International
Former Clinton adviser calls for investigation of ABC debate between Trump, Harris

From LifeSiteNews
By Stephen Kokx
Mark Penn, chairman of the Harvard CAPS Harris Poll, believes there is a likely chance that ABC colluded with the Harris campaign.
A former adviser to Bill and Hillary Clinton is calling for an investigation into the recently concluded presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.
During an appearance on the “John Solomon Reports” podcast, Mark Penn said he believes there is a likely chance that ABC colluded with the Harris campaign.
Describing the debate as a “staged wrestling match,” Penn commented that he thinks ABC “should do a full internal investigation, hire an outside law firm. I don’t know how much of this was planned in advance.”
Penn, chairman of the Harvard CAPS Harris Poll, previously worked at Microsoft and founded a prominent polling firm that has helped many high-profile public officials, including former president Bill Clinton. In recent years, he has grown close to Trump, even advising him on his impeachment in 2019.
Penn remarked on X that the “referees” of the debate were unfair and that had the moderators overseen the first debate between Trump and Joe Biden, Biden might still be in the race, as they were clearly in favor of Harris.
There can be no fair game or debate no matter what the score when the referees put their fingers on the scale.
What ABC did in poorly fact checking one side while letting the other side repeat serial falsehoods meant that one side had to do its own defense.
It robs all sides…
— Mark Penn (@Mark_Penn) September 11, 2024
He further told Solomon that the “suspicion here is really quite high, and I think a review of all their internal texts and emails really should be done by an independent party to find out to what extent they were planning on, in effect, you know, fact-checking just one candidate and in effect, rigging the outcome of this debate. I think the situation demands nothing less than that.”
Since the debate, the Trump campaign has pointed out that moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis repeatedly “fact-checked” Trump but did not do so even one time with Harris. Some have also noted that Davis belongs to the same sorority as Harris and that the failure to disclose that detail was unprofessional in the least, if not a blatant conflict of interests.
Debate conflict of interest with ABC moderator Linsey Davis CONFIRMED. She is a sorority sister of Kamala Harris, and even confirmed it on a live broadcast 3 1/2 years ago. pic.twitter.com/eoJihVpZp1
— WorldNetDaily (@worldnetdaily) September 12, 2024
While Trump and his surrogates have claimed victory in the debate, not all conservatives agree with that assessment. Former Congressman Trey Gowdy told Fox News that Trump should fire the people who prepared him for the debate, which he called the “land of missed opportunities.” Fox pundit Brit Hume likewise said Trump had a “bad night” getting baited repeatedly by Harris.
Polls seem to suggest that Harris has gained several points in the last 72 hours, with betting markets now being less optimistic about a Trump victory in November. At the same time, forecaster Nate Silver gives Trump at a 60% chance of winning the Electoral College.
Unconfirmed reports on social media suggested that a possible ABC “whistleblower” may be on the verge of coming forward with evidence that the outlet fed Harris the questions ahead of time. LifeSite has found no reliable evidence of that being true as of the publication of this story. What LifeSite can confirm is that in 2016, former Democratic National Committee interim chair Donna Brazile leaked questions to the Clinton campaign that were going to be asked at a CNN town hall.
Trump recently announced that he will not participate in another debate before this year’s elections on Tuesday, November 5. Democrats currently hold a narrow edge in the U.S. Senate with 47 members plus four independents who caucus with them for a total of 51 in comparison to 49 Republicans. The House of Representatives is run Republicans, who have 220 members to 211 Democrats.
espionage
Inside Xi’s Fifth Column: How Beijing Uses Gangsters to Wage Political Warfare in Taiwan — and the West

A new Jamestown Foundation report details how China’s Ministry of State Security and allied triads have been used to subvert Taiwan’s democracy as part of Beijing’s united front.
Editor’s Note
The Bureau has previously reported on how Chinese state-linked crime networks have exploited Canada’s real estate market, casinos, and diaspora associations, often under the cover of united front work. One of these groups, the Chinese Freemasons, has been linked to meetings with Canadian politicians, as reported by The Globe and Mail ahead of the 2025 federal election. The Globe noted that the Toronto chapter explicitly advocates for the “peaceful reunification of Taiwan.” The Jamestown Foundation’s new findings on groups active in Taiwan — including the Chinese Freemasons, also known as the Hongmen, the related Bamboo Union triad, and the China Unification Promotion Party (CUPP) — show that Taiwan is the epicenter of a strategy also visible, though less intensively, across democracies including the United States. The parallels — from Vancouver to Sydney to New York to Taipei — should alert governments that the “fifth column” problem is international, and it is growing.
TAIPEI — At a banquet in Shenzhen more than two decades ago, Chang An-lo — the Bamboo Union boss known as “Big Brother Chang” or “White Wolf” — raised a glass to one of the Communist Party’s princelings. His guest, Hu Shiying, was the son of Mao Zedong’s propaganda chief. “Big Brother Chang,” Hu reportedly toasted him, an episode highlighted in a new report from the Jamestown Foundation.
Hu would later be described by Australian journalist John Garnaut as an “old associate of Xi Jinping.” That link — through Hu and other princelings Chang claimed to have met — placed the Bamboo Union leader within the orbit of Party elites. Garnaut also reported that the Ministry of State Security (MSS) had used the Bamboo Union to channel lucrative opportunities to Taiwanese politicians. According to Jamestown researcher Martin Purbrick, a former Royal Hong Kong Police intelligence officer, such episodes show how the CCP has systematically co-opted Taiwanese organized crime as part of its united front strategy.
“The long history of links between the CCP and organized crime groups in Taiwan,” Purbrick writes, “shows that United Front strategy has embedded itself deeply into Taiwan’s political life.”
Chang’s global influence is not a relic of the past. The Bureau reported, drawing on leaked 1990s Canadian immigration records, that intelligence indicated Chang’s triad had effectively “purchased” the state of Belize, on Mexico’s southern border, for use in smuggling illegal immigrants into the United States. But Chang is more relevant than ever as fears of Beijing invading Taiwan grow. In August 2025, seated in his Taipei office before a PRC flag, he appeared on a YouTube program to deny he led any “fifth column.” Instead, he insisted Taiwan must “embrace” Beijing and cast himself as a “bridge for cross-strait peace.”
His denial came just months after Taiwan’s Ministry of Justice accused CUPP of acting as a political front for organized crime and foreign interference. Police suspected more than 130 members of crimes ranging from homicide to drug trafficking. Prosecutors charged CUPP operatives with taking $2.3 million from the CCP to fund propaganda. In January, the Ministry of the Interior moved to dissolve the party outright, submitting the case to Taiwan’s Constitutional Court. By March, a Kaohsiung court sentenced CUPP deputy secretary-general Wen Lung and two retired military officers for recruiting Taiwanese personnel on behalf of the PRC. According to court filings, Wen had been introduced by Chang to the Zhuhai Taiwan Affairs Office, which in turn connected him to a PLA liaison officer.
President Lai Ching-te, in a March national security address, warned that Beijing was attempting to “divide, destroy, and subvert us from within.” Intelligence assessments in Taipei describe the Bamboo Union and CUPP as part of a potential “fifth column,” prepared to foment unrest and manipulate opinion in the event of an invasion.
The historical record shows why Taipei is so concerned. Chang’s name has shadowed some of Taiwan’s darkest chapters. In the 1980s, he was suspected of involvement in the assassination of dissident writer Henry Liu in California. He was later convicted of heroin smuggling in the United States, serving ten years in prison. After returning to Taiwan, he fled again in 1996 when authorities sought his arrest, spending 17 years in Shenzhen. During those years, he cultivated ties with influential Party families. At the Shenzhen banquet, Washington Post journalist John Pomfret wrote, Hu Shiying introduced him as “Big Brother Chang,” signaling acceptance in elite circles. Garnaut, writing over a decade later, noted that Hu was an “old associate of Xi Jinping” and that Chang had moved comfortably among other princelings, including sons of a former CCP general secretary and a top revolutionary general.
These connections translated into political capital. When Chang returned to Taiwan in 2013, he launched the China Unification Promotion Party — a pro-Beijing group openly advocating “one country, two systems.” He declared his mission was to “cultivate red voters.” CUPP cadres and Bamboo Union affiliates became visible in street politics, clashing with independence activists and disrupting rallies. During U.S. Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s 2021 visit, they staged counter-protests echoing Beijing’s line.
The ideological warfare runs even deeper. A Phoenix TV segment from 2011 recalled how a Bamboo Union elder declared in 1981 that he “would rather the CCP rule Taiwan than have Taiwan taken away by Taiwan independents.” Chang himself has echoed this sentiment for decades. In 2005, he launched a Guangzhou-based group called the Defending China Alliance, later rebranded in Taipei as CUPP. His activism has spanned disruptive protests, nationalist rallies, and propaganda campaigns amplified through China-linked media channels.
Purbrick situates these developments within a wider united front playbook. Taiwanese triads and Chinese Freemason associations are courted as grassroots mobilizers, intermediaries, and psychological enforcers. A recent report from the Washington Post has also linked the Chinese Freemasons to the powerful 14K Triad, a global network deeply implicated in Chinese underground banking networks accused of laundering fentanyl proceeds for Mexican cartels through the United States. The triad–Hongmen nexus complements other CCP efforts: online influence campaigns, cultural outreach, and intelligence recruitment inside Taiwan’s military.
The implications extend beyond Taiwan. In Canada, Australia, the United States, Southeast Asia, and beyond, intelligence agencies have documented how PRC-linked triads launder drug profits, fund political donations, and intimidate diaspora critics. These groups benefit from tacit state protection: their criminality overlooked so long as they advance Beijing’s strategic objectives. It is hybrid warfare by stealth — not soldiers storming beaches, but criminal syndicates reshaping politics from within.
For Taiwan, the Bamboo Union and CUPP remain immediate threats. For other democracies, they serve as case studies of how united front tactics adapt across borders. President Lai’s warning that Beijing seeks to “create the illusion that China is governing Taiwan” resonates internationally.
Before leaving journalism to establish an advisory firm, John Garnaut himself became entangled in the political fallout of his reporting. He was sued by a Chinese-Australian real estate developer from Shenzhen, who had funneled large donations to Australian political parties. The developer, later publicly implicated in the case by an Australian lawmaker under parliamentary privilege, successfully sued Garnaut for defamation in 2019. Subsequent disclosures confirmed the tycoon’s implication in an FBI indictment involving United Nations influence schemes and notorious Chinese operative Patrick Ho, later linked to a Chinese oil conglomerate accused of targeting the Biden family in influence operations. Together, these episodes highlight the global reach of united front networks.
International
Brazil sentences former President Bolsonaro to 27 years behind bars

Quick Hit:
In a stunning display of political persecution, Brazil’s Supreme Federal Tribunal sentenced conservative former President Jair Bolsonaro to 27 years in prison on trumped-up charges of “crimes against democracy.” The ruling, driven by leftist judges loyal to radical President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, effectively ends Bolsonaro’s political career and underscores the growing use of weaponized courts to silence conservative leaders.
Key Details:
- Bolsonaro was sentenced to 27 years and 3 months in prison on charges critics say were fabricated to eliminate him from politics.
- U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio condemned the conviction as a “witch hunt,” promising America will respond.
- President Donald Trump has already imposed heavy tariffs on Brazil and sanctioned the lead judge, Alexandre de Moraes, for human rights abuses.
Diving Deeper:
The conviction of Jair Bolsonaro marks an unprecedented step in Brazil’s descent into judicial tyranny. A panel of just five STF justices, led by notorious censorship crusader Alexandre de Moraes, claimed Bolsonaro plotted a coup to overturn the 2022 election. Only one justice, Luiz Fux, dissented, while the others rubber-stamped Lula’s narrative of a “digital militia” undermining democracy.
In reality, Bolsonaro’s true crime was daring to challenge Brazil’s rigged electoral system and standing in the way of Lula’s return to power. The conviction is less about defending democracy and more about crushing political opposition. By sentencing Bolsonaro to nearly three decades behind bars and slapping him with a permanent ban from public office, Brazil’s courts have ensured that the conservative movement’s most powerful leader is silenced.
Internationally, outrage is building. Secretary of State Marco Rubio condemned the ruling as an act of persecution by sanctioned human rights abuser de Moraes, warning the U.S. “will respond accordingly.” Bolsonaro’s lawyers are preparing appeals to international courts, arguing that due process was shredded in a show trial orchestrated by Lula’s allies.
The Trump administration has already taken decisive action, slapping a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian goods and targeting de Moraes with Global Magnitsky sanctions for his authoritarian crackdown on free speech. Bolsonaro’s conviction is certain to deepen tensions with Washington, as conservatives see the case as a test of whether global elites can jail and silence opposition figures without consequence.
For Bolsonaro’s supporters, the ruling is proof that Brazil is sliding into dictatorship under the banner of “defending democracy.” What Lula and his allies call justice looks to many more like the criminalization of conservative thought — a warning of what happens when the Left is allowed to use courts as political weapons.
-
Censorship Industrial Complex16 hours ago
Freedom of speech under threat on university campuses in Canada
-
Alberta11 hours ago
Ottawa’s destructive federal energy policies and Premier Danielle Smith’s three part solution
-
Business16 hours ago
Carney engaging in Orwellian doublethink with federal budget rhetoric
-
Alberta12 hours ago
Is Alberta getting ripped off by Ottawa? The numbers say yes
-
Energy16 hours ago
Canada’s LNG breakthrough must be just the beginning
-
Business17 hours ago
Court’s ‘Aboriginal title’ ruling further damages B.C.’s investment climate
-
Business5 hours ago
Manitoba Must Act Now To Develop Its Northern Ports
-
Agriculture10 hours ago
In the USA, Food Trumps Green Energy, Wind And Solar