The China Syndrome

When Trump-deranged news outlets “called” the presidential election for Joe Biden, most Americans probably didn’t pay much attention to the date. But you can be sure the Chinese Communist Party did.

November 7, the day Democrats started calling Biden “president-elect,” happens to be the same date in 1917 that Lenin’s Bolsheviks seized power in Russia.

Coincidence? Maybe. 

Or was it a message to Beijing from the Democratic Party that after four years of President Donald Trump everything was back under control?

The question is whose control?

As ballot counting in some states entered its second week, amid accusations of fraud—including vote-changing software “glitches” that may or may not have been the result of “human error”—investigators, with good reason, are turning their attention to China.

China clearly played a central role in the election. First, there is COVID-19, the reason for mail-in voting and along with it historic opportunities for fraud.

Then there’s this: The Chinese government in 2018 declared a 30-year war on the United States. When the war is over in 2049, the 100th anniversary of Communist rule, China expects to be victorious economically, politically, and—should it be necessary—militarily.  

If the 2020 presidential election was the first major battle of the war, it has to be seen as a big win for China—at least so far. 

In August, the CCP announced its preference for Biden in the Global Times, the party’s daily newspaper, noting the former vice president would be “smoother” to deal with than Trump. That’s one way of putting it. At the time it was not widely suspected that members of the Biden family were already on retainer to China. 

But Chinese involvement in the recent election runs deeper than buying off political facilitators. China and its American mercenaries—Big Media, Big Tech, and the Democratic Party—all got down and dirty with the vote.

Motive, Means, and Opportunity

It’s time to call the Democratic Party what it really is—an organized crime syndicate that’s been fixing elections for years under the pretense of saving the planet, ending racism, or whatever else sounds like a good cause to divert attention from the heist in progress. 

In fact, Democrats have been getting away with it for so long, they make little, if any, attempt to hide what they’re doing. And why bother when Republicans have always been perfectly willing not to notice? Enter Donald Trump, making an issue of deep state corruption, much of it having to do directly with China. 

Long before getting into politics, Trump complained the Chinese were robbing the United States blind. When he became president, he began confronting China as no U.S. leader ever had on trade, intellectual property theft, and treaty obligations.

In November 2019, with China threatening a harsh response to political protests in Hong Kong, Trump signed into law the Human Rights and Democracy Act, authorizing the State Department to conduct an annual review to make sure China wasn’t interfering with Hong Kong’s guaranteed autonomy. 

Beijing’s foreign ministry was outraged, promising “countermeasures.” Within days, the first cases of coronavirus were reported in Wuhan. Soon afterward China put an end to democracy in Hong Kong.

Getting rid of Donald Trump in 2020 was a top priority for the Chinese government. No matter how much the Democratic Party hates Trump, China hates him more.

Practice Run

The New York Times last week asked its readers to perform “a thought experiment,” to imagine that the “president of another country lost an election and refused to concede defeat. Instead, he lied about the vote count. He then filed lawsuits to have ballots thrown out [and] put pressure on officials to back him up . . . How would you describe this behavior? It’s certainly anti-democratic. It is an attempt to overrule the will of the people, ignore a country’s laws and illegitimately grab political power.”  

Forgetting for a minute the sheer stupidity of all this, it does raise an interesting question: How would you describe a democratic country that held the kind of election the United States just did and then pretended, like the New York Times, nothing was wrong. 

That’s exactly what happened in South Korea. It held National Assembly elections in April, and the government, after an unexpected landslide win, essentially warned people to accept the results—or else. South Korea, effectively, has no First Amendment.

And this should sound familiar: China was involved, supplying components for Korean voting machines that tabulated a large parliamentary majority for Moon Jae-in’s pro-China, pro-North Korea party. 

Conveniently, just what China needed to move closer to achieving its immediate goal: the removal of U.S. troops from South Korea. 

Moon’s victory, though, was marred by accusations of vote manipulation, fake ballots, statistically improbable voting patterns, and chain-of-custody issues, all cataloged in a study by the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C.

Cleo Paskal, an expert on Indo-Pacific affairs, wrote in the Sunday Guardian: “If, as it seems, China is involved, this is a dramatic escalation in its attempts to interfere in the governance of sovereign states . . . It has a track record of attempting to manipulate elections. But this seems to involve direct technological infiltration . . . the Chinese Communist Party interposing itself between the voter and his or her ballot.”

Glitch-gate

The first voting machine “glitch” reported in the 2020 presidential election was in Antrim County, Michigan. What officials described as a software malfunction in Dominion Voting Systems’ equipment switched thousands of votes for president from Republican to Democrat. 

Dominion voting machines were used in several swing states—Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Nevada, and Arizona—and soon more glitches were being reported. By the second week of vote counting, Dominion’s software was blamed for allegedly switching millions of votes from Trump to Biden.

Earlier this year Dominion’s founder and CEO John Poulos told a congressional hearing that his Canadian company uses Chinese components in its voting machines. That revelation and multiple problems with its vote tabulations have made Dominion a target for Trump campaign lawyers in a half-dozen states. The company denies any wrongdoing.  

U.S. election officials have long been concerned about supply chain safeguards for voting machine components. A particular worry is that parts made in China might be tampered with during production. After what apparently happened in South Korea the threat posed by China to election security in this country should be obvious.

In 2016, Eric Coomer, Dominion’s vice president for engineering, addressed security issues during a meeting with the Illinois State Board of Elections. Coomer was asked about the possibility of bypassing “election system software to go directly to data tables that manage systems running elections . . . .” 

Bypassing system software would allow anyone with access to change votes while avoiding detection.

Asked who would have access to the company’s voter data tables, Coomer replied, “Vendors, election officials, and others who need to be granted access.”  

It might have been a good idea to keep Coomer himself away from the machines. He made his political sympathies known in June when he approvingly re-posted an antifa statement against President Trump on Facebook. The statement reads in part: “We can stop pretending that this man represents anything but the worst in humanity, which his supporters embody.” 

Besides Coomer, any number of bad actors might have accessed Dominion’s 2020 voter data, among them the Trump-despising Chinese. 

“China hates democracy, especially successful democracies,” wrote Paskal in the Sunday Guardian. “By helping a favored party subvert democracy, the CCP parasitically spreads its authoritarianism into a new, increasingly dependent host. It is a tragedy for freedom.”  

 

 

 

About Bill Thomas

Bill Thomas is the author of Club Fed: Power, Money Sex and Violence on Capitol Hill as well as other books, and the co-author of Red Tape: Adventure Capitalism in the New Russia. He is also a former editor and writer with The Economist Group.

Photo: Grindi/Getty Images

Want news updates?

Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.