Connect with us

Daily Caller

‘He’s Willing To Hit Them Hard’: American Adversaries Pull Out The Stops To Derail Trump’s White House Bid

Published

11 minute read

From the Daily Caller News Foundation 

 

By Jake Smith

Former President Donald Trump dealt with some American adversaries harshly during his first term, threatening them with military action and choking their economies. Now that Trump is on the verge of being reelected, those adversaries are panicking — and trying to prevent Trump from entering the White House.

Trump is in a dead-heat race against Vice President Kamala Harris in next Tuesday’s presidential elections. Nations making up the so-called “Axis of Evil” — especially Iran and China — have made it clear they do not want Trump to win. That’s borne in part out of anger against Trump for his actions during his first term and fear of what he will do in his second, according to a review of multiple reports.

It’s an open secret that Iran and China have attempted to interfere in elections in the past, as they are this year. Both countries have utilized a variety of methods to interfere with Trump’s bid for the White House. That’s particularly true for Iran, which has attempted to kill Trump and waged cyberwarfare operations against his campaign.

“While the Islamic Republic continues to mean what it says when it calls for ‘death to America,’ there is only one current presidential contender whom the regime and its terrorist network are trying to kill. That is Donald Trump,” Behnam Ben Taleblu, a scholar on Iranian affairs at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “That is born of a clear understanding in the regime’s mind that he is the candidate of real pressure.”

Trump’s approach to Iran — the largest state sponsor of terrorism and an accomplice in the killing of scores of U.S. troops over recent years — was described by his administration as a “maximum pressure” campaign. Trump withdrew from the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal in 2018, arguing that it allowed Tehran to rake in billions of dollars under eased sanctions while failing to prevent it from building a nuclear weapon. He replaced the deal with harsh sanctions that cut off many of the country’s revenue streams.

“Trump demonstrated he’s willing to hit them hard. This isn’t the same approach we’re seeing from the current administration, which is why Iran’s focus remains on Trump,” former senior Pentagon official and Strauss Center fellow Simone Ledeen told the DCNF.

Iran’s network of terrorist groups suffered from a lack of funding as a result of Trump’s approach, but remained incredibly hostile to the U.S., launching multiple attacks on American forces in the Middle East in the following year. As attacks escalated, Trump made the decision to launch a drone strike and assassinate top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani while he was visiting Iraq in 2020.

Soleimani was a pivotal figure in the Iranian military, and his death greatly angered Tehran.

“The Soleimani strike… exposed some of Iran’s vulnerabilities,” Ledeen told the DCNF.

Iran has since staged multiple unsuccessful assassination attempts against Trump through various actors. The reports on the matter have seemed to escalate in recent months as the election draws close; U.S. intelligence officials briefed the Trump campaign in September on a previous assassination operation, which failed.

Iran has also carried out various cyberwarfare campaigns against Trump ahead of the election, some of which have been successful. Iranian-backed hackers gained access to internal Trump campaign documents — specifically regarding research about Republican vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance — and leaked it to various media outlets and reporters in August and September, only some of whom published the material.

Iranian hackers also accessed and leaked a number of internal Trump campaign emails, which made their way into public reporting. The U.S. charged three Iranian operatives for the action in late September.

“If Trump is back, I’d expect Iran to ramp up its threats,” Ledeen told the DCNF. “Another Trump term would bring renewed pressure, and Iran’s leaders know that. They’ll likely grow more desperate and aggressive as they try to hold onto control in the region, but they’re not in the position they once were.”

If Trump wins, he’ll need to be ready to face down Tehran a second time — while making it clear his contention is not with the Iranian people, who have suffered under the authoritarian Islamic regime, Taleblu told the DCNF.

“While one of the strengths of former President Trump was his ability to keep the adversary guessing, I think it’s quite clear at a minimum a future Trump administration would return to a policy of maximum pressure, and begin to put meaningful and sustained pressure on oil and petrochemical exports and financial flows,” Taleblu told the DCNF.

“What a prospective Trump administration will need to be prepared for is how Tehran might be inclined to respond to pressure with pressure of its own,” Taleblu said. “And that’s why to offset escalation by the regime, as well as to do the moral and politically astute thing, Trump will need to pair maximum pressure against the regime with a real policy of maximum support for the Iranian people.”

The Trump campaign told the DCNF that Iran is “terrified” of a second Trump presidency.

“The terror regime in Iran loves the weakness and stupidity of Kamala Harris,” spokesman Steven Cheung said.

China has also been incredibly wary of a second Trump term, according to multiple reports. Chinese officials are reportedly fearful of Trump because he appears more unpredictable than Harris.

Publicly, Beijing refuses to say who it would rather deal with. But privately, officials were previously hoping that President Joe Biden would beat out Trump in the elections because they felt Biden was less of a threat, according to officials who spoke to The Wall Street Journal earlier in October .

When Biden dropped out of the race in July, officials shifted their preference to Harris, even though neither candidate is likely that favorable to Beijing, according to the WSJ. China has expressed ire to Republican and Democratic administrations over the years and has launched cyberattack operations against both parties.

But Trump’s strict policies in particular caused headaches for officials, and they may be expecting similar policies if he wins again.

“They know a lot about what Donald Trump’s approach to government, diplomacy, trade negotiations might be, and they know a lot about what he said through the entirety of the campaign,” Steve Yates, senior fellow at the America First Policy Institute, told the DCNF. “That is a challenge to them.”

Part of the fear among Chinese officials is that Trump will launch a second trade war if reelected. During his first term, Trump imposed heavy tariffs on China, significantly raising the tax on some incoming Chinese imports and deterring Americans from buying Chinese-made goods. Trump’s goal was to balance out the U.S.-China trade relationship and compel China to buy more American goods.

Trump has already publicly mused the idea of imposing 60% tariffs on Chinese goods if he wins back the White House, something Beijing is eager to avoid.

U.S. officials have said they’ve seen evidence of China trying to interfere in this year’s elections. It was reported last week that Chinese-backed hackers targeted data on Trump’s and Vance’s phones. It wasn’t clear what, if any, information was stolen, but it could be beneficial to Beijing if anything was taken. Members of Harris’ staff were also reportedly targeted.

A spokesperson from the Chinese Embassy in the U.S. claimed that Beijing was unaware of the hacking operation.

“We cannot comment [on] it… China firmly opposes and combats cyber attacks and cyber theft in all forms,” the spokesperson said. “We hope that the U.S. side will not make accusations against China in the election.”

A number of “bot” social media accounts linked to China have also been targeting Republican congressional candidates, according to a report released last week by Microsoft’s Threat Analysis Center.

“While not always resulting in high levels of engagement, these efforts demonstrate China’s sustained attempts [to] influence U.S. politics across the board,” Clint Watts, general manager of the tech company’s agency, wrote in a post regarding the report.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Ted Cruz, Jim Jordan Ramp Up Pressure On Google Parent Company To Deal With ‘Censorship’

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Andi Shae Napier

Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Republican Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan are turning their attention to Google over concerns that the tech giant is censoring users and infringing on Americans’ free speech rights.

Google’s parent company Alphabet, which also owns YouTube, appears to be the GOP’s next Big Tech target. Lawmakers seem to be turning their attention to Alphabet after Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta ended its controversial fact-checking program in favor of a Community Notes system similar to the one used by Elon Musk’s X.

Cruz recently informed reporters of his and fellow senators’ plans to protect free speech. 

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here. Thank you!

“Stopping online censorship is a major priority for the Commerce Committee,” Cruz said, as reported by Politico. “And we are going to utilize every point of leverage we have to protect free speech online.”

Following his meeting with Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai last month, Cruz told the outlet, “Big Tech censorship was the single most important topic.”

Jordan, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, sent subpoenas to Alphabet and other tech giants such as RumbleTikTok and Apple in February regarding “compliance with foreign censorship laws, regulations, judicial orders, or other government-initiated efforts” with the intent to discover how foreign governments, or the Biden administration, have limited Americans’ access to free speech.

“Throughout the previous Congress, the Committee expressed concern over YouTube’s censorship of conservatives and political speech,” Jordan wrote in a letter to Pichai in March. “To develop effective legislation, such as the possible enactment of new statutory limits on the executive branch’s ability to work with Big Tech to restrict the circulation of content and deplatform users, the Committee must first understand how and to what extent the executive branch coerced and colluded with companies and other intermediaries to censor speech.”

Jordan subpoenaed tech CEOs in 2023 as well, including Satya Nadella of Microsoft, Tim Cook of Apple and Pichai, among others.

Despite the recent action against the tech giant, the battle stretches back to President Donald Trump’s first administration. Cruz began his investigation of Google in 2019 when he questioned Karan Bhatia, the company’s Vice President for Government Affairs & Public Policy at the time, in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. Cruz brought forth a presentation suggesting tech companies, including Google, were straying from free speech and leaning towards censorship.

Even during Congress’ recess, pressure on Google continues to mount as a federal court ruled Thursday that Google’s ad-tech unit violates U.S. antitrust laws and creates an illegal monopoly. This marks the second antitrust ruling against the tech giant as a different court ruled in 2024 that Google abused its dominance of the online search market.

Continue Reading

Daily Caller

Daily Caller EXCLUSIVE: Trump’s Broad Ban On Risky Gain-Of-Function Research Nears Completion

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Emily Kopp

President Donald Trump could sign a sweeping executive order banning gain-of-function research — research that makes viruses more dangerous in the lab — as soon as May 6, according to a source who has worked with the National Security Council on the issue.

The executive order will take a broad strokes approach, banning research amplifying the infectivity or pathogenicity of any virulent and replicable pathogen, according to the source, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about the anticipated executive action. But significant unresolved issues remain, according to the source, including whether violators will be subject to criminal penalties as bioweaponeers.

The executive order is being steered by Gerald Parker, head of the White House Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy, which has been incorporated into the NSC. Parker did not respond to requests for comment.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here. Thank you!

In the process of drafting the executive order, Parker has frozen out the federal agencies that have for years championed gain-of-function research and staved off regulation — chiefly Anthony Fauci’s former institute, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health.

The latest policy guidance on gain-of-function research, unveiled under the Biden administration in 2024, was previously expected to go into effect May 6. According to a March 25 letter cosigned by the American Society for Microbiology, the Association for Biosafety and Biosecurity International, and Council on Governmental Relations, organizations that conduct pathogen research have not received direction from the NIH on that guidance — suggesting the executive order would supersede the May 6 deadline.

The 2024 guidance altered the scope of experiments subject to more rigorous review, but charged researchers, universities and funding agencies like NIH with its implementation, which critics say disincentivizes reporting. Many scientists say that researchers and NIH should not be the primary entities conducting cost–benefit analyses of pandemic virus studies. 

Parker previously served as the head of the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB), a group of outside experts that advises NIH on biosecurity matters, and in that role recommended that Congress stand up a new government agency to advise on gain-of-function research. Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield has also endorsed moving gain-of-function research decision making out of the NIH to an independent commission.

“Given the well documented lapses in the NIH review process, policymakers should … remove final approval of any gain-of function research grants from NIH,” Redfield said in a February op-ed.

It remains to be seen whether the executive order will articulate carveouts for gain-of-function research without risks of harm such as research on non-replicative pseudoviruses, which can be used to study viral evolution without generating pandemic viruses.

It also remains to be seen whether the executive order will define “gain-of-function research” tightly enough to stand up to legal scrutiny should a violator be charged with a crime.

Risky research on coronaviruses funded by the NIH at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through the U.S. nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance typifies the loopholes in NIH’s existing regulatory framework, some biosecurity experts say.

Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act in 2023 indicated that EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak submitted a proposal to the Pentagon in 2018 called “DEFUSE” describing gain-of-function experiments on viruses similar to SARS-CoV-2 but downplayed to his intended funder the fact that many of the tests would occur in Wuhan, China.

Daszak and EcoHealth were both debarred from federal funding in January 2025 but have faced no criminal charges.

“I don’t know that criminal penalties are necessary. But we do need more sticks in biosafety as well as carrots,” said a biosecurity expert who requested anonymity to avoid retribution from his employer for weighing in on the expected policy. “For instance, biosafety should be a part of tenure review and whether you get funding for future work.”

Some experts say that it is likely that the COVID-19 crisis was a lab-generated pandemic, and that without major policy changes it might not be the last one.

“Gain-of-function research on potential pandemic pathogens caused the COVID-19 pandemic, killing 20 million and costing $25 trillion,” said Richard Ebright, a Rutgers University microbiologist and longtime critic of high-risk virology, to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “If not stopped, gain-of-function research on potential pandemic pathogens likely will cause future lab-generated pandemics.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X