Meet The Republican Lobbyists Getting Paid To Help China Buy American Farmland

 Despite Republicans publicly opposing Chinese ownership of American farmland, some within the party are lobbying on behalf of Smithfield Foods, a major agricultural firm controlled by a Chinese company. This situation raises concerns regarding national security and foreign influence on U.S. land.

Former Republican aides are employed by Smithfield Foods to influence legislation aimed at restricting foreign ownership of U.S. farmland.

Smithfield is primarily owned by the Hong Kong-based WH Group, which holds about 87% of the company and oversees approximately 87,000 acres of American land.

Lobbying efforts include contracts with firms like Holland & Knight, which were paid $270,000 for issues related to foreign ownership of agricultural land, including the Promoting Agriculture Safeguards and Security Act (S.903).

Key lobbyists working on these efforts include Christopher DeLacy, a former aide to Republican Senator John Warner, and Molly Ross, a former aide to Senator Susan Collins.

Republican officials have declared Chinese access to U.S. farmland a national security risk, with some stating that foreign adversaries should not control American agricultural assets.

Washington Republicans are actively campaigning against foreign ownership, while Smithfield is leveraging connections with former government officials to navigate this political landscape.

As Republicans push back against Chinese ownership of agricultural land, the involvement of former GOP insiders in lobbying for Chinese-controlled Smithfield Foods raises questions about the integrity of their position and the potential influence of foreign entities in U.S. agriculture. 

https://nataliegwinters.substack.com/p/meet-the-republican-lobbyists-getting?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=3382126&post_id=210678325&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=6dl2nb&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Who Owns America’s Farmland?

American farmland is vital for national sovereignty, food security, and economic stability. However, changes in ownership and control of this land pose significant challenges. This summary explores who owns America's farmland, the implications of foreign ownership, the trend of agricultural consolidation, and the barriers faced by young Americans wanting to enter farming.

1. Importance of Farmland: Farmland is essential for food supply, economic health, and rural communities. Control over this land directly impacts national sovereignty and readiness.

2. Foreign Ownership Statistics: As of 2024, foreign interests own about 46 million acres of American farmland, up from 35.2 million acres in 2019. This includes various land types such as forestland and agricultural lands used for energy projects. The increase raises concerns about national security, especially if land ownership involves entities linked to foreign adversaries.

3. Need for Transparency: The U.S. government struggles to verify foreign ownership accurately. The current system lacks the necessary data to assess risks and protect sovereignty effectively. Efforts are underway to improve reporting and coordination among government agencies.

4. Consolidation in Agriculture: The number of farms has decreased, and agricultural operations have become larger. In 2024, America had about 1.9 million farms, down 8% from 2017. The shift towards bigger farms has diminished the number of mid-sized farms, which are crucial for a balanced agricultural economy.

5. Impact of Consolidation: As more farms operate within markets dominated by a few processing and supply companies, small farmers have less control over production costs and profit margins. The concentration of land ownership can harm rural economies by reducing local businesses dependent on farm families.

6. Barriers for Young Farmers: The average farmer in the U.S. is 58 years old, with only 9% under 35. High land prices, which rose approximately 79% since 2012, make it challenging for young people to invest in farming. Farmland prices can exceed $3 million for substantial parcels, making entry into agriculture financially burdensome.

7. Transition of Agricultural Land: An aging population of landowners is set to transition their land, presenting a critical juncture for American agriculture. Decisions made during this period will significantly shape its future, whether land is passed to young farmers, sold for development, or acquired by large investors.

8. National Security Considerations: Ownership and control of farmland relate closely to national security. The U.S. should limit foreign purchases that create risks to critical infrastructure. Legislative measures could ensure that farmland remains under American control while balancing property rights.

9. Role of Congress: There are calls for Congress to enhance loan programs for young farmers, reduce barriers to entry, and support measures that keep farmland in productive use. This includes strengthening antitrust regulations in agricultural markets and promoting local processing capacities.

American farmland is more than a resource; it symbolizes heritage, responsibility, and national strength. The future of agriculture in the U.S. depends on who owns the land and the ability of young farmers to participate in farming. A commitment to maintaining farmland control, ensuring market fairness, and empowering the next generation of farmers is critical for national security and the vitality of American communities. Addressing these issues will determine whether America can sustain its agricultural independence and sovereignty. 

https://genflynn.substack.com/p/who-owns-americas-farmland?utm_campaign=email-half-post&r=6dl2nb&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

What Do “Capitalism” and “Socialism” Really Mean?

 The debate between capitalism and socialism has resurfaced, drawing attention to the need for clear definitions of both systems. Understanding what these terms signify is crucial to addressing current economic discussions and beliefs.

1. Historical Context:

The decline of socialism was notable after the failures of Soviet-style economies, which led many to question the viability of government control over production.

Historically, socialism was viewed as opposing private ownership, which was believed to only benefit the capitalist class.

2. Education and Ideology:

Current educational narratives often depict capitalism negatively, attributing social injustices to its profit-driven motives while not addressing the failures of socialism.

Young people are frequently educated to believe that socialism is the answer to societal issues, despite historical failures.

3. Vague Definitions:

Socialists often vaguely define socialism to avoid association with its historical failures. This leads to a broad interpretation that lacks specificity.

Capitalism is sometimes misrepresented as a system devoid of moral underpinnings due to the interference of state interventions that distort market operations.

4. Mises's Definitions:

Economist Ludwig von Mises provides distinct definitions:

Capitalism: A system based on voluntary, private ownership and free market principles.

Socialism: Centralized control over production, whether or not ownership is formalized.

Interventionism: A hybrid system where the government interferes selectively in the market.

5. Understanding Economic Principles:

A clear understanding of economic theories is necessary to comprehend how different systems operate and their outcomes.

Historically, the performance of economic systems cannot be assessed solely based on outcomes; rather, it requires theoretical frameworks to contextualize results.

6. Debate Focus:

The current critical focus should be on addressing economic decline, especially concerning the weakening of the American manufacturing base and the economic struggles of the working class.

Blaming specific groups or ideologies does not address the systemic issues that have evolved over time.

7. Need for Reform:

The prevailing mixed system, which includes elements of both capitalism and socialism, does not represent true capitalist principles as defined by Mises.

A return to foundational capitalist principles is suggested as a means to foster economic growth, individual liberty, and prosperity.

The ongoing discourse about capitalism and socialism requires clarity and specificity in definitions. Mises's classifications provide a framework that allows for a more informed debate about economic systems and their respective outcomes. Effective discussions should focus on understanding and resolving economic challenges, rather than reverting to broad and often misleading generalizations. The goal should be to articulate a vision that embraces individual autonomy and economic vitality, recognizing the historical lessons learned from both systems.

https://mises.org/mises-wire/what-do-capitalism-and-socialism-really-mean

Trump v. California: Election Order Survives the Lawfare

 The Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of the Trump administration’s election-integrity efforts, allowing the continued implementation of an executive order aimed at ensuring the security of elections. This decision stands as a significant victory for Trump amid ongoing legal challenges from Democratic states, particularly California.

The Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision to stay a lower-court injunction that blocked Trump's election-integrity order, signaling a potential boost for the administration ahead of the midterm elections.

The lawsuit brought forth by California and other Democratic attorneys general was not about constitutional overreach, but rather a response to the president guiding federal agencies to ensure election integrity.

Trump's Executive Order 14399 directs agencies such as Homeland Security and Justice to compile lists of confirmed citizens and enhance scrutiny of mail-in voting processes.

The Democratic Party's legal strategies are viewed as attempts to protect existing, less stringent voting processes, which some consider vulnerable to fraud.

Evidence has surfaced showing irregularities in voter rolls, with hundreds of thousands of deceased individuals and non-citizens listed as voters across 25 states.

This ongoing debate touches on broader international practices, where many countries mandate voter identification to prevent election fraud.

Critics argue that the Democratic resistance to stricter voting measures suggests they may benefit from the current system, which lacks stringent controls.

The Supreme Court's ruling allows the Trump administration to continue its efforts to clean voter rolls and re-establish confidence in the electoral process.

The Supreme Court's stay of the injunction marks a noteworthy moment in the ongoing debate about election integrity in the U.S. The ruling enables the Trump administration to push forward with measures aimed at cleaning voter rolls and ensuring only eligible citizens participate in elections. This decision may have lasting implications for the future of voting practices in the country, continuing the conversation over the balance between accessibility and security in elections.

https://spectator.org/trump-v-california-election-order-survives-the-lawfare/

Let's stop letting in ungrateful immigrants

Victor Davis Hanson discusses the challenges associated with recent immigration trends in the United States, emphasizing the importance of legal immigration that fosters assimilation and economic independence. He expresses concern over the increase of immigrants who may not share traditional American values and who potentially view their new home with ungratefulness.

1. Support for Legal Immigration:

Americans generally support legal immigration when it involves diversity, skills, and the potential for assimilation.

There is concern that the current system allows too many immigrants, both legal and illegal, leading to over 53 million people not born in the U.S.

2. Historical Perspective:

The early 20th-century immigration wave brought many people who did not integrate well, creating a backlash against immigration.

Currently, a similar effect is seen due to high immigration rates and the nature of some new immigrants.

3. Changing Nature of Immigrants:

The new wave consists of people from "failed states," often influenced by detrimental ideologies like socialism and communism.

These immigrants are sometimes wealthy and often bring ideas that conflict with American traditions and values.

4. Concern Over Radical Ideas:

Some newly arrived immigrants and their descendants are pushing for significant changes to the American political system, such as abolishing the Senate or implementing reparations.

This contrasts sharply with the traditional immigrant ethos that aimed to embrace and adapt to American values.

5. The “Victim” Narrative:

Many of these immigrants adopt a victim mentality, asserting that the American system oppresses them despite their new opportunities.

There is a suggestion that they receive preferential treatment, reinforcing their grievances and loyalty to their ethnic identities over their American identity.

6. Imposition of Foreign Ideals:

Instead of assimilating, some immigrants want to import foreign socialist ideals into the U.S. system, challenging the foundations of American society.

This has the effect of alienating the native-supporting population and challenges the concept of what it means to be an American.

Hanson raises alarms about the risks posed by certain immigrant groups who, rather than integrating and contributing positively, seem to challenge the American way of life. His argument underscores a shifting narrative in which recent immigrants may not be embracing the prosperity and freedom America offers, potentially sowing divisions rather than fostering unity. The future of U.S. immigration policy may hinge on addressing these complex dynamics. 

https://www.wnd.com/2026/08/lets-stop-letting-ungrateful-immigrants/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=lets-stop-letting-ungrateful-immigrants

Chinese Fake Accounts Push Anti-Data Center Drive

Recent reports indicate that a significant network of fake social media accounts based in China is promoting anti-data center messages, raising concerns among U.S. lawmakers about foreign influence on American opinions and public discourse related to energy policy and artificial intelligence (AI).

Fake Accounts Identified: The social media platform X (formerly Twitter) has reported the existence of a "bot farm" consisting of about 200,000 fake accounts. These accounts are involved in spreading false narratives about the impact of AI data centers on electricity prices and public welfare.

Political Concerns: Members of Congress, including Representative Jared Moskowitz, have expressed alarm about these operations, suggesting they are psychological tactics used by China to create division among Americans. Senator Ted Cruz supported this viewpoint.

Influence on Public Debate: Reports suggest that the issue of data centers has become a pivotal topic in the 2026 midterm elections, with media coverage often framing the concerns as genuine grassroots movements rather than influenced by external forces.

Reactions from Business Leaders: Prominent figures in the business sector, such as Joe Lonsdale from Palantir and Shaun Maguire from Sequoia, noted that foreign operations aim to destabilize U.S. industrial growth in the AI sector, with Lyman stressing that the anti-data center movement is fundamentally against manufacturing in the U.S.

China's Goals: Analysts argue that China is leveraging these fake accounts to stoke fears around data centers, as America is seeking to expand its production capabilities in AI technology, which China perceives as a threat to its ambitions.

No Connection to Actual Content Creators: The publisher of the Southern Maryland Chronicle clarified that they neither authorized nor were aware of the promotion of their articles by the identified fake accounts, emphasizing they do not control how their content is shared.

Media Coverage of the Issue: While some news outlets have reported on the influence of Chinese propaganda, there are claims that mainstream media may be underplaying the extent of foreign influence in this domestic debate.

The discovery of a large network of Chinese fake accounts manipulating U.S. discussions about data centers highlights a concerning trend of foreign interference in domestic policy matters. It raises important questions about the authenticity of grassroots movements and the need for vigilance against foreign psychological operations aimed at provoking division within the U.S. 

https://freebeacon.com/china/chinese-fake-accounts-push-anti-data-center-drive/

CIA obtained germs used by Fauci’s institute, which provided cover for its involvement in biodefense

 Reports reveal that the CIA collaborated with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), formerly directed by Anthony Fauci, to advance biodefense research. This partnership reportedly allowed the CIA to access sensitive germ research under the guise of civilian efforts.

The CIA used funds to leverage existing civilian research to benefit both the CIA and NIAID.

An undated agreement indicated the establishment of the CIA’s Biological Technology Center, focused on bioterrorism research.

The collaboration involved studying "forensic microbiology" related to bioterrorism agents for intelligence purposes.

Research was classified as sensitive but not officially classified, with the CIA controlling access to information.

The CIA aimed to enhance its existing capabilities in detecting and identifying viruses, thereby offering support to NIAID in obtaining necessary germs.

The Biological Technology Center also partnered with the Intelligence Technology Innovation Center and a private nonprofit located near NIH headquarters.

This partnership illustrates a blending of government intelligence and civilian research efforts, aimed at improving national security against biochemical threats. The details of this collaboration reflect ongoing efforts to enhance biodefense mechanisms through strategic governmental partnerships.

https://justthenews.com/government/security/cia-obtained-germs-used-faucis-institute-which-provided-cover-its-involvement?utm_source=justthenews.com&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=external-news-aggregators