged hosts both groups, included one device that visited the activists' location twice in a year and a half — while having also visited Iran, with a whopping 213 data points across the country.
The right-wing group said the data "strongly supports that the device was in Iran" and not faking its location, which could be accomplished through the use of a VPN, for example.
The Oversight Project also found connecting data from the left-wing headquarters to the nearby Chinese consulate.
RELATED: Pete Hegseth obliterates media over leaked assessment of US strike on Iran
"Another device had data points at the ANSWER/PSL location and at a building next door" and "also had 58 data points in the San Francisco consulate of the People's Republic of China," the Oversight Project wrote on X.
The Oversight Project described the activist groups as "central to street resistance," while claiming they are "allegedly funded by a CCP propagandist."
On their About page, the Party for Socialism and Liberation says it believes "the only solution to the deepening crisis of capitalism is the socialist transformation of society."
The group also includes guidance for those who are facing deportation at the hands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, part of a campaign called "Don't Open for ICE."
"One of the most important things to remember is to refuse to open the door unless ICE has a signed warrant from a judge," the organization says.
At the same time, ANSWER boasts a near 25-year history of organizing protests and says it fights against "racist and religious profiling," advocates "immigrant and workers' rights," and supports "economic and social justice for all."
RELATED: China's greatest export isn’t steel — it’s industrial theft
The Consulate General of the People's Republic of China, located at 1450 Laguna Street in San Francisco, is about a 20-minute drive from ANSWER's publicly listed headquarters in the city at 2969 Mission Street. It is not clear, however, that ANSWER and PSL officially operate out of the same location, as the Oversight Project claimed.
Blaze News reached out to both ANSWER and the PSL and asked if they have received any monetary support from Iranian or Chinese entities, or if they have had contact with officials from other countries in any capacity. Neither answered.
This article will be updated with any applicable replies.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
“The View” co-hosts Sara Haines and Alyssa Farah Griffin now know how the rest of us feel.
Audiences have endured an endless string of fake news stories, crazed conspiracies, and more from the toxic ABC News product.
The scariest part for tomorrow’s filmmakers? 'A Better Tomorrow' required just 30 people to complete.
We roll our eyes, laugh, and stare agape, wondering why the top brass isn’t ashamed to put the network’s name on the product.
Haines and Griffin must be numb to it all, enduring it five days a week while the paychecks keep clearing. Last week, however, Whoopi Goldberg’s commentary proved too much for even them.
The trouble began with the panel debating the latest Israeli attacks on Iran and the prospect of the U.S. entering the fray. That led to this bewildering exchange between Goldberg and Griffin.
Griffin began by explaining how the human rights abuses in Iran are far worse than what citizens face in the U.S. It’s a “the sky is blue” comment, except uber-patriot Goldberg disagreed.
GOLDBERG: We've been known in this country to tie gay folks to the car!
FARAH GRIFFIN: I’m sorry, but where the Iranian regime is today is nothing compared to the United States!
GOLDBERG: Listen, I'm sorry! They used to just keep hanging black people!
FARAH GRIFFIN: It’s not even the same! I couldn’t step foot wearing this outfit in Iran right now ... I think it's very different to live in the United States in 2025 than it is in Iran.
GOLDBERG: Not if you're black!
HOSTIN: Not for everybody!
GOLDBERG: Not if you're black!
Haines jumped in, trying to bring sanity to the discussion, but Goldberg wouldn’t budge.
This really happened on a major television network, not a YouTube channel with 25 indifferent subscribers ...
RELATED: The best destinations for celebrities fleeing the Donald Trump regime
U.S.-based film studios are treading carefully vis-à-vis AI. Very carefully.
They don’t want to be seen as pushing digital creativity over human inspiration, and the recent industry strikes offered limited protections for cast and crew against the AI revolution.
China has no such compunctions.
In fact, the China Film Foundation recently announced two new AI-driven projects: the restoration of 100 martial arts films and the first completely AI-produced animated film: “A Better Tomorrow: Cyber Border.”
The scariest part for tomorrow’s filmmakers? “A Better Tomorrow” required just 30 people to complete. Now, recall watching any MCU film and seeing the waves of names floating by during the end credits.
It’s no wonder Hollywood is very, very nervous ...
Find a spouse who will love you as much as Francis Ford Coppola loves “Megalopolis.” The auteur’s 2024 film earned rough reviews and an even worse commercial drubbing. It’s still Coppola’s baby, despite it costing him tens of millions.
Literally.
With a box office tally of only $14 million, the Mega-flop didn't come close to making back its estimated $120 million budget — most of which came from the “Apocalypse Now” director's own pockets. That’s commitment, and his relationship with the film is far from over.
Coppola has yanked “Megalopolis” from its brief VOD platform run and refuses to let the movie be shown on streaming platforms or Blu-ray. Instead, he’s about to start a limited U.S. tour where he’ll screen the film and provide post-movie commentary.
We’ll know it’s true love if he announces a sequel during the tour ...
Thoughts and prayers go out to Nathan Lane. He just caught a severe case of Trump derangement syndrome.
The TV/film/Broadway actor is currently appearing in “Mid-Century Modern,” Hulu’s new gay sitcom. Lane is proud of the show but fears it could come to a crashing halt at any point. Is he worried about low ratings or disinterested Hulu executives? Perhaps the show’s budget is too expensive for the streamer?
No. He thinks Orange Man Bad might make it disappear.
“Is it going to change any minds? I don’t know about that. Trump, if he knew we were on the air, would probably try to shut it down, come after Hulu. But I think it’s a great thing to have right now, in the midst of books being banned and, ‘Don’t say this and don’t say gay and don’t do that.’ I think it’s a perfect time for a show like this.”
Maybe Lane should press Scott Bessent about his fears. Bessent is Trump’s treasury secretary, an openly gay man. He seems quite happy to be where is he today. Can Lane say the same?
The notification chimes. Another algorithmically selected product appears in your feed, something you never knew you wanted until this moment. You pause, finger hovering over the “buy now” button. Is this truly what you desire or just what the algorithm has decided you should want?
We’re standing at a fascinating turning point in human history. Our most advanced technologies — often criticized for trapping us in cycles of shallow wants and helpless determinism — could offer us unprecedented freedom to rediscover what we truly desire. “Agentic AI” — those systems that can perceive, decide, and act on their own toward goals — isn't just another tech advancement. It might actually liberate our attention and intention.
Rather than passively accepting AI's influence, we can actively shape AI systems to reflect and enhance our deeply held values.
So what exactly is agentic AI? Think of it not just as a fancy calculator or clever chatbot, but as a digital entity with real independence.
These systems perceive their environment, make decisions, and take actions with significant autonomy. They learn from experiences, adapt to new information on the fly, and pursue complex goals without our constant direction. Self-driving cars navigate busy streets, trading algorithms make split-second financial decisions, and research systems discover scientific principles on their own.
These aren't just tools any more. They're becoming independent actors in our world.
To understand this shift, I want to introduce you to two key thinkers: Marshall McLuhan, who famously said “the medium is the message,” and René Girard, who revealed how we tend to want what others want — a phenomenon he called “mimetic desire.” Through their insights, we can see how agentic AI works as both a medium and a mediator, reshaping our reality while influencing what we desire. If we understand how agentic AI will continue to shape our world, we can maintain our agency in a world increasingly shaped by technological advances.
McLuhan showed us that technology’s structure, scale, and speed shape our consciousness more profoundly than whatever content it carries. The railway didn’t just introduce transportation; it created entirely new kinds of cities and work.
Similarly, agentic AI isn't just another tool. It's becoming an evolving environment whose very existence transforms us.
McLuhan offers the example of electric light. It had no “content” in the conventional sense, yet it utterly reshaped human existence by eliminating darkness. Agentic AI similarly restructures our world through its core qualities: autonomy, adaptability, and goal-directedness. We aren't just using agentic AI; we’re increasingly living inside its operational logic, an environment where non-human intelligence shapes our decisions, actions, and realities.
Neil Postman, who built on McLuhan’s work, reminds us that while media environments powerfully shape us, we aren't just passive recipients: “Media ecology looks into how media of communication affect human perception, understanding, feeling, and value.” By understanding these effects, we can maintain our agency within them. We can be active readers of the message rather than just being written by it.
One big impact is on how we make sense of the world. As agentic AI increasingly filters, interprets, and generates information, it becomes a powerful participant in constructing our reality. The challenge is maintaining shared reality while technology increasingly forges siloed, personalized worlds. While previous technological advances contributed to this siloing, AI offers the possibility of connectivity. Walter Ong's concept of "secondary orality" suggests AI might help create new forms of connection that overcome the isolating aspects of earlier digital technologies.
While McLuhan helps us understand how agentic AI reshapes our perception, René Girard offers a framework for understanding how it reshapes what we want.
Girard’s theory of mimetic desire suggests that human desire is rarely spontaneous. Instead, we learn what to want by imitating others — our "models." This creates a triangle: us, the model we imitate, and the object of desire.
Now, imagine agentic AI entering this dynamic. If human history has been a story of desire mediated by parents, peers, and advertisements, agentic AI is becoming a significant new mediator in our digital landscape. Its ability to learn our preferences, predict our behavior, and present curated choices makes it an influential model, continuously shaping our aspirations.
RELATED: If AI isn’t built for freedom, it will be programmed for control
Peter Thiel, who studied under Girard at Stanford, suggests awareness of these dynamics can lead to more authentic choices. “The most successful businesses come from unique, non-mimetic insights,” Thiel observes. By recognizing how AI systems influence our desires, we can more consciously choose which influences to embrace and which to question, moving toward greater authenticity.
Look at recommendation engines, the precursors to full-blown agentic AI. They already operate on Girardian principles by showing us what others have bought or liked, making those items more desirable to us. Agentic AI takes this farther. Through its autonomous actions and pursuit of goals, it can demonstrate desirability.
The key question becomes: Is your interest in a hobby, conviction about an issue, or lifestyle aspiration truly your own? And more importantly, can you tell the difference, and does it matter if it brings you genuine fulfillment?
The convergence of AI as both medium and mediator creates unprecedented possibilities for human-AI partnership.
Andrew Feenberg's critical theory of technology offers a constructive path forward. He argues that technologies aren't neutral tools but are laden with values. However, he rejects technological determinism, emphasizing that these values can be redesigned through what he calls “democratic rationalization,” the process by which users reshape technologies to better reflect their values.
“Technology is not destiny but a scene of struggle,” Feenberg writes. "It is a social battlefield on which civilizational alternatives are debated and decided." Rather than passively accepting AI's influence, we can actively shape AI systems to reflect and enhance our deeply held values.
This vision requires thoughtful design guided by human wisdom. The same capabilities that could liberate us could create more sophisticated traps. The difference lies not in the technology itself but in the values and intentions that shape its development. By drawing on insights from McLuhan, Girard, Postman, Ong, Thiel, Feenberg, and others, we can approach this evolving medium not with fear or passive acceptance, but with creative engagement.
The future of agentic AI isn't predetermined. It’s ours to shape as a technology that enhances rather than diminishes our humanity, that serves as a partner rather than a master in our ongoing quest for meaning, connection, and flourishing.
The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.
Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.
We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.
It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.
Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.
In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.
The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.
The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.
The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.
RELATED: Iran fires missiles at US troops on bases in Qatar and Iraq
To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.
As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.
They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.
If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.
This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.
We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.
Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.
That would be catastrophic.
The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.
The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?
Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.
Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.
We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.
The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.
He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.
Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.
President Trump last week announced a deal in principle with China: The U.S. will impose 55% tariffs on Chinese goods, while China will respond with a 10% tariff on American goods. In return, China will continue supplying rare earth minerals and magnets, and Chinese students will keep attending American universities. The deal’s finer details remain in flux.
Noticeably absent from the agreement? Any commitment from China to protect American intellectual property. That’s no accident. China denies stealing American IP altogether, chalking up clear examples of theft to normal “market behavior.”
Trump is the first president in half a century to take trade seriously. But tariffs alone won’t fix this.
And in a way, they’re right. IP theft is normal in China. Some of the country’s most successful firms, like Huawei, were built on stolen American technology. For the Chinese Communist Party, theft isn’t an embarrassment. It’s a strategy.
In 1983, much of China was still preindustrial. No engines, no tractors, no cars. Labor happened by hand or with the help of animals. Rural China looked a lot like colonial America.
But in just a few decades, China transformed into an industrial superpower. It now produces three times more industrial output than the U.S., including 24 times more steel and far more oceangoing ships. It has the world’s largest economy by purchasing power.
How did they do it? Theft.
RELATED: Without tariffs, the US is defenseless in an economic war
A 2024 House Homeland Security Committee report estimates that China steals between $300 billion and $600 billion in American IP annually. A 2017 report from the Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property drew similar conclusions. If we use a midpoint estimate and track the losses back to 2001 — when China joined the World Trade Organization — America has lost nearly $10 trillion in intellectual property to China.
China gets this technology in several ways. First, through direct espionage. Only 29% of these operations target military secrets. The rest focus on industrial and commercial tech: manufacturing methods, chemical formulas, blueprints. Espionage alone accounts for roughly $180 billion in losses each year.
Second, through counterfeiting. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 60% of all counterfeit goods sold worldwide come from China. In the U.S., that number rises to 87%. Counterfeiting costs U.S. businesses up to $291 billion per year.
Third, through piracy on Chinese e-commerce platforms. The United States Trade Representative reports that American rights-holders lose billions thanks to widespread digital theft of films, music, software, books, and branded products. Of the $2.16 trillion in Chinese e-commerce sales in 2024, roughly 40% were pirated or counterfeit. That’s $864 billion in lost profits — just last year.
Americans deserve to benefit from their own labor and ingenuity. But China continues to loot our IP with impunity, and our leaders let it happen.
Beyond outright theft, China siphons off American technology through strategic corporate acquisitions and forced technology transfers.
The U.S. runs a trade deficit with China of more than $300 billion annually. To cover it, we sell assets — ownership stakes in American companies. Chinese investors target U.S. tech and industrial firms, acquire shares, then funnel proprietary information back to China. Once the intellectual property is transferred, they sell off their holdings.
Technically legal. Strategically disastrous.
China also compels U.S. companies to “partner” with Chinese firms when setting up operations inside the country. The Chinese side runs daily operations and learns the ropes. In exchange, Americans share their tech. Eventually, the Chinese copy the technology, replicate the products, and compete directly with the very companies that taught them.
That’s how Huawei rose to prominence. The company reverse-engineered American products, then used its home-field advantage to grow into the world’s third-largest smartphone maker.
China’s strategy works. And American businesses, addicted to short-term profits, keep falling for it. The consequences aren’t just economic — they’re geopolitical. This is how the CCP turned a rural backwater into a peer competitor.
Trump is the first president in half a century to take trade seriously. But tariffs alone won’t fix this. As I argue in my book “Reshore,” the only way to win this fight is to bring America’s factories home. Reshoring means economic independence. It also cuts off China’s access to the technology they’ve been stealing for decades.
Until then, we’re funding our own decline.
The globalist fairy tale is finally unraveling — and not a moment too soon.
For decades, Americans were sold the shiny promise of globalization: open markets, booming trade, cheaper goods, and peace through economic integration. But behind the glittering sales pitch was a brutal reality — the slow, deliberate hollowing out of the American middle class.
Trump’s tariffs are not just about trade. They’re about rebuilding what our elites sold off piece by piece.
Enough of this.
President Donald Trump’s recent announcement on tariffs sent the elites — those who profited most from this decades-long experiment — into full panic mode, and for good reason. Their gravy train may finally be running out of track.
This isn’t about economic theory. This is about the lives, livelihoods, and dignity of the American people — especially those in towns and cities that once hummed with the sound of industry.
The North American Free Trade Agreement was the appetizer in a global feast that served American manufacturing to foreign competitors on a silver platter. Even President Bill Clinton, at the NAFTA signing ceremony in 1993, seemed eager to get past the domestic details and embrace the coming wave of globalization.
By the early 2000s, the United States was importing at unprecedented rates. Today, the trade deficit with the European Union alone is $235 billion. That’s not trade — that’s surrender. Our deficit with Europe hasn’t fallen below $100 billion since 2011.
None of this happened by accident.
It began with a handshake in 1972, when President Richard Nixon traveled to Mao Zedong’s China. At the time, China was riding bicycles and rationing rice. No one imagined that opening the door to trade would lead to the economic superpower we face today.
But by 2001, that door had been blasted open. China joined the World Trade Organization, committing to lower tariffs and removing trade barriers. American markets were flooded with cheap Chinese goods — and American workers were left holding an empty lunch pail.
The result was a trade deficit with China that ballooned to $295 billion last year. That’s the largest deficit we have with any country. Our total trade deficit in 2024 was a record $1.2 trillion — the fourth consecutive year topping $1 trillion.
The fallout from this one-sided relationship with China is staggering. A 2016 MIT study found that, in the decade following China’s World Trade Organization entry, the U.S. lost 2.4 million jobs — nearly a million in manufacturing alone. The researchers concluded that international trade makes low-skilled workers in America “worse off — not just temporarily, but on a sustained basis.”
You’d think a quote like that would be plastered across every office in Congress. But no. The political class — especially on the left — chose to ignore it.
Instead, they wring their hands in confusion when working-class Americans turn to a leader like Donald Trump. “Why are they so angry?” they ask, while standing atop the wreckage of towns they helped dismantle.
In Galesburg, Illinois, Maytag once employed 5,000 workers. The last refrigerator rolled off the line in 2004. The site is now rubble and weeds.
Youngstown, Ohio — once a titan of American steel — has lost 60% of its population since the 1970s. Gary, Indiana, once home to U.S. Steel’s largest mill, has over 10,000 abandoned buildings. In Flint, Michigan, over 80,000 GM jobs vanished. By 2016, over half of men ages 25 to 54 in Flint were unemployed. Buick City, once a symbol of industrial might, was demolished in 2002.
Detroit, once richer than Boston, is now 40% poorer. The U.S. auto parts industry lost 419,000 jobs in the decade after China joined the WTO.
Even NPR admitted that “the China Shock created what looked like miniature Great Depressions” in these areas.
Between 2000 and 2014, America lost 5 million manufacturing jobs — the steepest decline in American history.
Meanwhile, in the same time period, corporate profits soared 600%. CEO pay has ballooned to 290 times that of the average worker. In 1965, it was 21 times. Since 1978, CEO compensation has grown by over 1,000%. Regular worker pay? Just 24%.
They told us the rising tide would lift all boats. Turns out, it mostly lifted yachts. And the rest of the boats? Capsized.
This economic assault came with a steep psychological toll.
A 2017 Princeton study found a link between rising deaths of despair — suicide, alcoholism, drug overdoses — and job losses in trade-exposed areas.
Since 1999, overdose deaths in America have increased sixfold. In Ohio, they rose 1,000% between 2001 and 2017. The hardest-hit areas? Deindustrialized, working-class communities.
The American middle class is vanishing. In 1971, 61% of households were middle class. By 2023, it was just 51%. In 1950, manufacturing jobs made up 30% of total U.S. employment. Today, they make up just 8%.
RELATED: Why tariffs are the key to America’s industrial comeback
There are fewer Americans working in manufacturing today than there were in 1941 — before we entered World War II — despite our population more than doubling.
This collapse hit black workers especially hard. Between 1998 and 2020, more than 646,000 manufacturing jobs held by black Americans disappeared — a 30% loss in that sector.
Trump’s tariff push is a long-overdue confrontation with the failed consensus of globalization. For 25 years, the arrangement has been spectacular — for China and for U.S. corporations chasing cheap labor. But for America’s workers and towns, it has been catastrophic.
Yes, the corporate press is scoffing. CBS News recently “fact-checked” Trump and Vice President JD Vance’s claim that America has lost 90,000 factories since NAFTA. The correct number, they said, was actually 70,500.
Oh? Only 70,500? As if that’s supposed to be reassuring.
These aren’t merely statistics. These are livelihoods — entire communities turned into ghost towns. Every shuttered factory was once a promise of stability, dignity, and upward mobility. And with each closure, that promise was betrayed.
We’ve allowed globalization to crush the backbone of this country — the working men and women who don’t show up on CNBC but who built the very foundation we all stand on.
Trump’s tariffs are not just about trade. They’re about sovereignty. They’re about self-respect. They’re about rebuilding what our elites sold off piece by piece.
This is not a perfect plan. But it’s the first real attempt in decades to confront the human cost of globalization. It’s a wager that America can still choose dignity over dependence, self-sufficiency over servitude.
Let’s hope we’re not too late.
The United States invented GPS. But under Joe Biden, we ceded our leadership in critical technologies to China — and opened the door to disaster. With President Trump back in charge, we have a chance to correct course and secure the future of our economy and national defense.
GPS powers everything. From military operations to farmers in the field, from ATMs to Amazon delivery, satellite-based positioning underpins modern life. But the system has one glaring weakness: no backup. One solar flare, one jammed signal, one cyberattack could knock it out — and take everything with it. Microseconds of disruption could halt supply chains, stall air traffic, and put American lives at risk.
In his first term, Trump leapfrogged China in 5G development. Now we must do it again — with GPS.
The Chinese Communist Party knows it.
While Washington slept, China built a terrestrial backup to GPS — an old-school solution using low-frequency signals and bulky infrastructure, rooted in World War II-era tech. It’s not flashy. But it’s functional. And today, it gives Beijing an edge.
America now faces a choice: Copy China’s playbook — or leap ahead.
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr (R) laid out the stakes in a recent Fox News interview with Maria Bartiromo. “During the Biden years, we fell deeply behind China,” Carr said. “The good news is we have the playbook. President Trump came in his first term and said we must lead the world in 5G. We did exactly that. ... This Trump administration is going to step up again.”
Carr is right. We’ve seen this before. In his first term, Trump leapfrogged China in 5G development. Now we must do it again — with GPS.
That starts with backing a 5G-based backup for GPS. Unlike China’s clunky eLoran system, a 5G-based solution reflects American innovation. It uses ground-based infrastructure and existing networks to deliver a wide-scale, secure, and reliable alternative to GPS — without costing taxpayers a dime. Private industry could roll it out before the end of Trump’s term.
In other words: It’s shovel-ready, future-proof, and 100% Made in America.
Not everyone wants that. Some voices in the policy debate are pushing China’s model instead. And they’re not just misguided — they’re compromised.
As Breitbart recently reported, a coalition of anti-Trump interests and China-linked entities has tried to stall U.S. progress on GPS backup technology. One group, the Resilient Navigation and Timing Foundation, consistently attacks 5G solutions. Unsurprisingly, the group's founding members include UrsaNav — the very firm that helped build China and Russia’s eLoran networks.
RELATED: From Wuhan to Michigan: Feds nab ANOTHER Chinese scholar in alleged bio-material smuggling plot
These aren’t just competing policy proposals. They’re coordinated efforts to keep America vulnerable.
We didn’t win the Cold War by patching up the telegraph. We invented the internet. We didn’t defend our skies with rebuilt biplanes. We created stealth bombers and drones. The same principle applies here. This isn’t about replicating China’s last move. It’s about defining what comes next.
And we’ve already started.
Carr and the FCC have launched a formal proceeding to explore “positioning, navigation, and timing” alternatives. That builds on President Trump’s first-term legacy, when he signed bipartisan legislation to strengthen GPS resilience. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) called it “crucial to the national and economic security of the United States.”
That leadership set the standard. Now we must finish the job.
We face a clear choice. One path copies the Chinese Communist Party and locks us into outdated infrastructure. The other unleashes American ingenuity and secures our future through private-sector innovation and Trump-era vision.
Let’s not backtrack. Let’s build forward. Let’s lead again.
There are several areas where Trump and his team can improve to confront an increasingly aggressive Red China.
If cases targeting American energy continue to prevail, 'it could result in shutting down the oil industry.'
www.theblaze.com