
Chinese bioweapon smuggling case shows US 'trains our enemies,' 'learned nothing' from COVID: security expert
In response to the Department of Justice charging two Chinese nationals – including a University of Michigan research fellow – with allegedly smuggling a potential "agroterrorism" weapon into the U.S., national security experts tell Fox News Digital that the Trump administration must continue to take action to prevent American colleges and companies from "essentially educating and arming our chief adversary in the world."
"In some cases, it seems like we learned nothing from COVID," Christian Whiton, a former senior foreign policy advisor in the Bush and Trump administrations, told Fox News Digital. "We allow direct flights now from China to the U.S. mainland. Again, that is crazy. And the whole fact that we are allowing researchers, even in the realm of dealing with pathogens to have access anywhere in the United States, much less the universities, is pretty insane. It seems like a pre-COVID mindset."
The two Chinese nationals were charged Tuesday with smuggling Fusarium graminearum fungus, a dangerous biological pathogen and "known agroterrorism agent" responsible for billions of dollars in economic losses worldwide each year, through Detroit's airport. The noxious substance causes "head blight," a disease of wheat, barley, maize, and rice, according to federal prosecutors. In humans and livestock, exposure to its toxins causes vomiting, liver damage, and reproductive defects.
"It's a new take on Chinese espionage and sabotage of the US economy. But it's not a surprise. I think that China has failed to pull back on any of its aggressive activity. And this is something that the Trump administration probably wants to take into consideration," Whiton said of the case. "I think it's both the government and our universities have let down the American people."
Whiton told Fox News Digital that Chinese infiltration of U.S. institutions has been happening since at least the 1990s – when Chinese spies stole American nuclear secrets from Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico – and since then, "there's been this systemic desire to put Chinese nationals into especially these technical areas, technical universities." Whiton said Beijing does not consider only Chinese citizens as its agents, as "anyone of Chinese ethnicity" have been viewed as "fair game" to be recruited. He categorized the H1-B visa program as essentially a "scam," asserting that about a quarter are awarded to Chinese nationals who "end up at some of our high-tech companies."
Traditionally, Whiton explained, Republicans have believed universities should run themselves without political interference, but doing so has allowed such institutions to be taken over by left-wingers.
"Taxpayers are funding these things and shouldn't be forced to fund things that are anathema to their beliefs and what they know to be true. Things like we shouldn't train our enemies at taxpayer expense," Whiton said. "So, I think it goes along with Republicans being pretty wimpy in the past, but only more recently with the emergence of the new right and the MAGA movement finally taking a tougher stand on some of these left-wing universities."
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said the United States does not want to de-couple with China, though Beijing has a choice whether to be a reliable partner.
"The reality is China is kind of doing what it has always done," Whiton said. "So if we're looking for a change of Chinese conduct because of President Trump being in office, it just hasn't happened yet. So I can't say that's a surprise."
Last week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the Trump administration would "aggressively" revoke the student visas for Chinese nationals, "including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields." After a call with Chinese President Xi Jinping, which the White House said focused mostly on trade, President Donald Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Thursday that Chinese students were still coming and the U.S. would be "honored" to have them. Yet, the president said the students need to be properly "checked" and the administration wants lists of Chinese nationals admitted to schools, such as Harvard and Columbia, so that vetting can occur.
"That's a step in the right direction," Whiton said. "But in reality, we probably need to recognize these are our chief economic and security adversary in the world and take those visa numbers down closer to zero and start sending these people home."
Whiton said there is a "faulty assumption" that Chinese students would come to the United States, learn about American culture and bring an appreciation back home to China.
"In reality, they sort of come over here, they're in a bubble, they pick up technical skills, and then they go back to China and put them to use for either the military directly or for corporations that are either utilized by the Chinese military or that are trying to undermine U.S. technology companies," Whiton said. "We really are essentially educating and arming our chief adversary in the world."
Former Rep. Michelle Steel, a California Republican who served on the House foreign and intelligence committees, told Fox News Digital that Chinese students educated in the U.S. essentially return home without an appreciation for America.
"After they study here, they took all of our brains here, and they took everything back to their country, and they are using to attack United States. And they hate United States after that education. Guess what we are teaching in the universities? Not love United States!" Steel, who was born in Korea and grew up in Japan, told Fox News Digital. "They are studying some very sensitive things in our universities. We really had to vet them well."
In her eyes, U.S. universities have prioritized bringing in international students for economic gain.
"Because of all the money," she said. "They try to build their endowments, and they want to just show how big their research center is."
She cited the case against former Chair of Harvard University's Chemistry and Chemical Biology Department, Dr. Charles Lieber, who was convicted in 2023 of lying to federal authorities about his affiliation with the People's Republic of China's Thousand Talents Program and the Wuhan University of Technology (WUT) in Wuhan, China. Federal prosecutors said Lieber had been paid $1.5 million by the CCP and failed to report additional income of $50,000 payments per month from the WUT.
"It's not just at University of Michigan, but it's just everywhere," Steel said. "We cannot bring everybody in to these universities and studying together and helping to build CCP's military. That's just totally no-no, because you know what they're doing in the Pacific areas and African countries and South American countries. And they're just expanding everywhere. And we are the only one [who] can stop [it]. And I think President Trump is doing great job."
The former congresswoman pointed to how the House Select Committee on the CCP in 2023 uncovered a $220 million payment made by the Chinese government to the University of California at Berkeley to help build a massive, joint institute in China – funding which UC Berkeley failed to disclose under Section 117 of the Higher Education Act. She has advocated for legislation that would decrease the reporting requirement from $250,000 to $50,000.
Steel also noted that Stanford University – located in the heart of Silicon Valley in California – has a relationship with China's Peking University, which in turn has ties to the Chinese military and "goes straight into the nuclear program." The current chair of the House Select Committee on the CCP, Rep. John Moolenaar, R-Mich., penned a letter to Stanford in March over concerns about U.S. universities "admitting large numbers of Chinese nationals into advanced STEM programs, potentially at the expense of qualified Americans."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

USA Today
11 minutes ago
- USA Today
Republicans, be so for real. This embarrassing government is what you wanted?
Republicans, be so for real. This embarrassing government is what you wanted? | Opinion Is this really what Republicans still want? Are they so scared of trans people having rights or undocumented immigrants receiving due process they chose a government that won't stand up to tyranny? Show Caption Hide Caption Six takeaways from the President Donald Trump, Elon Musk feud From disappointment to threats, here are six takeaways from the public spat between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Anyone could have predicted that President Donald Trump's second term was going to be an absolute disaster. I doubt even Republicans realized it would be this bad. Amid Trump's feud with Elon Musk, our tanking economy and our dysfunctional Congress, it seems that the next three and a half years are going to be rough on the country. I have to imagine that some Republican voters have buyer's remorse but would never admit it. I also realize that, for many Republican voters, a chaotic government is better than one that's run by a Democrat. They would rather watch our country become an international laughingstock than vote for someone who would run a stable, albeit more liberal, government. They would rather have millions lose health care than have a Democrats in power. I'll be the first to admit that Kamala Harris wasn't a perfect presidential candidate, but she was competent. She was energetic. She could ensure the country stayed on its course and continued to be a place where people felt secure. We could have had that. And Republicans in Congress would have done their job. Instead, we have this. So, this far into Trump's chaotic reign, I have to ask. Is this really what Republicans wanted? President Donald Trump vs. Elon Musk. Really? In case you missed it, Trump and Musk have gone from inseparable to enemies in a matter of hours. Musk, who was previously charged with leading the Department of Government Efficiency, has gone on X (previously Twitter) to allege that Trump was included in the Jeffrey Epstein files and whine that the Republicans would have lost the election without him. Trump, in response, has threatened to cancel all of Musk's contracts with the federal government. It's almost entertaining, in the way high school drama is entertaining. If only the entire country weren't on the verge of suffering because of it. Opinion: Musk erupts, claims Trump is in the Epstein files. Who could've seen this coming? If Harris had been elected, I doubt she would have made a narcissistic man-child one of her closest advisers in the first place – not just because Musk endorsed Trump, but because he was and continues to be a liability. She wouldn't have created DOGE and then allowed it to be a threat to Americans. Republicans, however, were unwilling to acknowledge the baggage that came with having Musk on their side. Now we have the president of the United States embroiled in a childish social media battle with the world's richest man. Think about how stupid that makes the country look. Is this what Republicans wanted? Is that what they still want? Surely they knew that the Trump-Musk partnership, like many of Trump's alliances, was going to implode. They are so scared of progressivism that they would rather have pettiness and vindictiveness in the White House. The American economy is not doing well. You wanted this? Trump, ever the businessman, has decided that making everything more expensive is what will make our country great again. His tariffs are expected to cost the average family $4,000 this year, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. I thought Republicans were the party of the working class. I thought they were supposed to care about grocery prices and the cost of living. But with the insanity of Trump's tariffs, a cooling job market and tax cuts that protect the wealthy, it seems like nothing is actually getting better for the average American. Our economy actually shrank. Opinion: Who would want to have babies under a Trump administration? Not me. Again, Republicans, you really wanted this? You were so scared of a government that was slightly more liberal that you would let everything get more expensive for working families? What were you afraid of – taxing billionaires? Helping first-time homebuyers? Harris' 'opportunity economy'? It seems like none of you thought this through. Or, worse, you did. The Republican Congress is a joke Another element of Trumpism is the fact that Republicans in Congress seem to be fine with the way he is completely dismantling the United States government. They don't care that his One Big Beautiful Bill Act is going to add to the deficit, so long as it's a Republican putting us further into debt. Some of them, like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, failed to even read the bill before voting for it. Their lack of interest is so substantial that she just admitted it openly. Opinion: Why can't Democrats take advantage of all this obvious Republican failure? If Harris had been elected, there would be no need for Congress to monitor her every move (even if they're failing to do that with Trump). Instead, we may have seen a legislature that, while divided, was able to function. We would have had checks and balances and likely significantly fewer executive orders, none of which would have tried to rewrite the U.S. Constitution. Once again – is this really what Republicans still want? Are they so scared of the possibility of trans people having rights or undocumented immigrants receiving due process that they would choose a government that won't stand up to tyranny? Would they really elect a tyrant in the first place? They did, so I suppose they must be OK with all of it. I can't get over the fact that Republicans willingly chose chaos over stability. They would rather say they won than have a functioning government or a stable economy. They would rather see our country suffer than admit that Trump is a raging lunatic. That isn't patriotism – it's partisanship. They would rather give Musk billions in federal contracts than help Americans in any way. This is what nearly half the country chose for the rest of us. And it doesn't seem like anyone is embarrassed about it. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter: @sara__pequeno
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk's feud with Donald Trump is hugely damaging to Tesla but don't expect any action from the board
How should a corporate board respond to a CEO publicly insulting and shaming a sitting president? It's not a question that most need to consider, since few chief executives dare to directly criticize the White House. When CEOs do speak out against a federal directive, their messages are usually delivered behind closed doors, or in a collective open letter. But this week, Elon Musk changed all that and forced the issue in a prolonged public spat with Donald Trump. The pair had a much-anticipated falling out over Trump's budget, also referred to as the 'big beautiful bill,' on Thursday, which quickly got personal. Musk asked his social media followers if it was time to create a new political party, said that Trump's tariffs would cause a recession, and even claimed that Trump's name was in government documents about Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sexual offender. 'That is the real reason they have not been made public,' Musk wrote. The feud has already been costly for Musk and his many businesses, including Tesla. The automaker's shares took a tumble as the back-and-forth took over the news cycle, dropping 14% in on Thursday, and costing shareholders $150 billion. Now analysts warn that feuding with Trump could cost Tesla billions, considering that Trump could repeal electric vehicle tax credits and other measures that have boosted Tesla's earnings. The company could also face increasing regulatory obstacles around its autonomous driving vehicles, the technology that is meant to drive Tesla's future and has been cited by stock watchers as a reason for the stock's sustained eye-popping performance. Tesla bull and Wedbush analyst Dan Ives seemed to speak for investors early on Friday when he wrote in a research note: 'This needs to calm down.' At a regular company, there's a solid chance that the events of the last few days would spur a board to dismiss a CEO. But will the Tesla board fire Musk to protect public shareholders from potential damages? 'They should,' Charles Elson, founding director of the Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware, told Fortune. 'But they won't.' The Trump-Musk spat is just the latest in a series of events that have forced the question of what role Tesla's board actually plays in the company. 'Over the years, Musk's behavior has become more outrageous,' says Elson. 'The board's lack of response makes you wonder, 'Who are these people? Why are they there?'' It has long faced criticisms for being too close to Musk, and therefore willing to overlook numerous management issues. For instance, it famously approved Musk's much-disputed 2018 pay package for $56 billion, and has silently witnessed a year of high-profile divisive behavior from the chief executive that has led to public protests and customers distancing themselves from the company. And recent allegations about Musk's drug use echo reports that have surfaced in the past without putting Musk's role at risk. There are a few contributing factors as to why that is. Musk is a controlling shareholder in Tesla, where he holds 22% of the voting power, making it extra challenging for board members to have the votes needed to force him out. The board is also in a tough position in that firing Musk could tank the stock, considering that his name is so closely associated with the company. Many directors also have particularly close ties to Musk. That includes his brother Kimbal Musk, an entrepreneur and restaurant owner, and Joe Gebbia, a cofounder of Airbnb and a friend of Musk's. There are no car industry or green energy CEOs in the group, as one might expect at a typical EV company. The directors are also paid very well. This year, a Delaware court ordered the board to give back more than $900 billion in pay after finding it had paid itself too handsomely. Robyn Denholm, Tesla board chair since 2018, earned $600 million, far more than people with the same position at other companies. The court found 'the compensation was so significant, it made it really almost impossible for them to be independent directors,' says Elson. 'It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it,' says Nell Minow, a corporate governance expert, quoting Upton Sinclair. 'That's this board.' To be sure, this year, there were signs earlier this year that Tesla's directors were taking more control over the company's governance. Last month, the Wall Street Journal reported last month that the board had begun looking for a successor and selected a search firm to assist them. It also reported that the board had met with Trump weeks before he announced he would be spending less time at the White House. It seemed that between the backlash against Tesla provoked by Musk's focus on Washington, and Tesla's shrinking share price, finally pushed the board to act. But the board denied the report outright, with Denholm calling it 'absolutely false.' Even considering his own predilection for conflict, Elon Musk's latest squabble is in a category of its own. But board experts agree that to expect action from the Tesla board is misguided. 'There have been so many 'Now the board has to do something moments,' and they have failed every time,' says Minow. 'I no longer feel that there is such a thing as 'Now they have to do something.'' There are technically ways that shareholders could move the needle if they wanted Musk out. They could vote directors off the board via shareholder proxy votes, and hope that new directors would fire Musk. Or they could try to sue the board for not kicking Musk to the curb when he put the brand at risk and split his focus between Washington and Tesla. But a shareholder who wanted to do that would need to own up to a 3% stake in the company, points out Ann Lipton, associate dean for faculty research at Tulane University's Law School, and governance laws make it all but impossible to do. 'No shareholder is going to be able to show that this board is acting in bad faith by failing to replace Musk as CEO, which is really the level that they'd have to show,' she said. It's still theoretically possible that a Tesla board director could try to bring about change by suggesting Musk go. But they would have to make peace with potentially losing their roles, says Elson. 'They would say, 'Look, I will vote to move him along. And if I lose, I leave. I can't do this anymore,'' says Elson. Whether they'll do that depends on whether they're people of principle, he added, or 'people of convenience.''We'll have to see,' he said. This story was originally featured on Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data


The Hill
26 minutes ago
- The Hill
Israel says it has retrieved the body of a Thai hostage kidnapped into Gaza on Oct. 7, 2023
TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — Israel says it has retrieved the body of a Thai hostage kidnapped into Gaza on Oct. 7, 2023. The Prime Minister's office said Saturday that the body of Thai citizen Nattapong Pinta was returned to Israel in a special military operation. Pinta was kidnapped from Kibbutz Nir Oz and killed in captivity near the start of the war, said the government. Thais were the largest group of foreigners held captive by Hamas militants. This comes a day after the bodies of two Israeli-American hostages were retrieved. Fifty-five hostages remain in Gaza, of whom Israel says more than half are dead.