Author

admin

Browsing

President Donald Trump has demanded an end to excessive state-level regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) and warned that state rules will end up threatening the U.S. economy.

In a post shared to Truth Social on Tuesday, Trump also slammed ‘Woke AI’ and referred to a ‘patchwork’ of state regulations in the AI space.

‘Investment in AI is helping to make the U.S. Economy the ‘HOTTEST’ in the World,’ Trump wrote.

‘But overregulation by the States is threatening to undermine this Major Growth Engine. Some States are even trying to embed DEI ideology into AI models, producing ‘Woke AI’ (Remember Black George Washington?). We MUST have one Federal Standard instead of a patchwork of 50 State Regulatory Regimes.’

Trump made his comments as House Republican leaders signaled they may try to include AI preemption language in the annual National Defense Authorization Act. 

This would block states from bringing in their own AI rules and protections.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said Monday that GOP leaders are considering the measure to prevent what he called ‘regulatory chaos’ as states advance their own rules. 

Trump’s push for a unified national framework is in line with his broader ‘Winning the AI Race: America’s AI Action Plan.’

Under executive orders issued in July, federal agencies must avoid procuring AI systems that ‘sacrifice truthfulness and accuracy to ideological agendas,’ adhere to ‘Unbiased AI Principles’ and support the fight against AI-generated deepfakes through the ‘Take It Down Act.’

Vice President JD Vance echoed Trump’s stance at February’s Artificial Intelligence Action Summit.

‘We believe that excessive regulation of the AI sector could kill a transformative industry just as it’s taking off,’ Vance said.

Not all Republicans are on board. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis shared a post to X Tuesday and warned that overriding state authority would serve as a ‘subsidy to Big Tech’ and ‘prevent states from protecting against online censorship of political speech, predatory applications that target children, violations of intellectual property rights and data center intrusions on power/water resources.’

Trump’s Truth Social post also came after Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman committed during Tuesday’s visit to the White House to increasing his planned investment in the U.S. economy to nearly $1 trillion over the next year.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., raised concerns Tuesday about the government’s potential use of taxpayer funds to support OpenAI and other AI firms.

‘OpenAI’s actions suggest that it may be pursuing a deliberate strategy to entangle itself with the federal government and the broader economy, so the government has no choice but to step in with public funds,’ she said in a letter.

‘We have seen this before: take on enough debt, make enough risky bets, and then demand a taxpayer bailout when those bets go south, so the economy does not crash.’


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Silicon Valley’s tech giants are pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure this year, a commitment that has been met with growing anxiety from shareholders.

This massive investment, reminiscent of the dot-com boom, has faced skepticism over its sustainability.

Market concerns were recently amplified after investor Michael Burry, who successfully bet against the US housing bubble, shorted tech shares and argued that AI hyperscalers are artificially inflating earnings by extending the useful life of costly equipment, a practice he termed “one of the more common frauds of the modern era.”

As investors weigh the promise of AI against the risks of inflated valuations and uncertain profitability, success will depend on grasping the strategic and legal dynamics of the AI infrastructure market, not just technological progress.

Overinvestment concerns in AI infrastructure

Drawing parallels between the current AI investment boom and the historic dot-com bubble, Ramos warned about the risk of overbuilding capacity without enough demand-driving applications.

“I’ve been worrying that we’re … building all this capacity, (but) there aren’t enough killer apps to use all the capacity that’s being built. What I worry (is that) we’re going to end up in the same place that we did in the boom,’ he said.

Formerly an engineer at the Boeing Company (NYSE:BA), Ramos provides technical insight on intellectual property (IP) licensing, portfolio growth and management. He leverages his experience in software and IT service transactions to advise clients on AI risk evaluation and help them develop workplace AI policies.

Ramos cautioned against overbuilding capacity without established demand, drawing lessons from the telecommunications bubble. He compared the fiber optic cable buildout of the past to the current construction of AI data centers and infrastructure, and described working extensively for companies involved in building out this capacity, only to see the market collapse when the anticipated demand failed to materialize.

“We did all these things technologically to get more capacity, and then it wasn’t needed. And all the investments that happened … it impacted my practice quite a bit,’ he noted.

While today’s enthusiasm is similar to what happened then, Ramos said a key difference is that today’s institutional investors are less willing to tolerate prolonged uncertainty without visible paths to profitability.

“Enterprise demand kind of works in the same way that it always did,” he explained.

“Most of my clients have not yet put a whole bunch of money into the next brand-new thing, because they want to make sure the next brand-new thing works and is going to be sold and maintained by a vendor who’s going to be around to do that. So there’s kind of a slower adoption than what you see on the consumer side,’ Ramos added.

Companies that look beyond hype and strategically balance investment with clear business cases will likely emerge strongest. Ramos advised leaders to consider succession and exit strategies in technology ventures early, underscoring that “the business lifecycle around AI is evolving quickly, and legal foresight is essential.”

Legal and regulatory considerations shaping AI infrastructure adoption

With technology evolving rapidly, Ramos emphasized that savvy businesses must assess AI-specific risks carefully, pointing to issues such as intellectual property infringement.

“Data privacy is a concern,” he said. “If you have an AI solution, and you are using it to solve problems that involve putting personal information into an LLM, can that LLM access that information to answer other people’s questions? And, if they can, there’s a potential that you have privacy breaches going on.”

Ramos advised businesses to consider where the value of AI adoption lies, and whether it comes with its own flaws.

He also highlighted that the landscape is currently highly fragmented, with no preemptive federal policy guiding AI development. As a result, states are establishing their own rules, creating a “patchwork” of regulations that increase compliance challenges as well as costs, a potentially major impediment to both innovation and infrastructure investments. All of this will shape how and where companies decide to develop and deploy AI solutions.

Strategic innovation in AI infrastructure

Ramos suggested that the buildout of AI infrastructure could prompt significant changes in how companies approach tech investment, noting that models could shift toward more flexible resource allocation rather than outright ownership, mirroring successful “capacity sharing” approaches from past technology cycles.

The emergence of new models and increased focus on energy efficiency could prompt significant changes in how companies structure their technology investments and strategies.

Ramos highlighted time sharing of GPU resources as a key emerging strategy to optimize costly AI infrastructure, drawing a parallel to historical time sharing in fiber optics as a model.

He explained that with GPUs currently utilized only 15 to 20 percent of the time, there is major potential for efficiency gains if companies share or lease compute resources when not in use.

Emerging business models that enable GPU time sharing represent promising avenues for value creation. For investors, this marks a shift toward more asset-light, scalable models in AI infrastructure.

A partnership between decentralized data platform Pundi AI and decentralized cloud computing provider Spheron Network exemplifies this strategy. Their collaboration addresses the problems of low-quality training data and the high costs of compute resources by providing verifiable, community-labeled datasets with on-chain provenance, packaged as tokenized digital assets that development teams can access securely and transparently.

The recent partnership creates an integrated pipeline from data to scalable, affordable compute, supporting decentralized AI development and directly addressing the inefficiencies and bottlenecks in current AI workflows.

On the compute side, Spheron Network offers decentralized and affordable GPU and CPU resources, enabling AI developers to rent compute power on demand rather than relying on costly fixed infrastructure.

This allows AI developers, especially startups and small teams, to run more experiments per dollar, avoid costly fixed infrastructure and scale compute resources flexibly based on their needs.

Investor takeaway

As capital floods into AI infrastructure, Ramos advised prudence coupled with innovation.

The stakes are high, with opportunities to reshape the technology landscape, but equally real risks underscoring the importance of legal and strategic guidance. For companies navigating these waters, careful planning around AI investments and corporate policies will be key to long-term success.

Securities Disclosure: I, Meagen Seatter, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

President Donald Trump made a point to shake the hand of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the White House Tuesday in a warm welcome — in contrast to former President Joe Biden, who came under scrutiny for fist-bumping the Saudi prince in 2022.

Biden’s fist bump occurred during a trip to Saudi Arabia in July 2022, and attracted criticism due to U.S. intelligence reports that indicated that bin Salman signed off on the 2018 assassination of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi. 

But when bin Salman arrived at the White House Tuesday, Trump indicated that the Saudi prince deserved a more formal greeting.

‘And Trump doesn’t give a fist pump. I grab that hand,’ Trump told reporters Tuesday. ‘I don’t give a hell where that hand’s been, I grab that hand. Remember Biden? He travels for 20 hours, he gets out and he gives a fist bump. No. When you get out of the plane and you got the future king and the man who is one of the most respected people in the world, you shake his hand, you don’t give him a fist bump, right?’

‘We don’t want to ask you about that,’ Trump said, referencing bin Salman. ‘But I can’t imagine you were thrilled.’

The Saudi leader’s arrival Tuesday came with full pageantry. A red carpet rolled across the South Lawn, military honor guard and an Air Force flyover underscored the formal state-level welcome.

Biden’s 2022 fist bump with bin Salman occurred as he stepped out of a vehicle outside the Al Salam Royal Palace in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Afterward, Biden brushed off questions about the interaction from reporters, but told them he suggested to bin Salman that he believed the crown prince was ‘responsible’ for Khashoggi’s death.

The exchange prompted former Washington Post publisher Fred Ryan to characterize the gesture as more offensive than a handshake.

‘The fist bump between President Biden and Mohammed bin Salman was worse than a handshake — it was shameful,’ Ryan said in a statement. ‘It projected a level of intimacy and comfort that delivers to MBS the unwarranted redemption he has been desperately seeking.’ 

More than a year later, in September 2023, Biden shook hands with bin Salman when they met in person at the G20 global economic summit in New Delhi.

U.S. intelligence agencies concluded in 2021 that bin Salman gave the green light on the operation that took Khashoggi’s life. Khashoggi, a Saudi dissident, was brutally murdered in Istanbul at the Saudi consulate in 2018.

Still, bin Salman has denied the veracity of those reports. When asked Tuesday about Khashoggi, bin Salman said that it’s ‘painful’ to hear of the death of anyone for ‘no real purpose,’ and said that ‘we are doing our best that this doesn’t happen again.’

Trump also came to defend bin Salman Tuesday, and accused a reporter who asked about U.S. intelligence reports linking the prince to Khashoggi’s death of embarrassing bin Salman.

‘A lot of people didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about,’ Trump said Tuesday. ‘Whether you like him or didn’t like him, things happen, but he knew nothing about it. And would you leave it at that? You don’t have to embarrass our guest by asking a question.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Biden’s office for comment and has not yet received a reply. 


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

No Senate Republicans blocked an attempt to force a vote on a resolution that would compel the release of documents and files related to Jeffrey Epstein.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., made good on his vow to force a vote on the resolution just hours after it passed through the House behind a near unanimous wave of support.

Schumer argued on the floor that the Senate ‘should pass this bill as soon as possible, as written and without a hint of delay.’ 

‘Republicans must not try to change this bill or bury it in committee, or slow walk it in any way,’ he said. ‘Any amendment to this bill would force it back to the House and risk further delay. Who knows what would happen over there?’

Now, as soon as the House transfers the bill to the Senate, it will go straight to President Donald Trump’s desk for his signature. 

The resolution from Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif., would require that the Department of Justice (DOJ) release all unclassified records, documents, communications and investigative materials ‘publicly available in a searchable and downloadable format’ related to the late financier and convicted pedophile and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell within 30 days of the bill being signed into law. 

The Epstein fervor has not had nearly the impact in the Senate as the House, which was thrust into chaos by the bipartisan push to see the release of the files. Earlier this year, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., put the House into recess to quell the Epstein drama and has since been accused of running from a vote on the issue.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said that Republicans were already mulling the bill through the hotline process, which is where legislation is considered among lawmakers before making it to the floor. Thune said the plan, if the bill clears the hotline, would be to have it on the floor before lawmakers leave for Thanksgiving recess at the end of this week. 

‘We’ll see what the Democrats have to say,’ he said. ‘But it’s the kind of thing, probably, that could perhaps move by unanimous consent.’

That ended up not being necessary, with bill making its way through the upper chamber without a full vote. 

The calculus surrounding the Epstein bill changed in the Senate, too, given that President Donald Trump, who for months railed against attempts to release the files, threw his support behind Massie and Khanna’s legislation over the weekend.

He charged that it was a ‘Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party.’

‘Nobody cared about Jeffrey Epstein when he was alive and, if the Democrats had anything, they would have released it before our Landslide Election Victory,’ he said in a post on Truth Social.

Senate Republicans, like their counterparts in the House, wanted more transparency on the issue when the Epstein saga resurfaced over the summer but cautioned that no materials should be released until the names or identifying traits of victims are combed through and kept safe.

But, despite calls from Johnson to amend the bill to include those kinds of guardrails in the legislation, it’s unlikely to happen in the Senate. 

‘I think when a bill comes out of the House 427 to one, and the president said he’d sign it, I’m not sure that amending it is in the cards,’ Thune said. 


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Rapper Nicki Minaj brought her star power to the United Nations to draw global attention to the persecution of Christians in Nigeria.

Minaj, who was born in Trinidad and Tobago, teamed up with President Donald Trump’s U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz to speak at an event hosted by the United States Mission to the United Nations that spotlighted religious violence and the killings of Christians in the most populous African nation.

The rap mogul said she wanted to speak out against injustice and stand up for people who are persecuted for their beliefs.

‘In Nigeria, Christians are being targeted, driven from their homes and killed. Churches have been burned. Families have been torn apart and entire communities live in fear constantly, simply because of how they pray,’ she told attendees.

‘Sadly, this problem is not only a growing problem in Nigeria, but also in so many other countries across the world, and it demands urgent action,’ Minaj said. ‘And I want to be clear, protecting Christians in Nigeria is not about taking sides or dividing people. It is about uniting humanity.’

Minaj, who has been a vocal supporter of the Trump administration’s actions to combat the persecution of Christians in Nigeria, seemed to distance herself from politics. Addressing her fans directly, who she calls ‘Barbz,’ she once again said that she was not ‘taking sides.’

‘Barbz, I know you’re somewhere listening. I love you so very much. You have been the ultimate light in my life and career for so long. I appreciate you and I want to make it very clear — once again — that this isn’t about taking sides. This is about standing up in the face of injustice. It’s about what I’ve always stood for my entire career. And I will continue to stand for that for the rest of my life. I will care if anyone, anywhere, is being persecuted for their beliefs,’ Minaj said.

Waltz also spoke, calling the killings of Christians in Nigeria ‘genocide wearing the mask of chaos.’

‘There is a body of evidence, and you are going to hear that from our experts today that paints a very grim picture of disproportionate suffering among Christians, where, again, families are torn apart, clergy is repeatedly assassinated, and entire congregations, church congregations,’ he said.

‘Folks, we have an entire faith that is being erased. One bullet at a time, one torched Bible at a time.’

The event featuring Waltz and Minaj came after Trump threatened in a November Truth Social post to send U.S. troops ‘guns-a-blazing’ into the most populous country in Africa to ‘completely wipe out the Islamic Terrorists who are committing these horrible atrocities.’

The president also threatened to stop all aid and assistance if the violence continued.

Nigerian President Bola Tinubu responded to Trump’s threat, writing on social media that his administration has worked with Christian and Muslim leaders to address security challenges affecting citizens across all faiths and regions.

‘The characterisation of Nigeria as religiously intolerant does not reflect our national reality, nor does it take into consideration the consistent and sincere efforts of the government to safeguard freedom of religion and beliefs for all Nigerians,’ he wrote on X.

‘Religious freedom and tolerance have been a core tenet of our collective identity and shall always remain so. Nigeria opposes religious persecution and does not encourage it.’

Open Doors, an international Christian organization that supports persecuted believers, said attacks are most common in the northern, Muslim-majority states of Nigeria but have started spreading into the Middle Belt and farther south.

The organization stated that Christians are at risk from targeted attacks by Islamist militants, including Fulani fighters and Boko Haram, and women are often killed and subjected to sexual violence.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Private investor Don Hansen returns to share his latest thoughts on gold, outlining five factors that illustrate how powerful the current bull market is.

‘I think it’s pretty obvious that in 2025 we’re in a secular bull market in gold, and it’s only (just) started,’ he said. In his view, it’s in the second inning of what may be a 15 inning game.

Securities Disclosure: I, Charlotte McLeod, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Steve Barton, host of In It To Win It, shares how he picks mining stocks, running through his initial screening process for companies, as well as the questions he asks CEOs.

He also explains how he decides when to buy and when to sell.

Securities Disclosure: I, Charlotte McLeod, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Nearly two dozen House Democrats defied their party leaders’ wishes Tuesday to vote in favor of rebuking a progressive lawmaker for what critics called an unfair move to tip the scales in his district’s next election.

The House voted to pass a resolution of disapproval against Rep. Jesús ‘Chuy’ García, a measure that was led by one of his fellow Democrats — moderate Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash.

It passed in a 236 to 183 vote, with 23 Democrats voting with the GOP to rebuke García. Four lawmakers voted ‘present’ — Reps. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va., and Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio.

The Democrats who voted with Republicans include Reps. Kristen McDonald Rivet, D-Mich., Sharice Davids, D-Kan., Laura Gillen, D-N.Y., Angie Craig, D-Minn., Kathy Castor, D-Fla., Jared Golden, D-Maine, Pat Ryan, D-N.Y., and Perez.

‘I’m on the Ethics Committee — I just generally, for stuff that should be referred to the Ethics Committee, I voted present,’ Subramanyam told Fox News Digital of his vote.

Houlahan said, ‘I worry that we’re in an endless cycle of tit-for-tat. What [Garcia] did was not correct. But my choice was to say that this needed to be taken up in the Ethics Committee. That’s why I voted the way I voted, because I don’t want people to continue to bring up resolutions against each other for every single thing that happens.’

Craig and Perez declined to elaborate on their votes.

Perez had accused García of ‘undermining the process of a free and fair election’ by abruptly changing course on his re-election bid hours before the filing deadline in his deep-blue Illinois district. Critics of the move said the timing ensured García’s chief of staff was the only person able to file to run instead.

The division caused a political headache for House Democratic leadership, which opposed the resolution.

House Democrats who voted in favor of rebuking García did so against the expressed wishes of Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., who said Monday that Americans were ‘focused on the high cost of living in the United States of America.’

‘I do not support the so-called resolution of disapproval, and I strongly support Congressman Chuy García. He’s been a progressive champion for disenfranchised communities for decades, including during his time in Congress. And he’s made life better for the American people,’ Jeffries said.

He released an additional statement on Tuesday morning alongside Democratic Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., urging opposition to the resolution.

‘He is a good man who has always prioritized the people he represents, even while experiencing unthinkable family tragedy. We unequivocally oppose this misguided resolution and urge our colleagues in the House Democratic Caucus to reject it,’ they wrote.

García said his decision was due to health reasons for himself and his family, as well as a desire to spend more time with his grandchildren.

Democrats’ bid to kill the measure failed on Monday night, with Perez and Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, voting with Republicans to proceed with the vote.

Perez laid out her case during debate on the measure shortly thereafter.

‘I like Chuy García. I think his reasons for retiring are noble. We are not here to adjudicate the character of Chuy García. I’m asking the body to consider a set of facts laid before us tonight about how he chose his successor and deprived Americans the right to choose their elected representative,’ she said.

‘One week before the filing deadline, Congressman Chuy García filed for re-election and submitted the necessary signatures for that petition. But three days before the filing deadline, he also began collecting signatures for his chief of staff, who shares his last name. Just hours before the filing deadline, Representative García’s chief of staff submitted the paperwork to run with at least 2,500 signatures attached to it, and Chuy García’s signature was the very first one listed in the petition.’

During his own comments, García suggested his wife’s recent multiple sclerosis diagnosis was part of his decision to withdraw, while disputing other accusations against himself.

‘I filed to run for Congress because this work is more important than ever, and I wanted to deliver for my community and to be part, hopefully, of a new House majority next year. I followed the rules of Illinois and its election law … And contrary to claims that were made earlier today, I did not circulate any petitions that I was accused of circulating. I only circulated when I filed on the first day,’ García said.

‘But as I looked ahead, I had to be honest about what the next term would demand and what my family needed. I saw the big picture — supporting my wife as we managed her illness, taking better care of my own health and being present for the grandson that we just adopted two weeks ago. It was a tough decision, but I made that choice.’


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz called the recent killings of Christians in Nigeria ‘genocide wearing the mask of chaos.’

Waltz made the remarks Tuesday at an event hosted by the United States Mission to the United Nations that spotlighted religious violence and the killings of Christians in the most populous African nation.

‘There is a body of evidence, and you are going to hear that from our experts today that paints a very grim picture of disproportionate suffering among Christians, where, again, families are torn apart, clergy is repeatedly assassinated, and entire congregations, church congregations,’ he said.

‘Folks, we have an entire faith that is being erased. One bullet at a time, one torched Bible at a time.’

Rapper Nicki Minaj, who was born in Trinidad and Tobago, also spoke at the event, saying she wanted to speak out against injustice and stand up for people who are persecuted for their beliefs.

‘In Nigeria, Christians are being targeted, driven from their homes and killed. Churches have been burned. Families have been torn apart and entire communities live in fear constantly, simply because of how they pray,’ she told attendees.

‘Sadly, this problem is not only a growing problem in Nigeria, but also in so many other countries across the world, and it demands urgent action,’ Minaj said. ‘And I want to be clear, protecting Christians in Nigeria is not about taking sides or dividing people. It is about uniting humanity.’

Minaj’s speech came after President Donald Trump threatened in a November Truth Social post to send U.S. troops ‘guns-a-blazing’ into the most populous country in Africa to ‘completely wipe out the Islamic Terrorists who are committing these horrible atrocities.’

The president also threatened to stop all aid and assistance if the violence continued.

Nigerian President Bola Tinubu responded to Trump’s threat, writing on social media that his administration has worked with Christian and Muslim leaders to address security challenges affecting citizens across all faiths and regions.

‘The characterisation of Nigeria as religiously intolerant does not reflect our national reality, nor does it take into consideration the consistent and sincere efforts of the government to safeguard freedom of religion and beliefs for all Nigerians,’ he wrote on X.

‘Religious freedom and tolerance have been a core tenet of our collective identity and shall always remain so. Nigeria opposes religious persecution and does not encourage it.’

Open Doors, an international Christian organization that supports persecuted believers, said attacks are most common in the northern, Muslim-majority states of Nigeria but have started spreading into the Middle Belt and farther south.

The organization stated that Christians are at risk from targeted attacks by Islamist militants, including Fulani fighters and Boko Haram, and women are often killed and subjected to sexual violence.


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Former national security officials could soon lose their security clearances — or even face lifetime bans from lobbying for foreign adversaries — under a new crackdown from Texas Republicans John Cornyn and August Pfluger.

The three-bill package takes direct aim at Washington’s revolving door, closing the loopholes that have let former officials and power brokers — many with deep knowledge of U.S. defense secrets — quietly push the interests of China, Russia and other hostile regimes inside the U.S. government.

If enacted, the legislation would require the Pentagon to revoke security clearances from former defense officials who lobby for Chinese-owned companies and impose a lifetime ban on any Senate-confirmed official lobbying on behalf of designated adversaries — including China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.

A third measure — the PAID OFF Act (Preventing Adversary Influence, Disinformation and Obscured Foreign Financing Act) — would overhaul the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) by eliminating the ‘commercial’ and Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) exemptions for entities tied to countries of concern. That change would force anyone representing or advocating for companies substantially owned or controlled by adversary governments, such as China or Russia, to register publicly as foreign agents and would expand the Justice Department’s enforcement authority to pursue unregistered influence campaigns.

The new bills aim to tighten lobbying restrictions amid a growing list of former officials and politically connected figures who have leveraged their Washington access to benefit foreign governments and corporations with minimal disclosure.

The effort marks the full bicameral rollout of the Cornyn-Pfluger package. Cornyn introduced the PAID OFF and CLEAR Path Acts earlier this year in the Senate and is introducing the REVOKE Act today, while Pfluger is introducing all three bills in the House.

The legislation has bipartisan consensus: Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., is the Democratic Senate co-lead on each measure, while Rep. Jason Crow, D-Colo., is co-sponsoring the CLEAR Path and PAID Off Acts, while Rep. Don Davis, D-Ill., is co-sponsoring the REVOKE Act.

The REVOKE Act was included in the House-passed National Defense Authorization Act, and the PAID OFF Act was included in the Senate-passed version, giving key parts of the proposal bipartisan traction in both chambers.

From the Pentagon’s E-ring to K Street boardrooms, a generation of former officials has turned national security experience into private contracts with foreign-linked companies. 

The same revolving door extended into the legal world. President Barack Obama’s Attorney General Loretta Lynch, now a partner at a major Washington firm, represented DJI Technology, the Chinese drone manufacturer later labeled by the Pentagon as a ‘Chinese military company.’ In 2023, she wrote to the War Department urging DJI’s removal from that list and led litigation challenging the designation before the company changed counsel in December.

DJI’s influence campaign in Washington reached far beyond Lynch’s firm. Jeff Denham, a former Republican congressman and Air Force veteran, was among the lobbyists listed on K&L Gates’s 2020 filings for DJI, focused on defense and commerce issues.

John P. Flynn, a former Air Force officer and deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force for legislative liaison, also appeared on Squire Patton Boggs’s lobbying disclosures for the company in 2022 and 2023. Their paths from military and congressional service to representing a Chinese defense-linked firm show how deeply the revolving door runs — and how easily government experience in the national security realm can become a global commodity once officials enter the private sector.

That network extended to Barry Rhoads, the chairman of Cassidy & Associates, one of Washington’s most established defense lobbying firms. A former Army JAG officer and counsel to the House Appropriations Committee’s Defense Subcommittee, Rhoads was listed among the lobbyists who represented DJI between 2018 and 2022. His decades of Capitol Hill and Pentagon experience made him a sought-after adviser for defense contractors — and, under current law, even for companies tied to U.S. adversaries.

In another high-profile example, former Defense Secretary William S. Cohen once worked with Huawei Technologies, the Chinese telecom company later deemed a U.S. national security risk. After leaving the Pentagon, Cohen founded The Cohen Group, which advised Huawei in 2010.

A spokesperson for the firm told Fox News Digital the work was done ‘with the support of the Department of Defense and Director of National Intelligence’ and was meant to limit Huawei’s business in the U.S. to activities acceptable to the U.S. government. The firm said it helped draft a plan that would have restricted Huawei’s sales under a national security agreement, but ended the project when the company ‘decided to take a different path.’

U.S. intelligence agencies have since warned that Huawei’s technology could be used by Beijing for espionage, prompting limits on its access to American networks and suppliers.

Lynch, Flynn, Denham and Rhoads did not respond to requests for comment.

The pattern has not been limited to defense insiders. Hunter Biden, who has faced a years-long Justice Department investigation into his foreign business dealings, including work for a Romanian real estate tycoon and his position on the board of the Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings, has also drawn scrutiny from congressional investigators.

They have examined his contacts with businessmen linked to Russian and Chinese interests during the same period. No charges have been filed under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, but the probe has drawn attention to how politically connected figures can pursue lucrative overseas ventures that blur the line between private consulting and foreign influence. 

‘It is the bare minimum expectation that U.S. government employees work for the betterment of America, both during their service and long after it. Yet far too often, we see individuals leave government only to lobby on behalf of foreign adversaries who wish to see America fail,’ said Pfluger in a statement. ‘This is a dangerous flaw in the incentive structure for those serving at the highest levels of government.’

 ‘American policy should not in any way reflect the handiwork of foreign adversaries who are actively working to tip the scales in their favor and undermine our interests,’  said Cornyn. 


This post appeared first on FOX NEWS