A massive aerospace company aggressively vying to build the successor to the International Space Station could be undermined by its cozy stance toward China, our main competitor in space.
The California-based Vast is one of several companies competing for the NASA <a href="https://www.nasa.gov/johnson/jsc-procurement/cldc/">contract</a> to fund the private-sector successor to the International Space Station ahead of its planned retirement in 2030. Vast, however, has key business ventures that align it with the Chinese Communist Party.
In February 2024, Vast <a href="https://www.addvaluetech.com/media/vast-selects-addvalue-for-haven-1-space-station-connectivity/">partnered</a> with satellite communication firm Addvalue Technologies to supply communications systems for a precursor to its proposed ISS successor. Addvalue operates inside China through a wholly owned Beijing subsidiary, Zhongxin Chuangzhi Technologies (Beijing) Ltd, and lists an office inside the capital city.
That subsidiary has deep ties to the Chinese Communist government, supplying CCP-aligned companies with communications technology for years. The subsidiary signed a lucrative <a href="https://www.addvaluetech.com/media/addvalue-secured-new-additional-contract-for-its-ifleetone-terminals-to-cttic-shanghai/">contract</a> to supply thousands of vessel-monitoring terminals to licensed satellite distributor CTTC-Shanghai. CTTC Shanghai&#8217;s parent company, the China Transport Telecommunication and Information Center, is an arm of the CCP&#8217;s Ministry of Transport.
A former Trump administration national security official told The Daily Wire that this is &#8220;not just another procurement.&#8221;
“The U.S. should not entrust taxpayer-funded, national security-sensitive space infrastructure to Vast while serious questions remain about the company’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party,&#8221; the national security official said. &#8220;A commercial space station is not just another procurement, it is a strategic asset with direct implications for American technological leadership and national security. Washington must ensure that any company seeking federal contracts is independent of foreign influence, control, or leverage.”
Another obstacle to its procurement is its posture towards President Donald Trump. Garret Reisman, a former NASA astronaut and Vast&#8217;s astronaut advisor, said in an Instagram video endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris that he would like to &#8220;punch Trump in the face.&#8221; The post drew likes from multiple Vast employees.
Vast founder and crypto billionaire Jed McCaleb, who continues to serve as the company&#8217;s primary financial backer, gave $500,000 to <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/we-deserve-better-inc/C00858779/summary/2024">We Deserve Better</a>, a super PAC that backed the Democrat presidential campaign for Dean Phillips, according to Federal Election Commission filings.
Top employees also aligned themselves with Eileen Gu, the American-born Olympic star who opted to abandon the U.S. team and instead represent Team China in the Winter Olympics.
Drew Feustel, Vast&#8217;s lead astronaut and former NASA acting chief astronaut, and chief design and Marketing Officer Hillary Coe liked an Instagram <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DXKsz7NiGlc/">post</a> from Eileen Gu — the American-born Olympic star who opted to abandon the U.S. Olympic Ski and Snowboarding team and instead represent Team China in the Winter Olympics. Gu has never publicly acknowledged or condemned the CCP&#8217;s human rights abuses, including its treatment of Uyghur muslims.
The aerospace company has also fully embraced DEI and other leftist tropes in official proceedings. In a 2024 filing with the Biden Federal Communications Commission, Vast urged regulators to move away from gendered language like &#8220;manned spacecraft,&#8221; writing that such language is &#8220;misaligned with recent FCC proceedings that have sought approaches that promote diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility.&#8221;
Vast is seen as a serious contender for the contract to replace the space station. NASA is expected to finalize the Phase 2 contract in the coming months. China&#8217;s Tiangong space station will be the only permanent station in orbit if no American station is ready when the ISS is retired.
Vast did not respond to a request for comment.

Haven1

The Company That Wants To Build America’s Next Space Station May Have A China Problem

china

international space station

nasa

national security

space

vast

Far-Left streamer Hasan Piker’s younger brother spent more than a decade as an aerospace engineer at Boeing, working on some of the U.S. military’s most sensitive aircraft and space programs while holding a security clearance.
Murat Piker’s resume includes work on Air Force One, the E-6B “Doomsday Plane” responsible for maintaining communications with America’s nuclear arsenal, and other advanced military systems, according to his public professional profile and reporting from the <a href="https://freebeacon.com/media/hasan-pikers-wingman-brother-is-space-engineer-with-security-clearances-whos-worked-on-air-force-one-and-nuclear-doomsday-plane-for-boeing/">Washington Free Beacon</a>.
Murat worked full-time for Boeing for more than a decade before leaving the company earlier this year. His <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/muratpiker">LinkedIn profile</a> says he worked in Boeing Defense &amp; Space on “Space Vehicle Structures Design” and that he possessed “active Security Clearances.”
It also lists work involving the E-6B, E-3 AWACS, E-7 AEW&amp;C, the Navy’s Orca undersea drone, and Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft. The E-6B, in particular, is no ordinary aircraft. The modified Boeing 707 serves as a key component of the U.S. military’s nuclear command-and-control system, allowing the president and senior military commanders to communicate with the nation’s nuclear forces if conventional communications infrastructure is destroyed during a nuclear conflict.
Murat has also publicly claimed that he worked “a little bit” on the VC-25B, the designation for one of the two new aircraft being built to replace the current Air Force One fleet. “I actually worked on VC-25B a little bit,” Murat told <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/hasan-piker-twitch-stream-midterms-1235604577/">Rolling Stone</a> this month. His brother Hasan immediately downplayed the accomplishment. “Yeah, on the toilet. Don’t let him act like he did anything cool,” Hasan joked.
A source close to Murat’s work disputed that he was actually assigned to the VC-25B program and said he did not possess the clearance required for the work. However, Murat’s public resume lists a series of high-security military aviation projects, and another person familiar with his work history told the Free Beacon that he held a “top secret” clearance.
“As a matter of privacy and security, Boeing does not disclose information about the specific work statement of former employees,” a company spokesman told the Free Beacon. “Boeing employees are only granted and maintain security clearances after successfully completing the rigorous background check and vetting process administered by the United States government.”
The revelation is particularly notable given Murat’s close relationship with his older brother, who has become one of the most prominent and controversial far-Left voices in American politics.
Hasan has repeatedly made inflammatory statements about the United States, Israel, and terrorism, including saying that “America deserved 9/11” and that he would vote for Hamas over Israel. He has also defended Hezbollah and blamed American foreign policy for anti-American Islamist rhetoric.
Murat has regularly appeared alongside Hasan on his livestreams and accompanied him to events, including international trips. The brothers even watched the launch of a ViaSat-3 satellite together in 2023, a project Murat said he had worked on for years.
Hasan has defended his younger brother&#8217;s decision to work for Boeing after fans criticized the company’s involvement in the defense industry. “You think he doesn’t want to work for NASA? He loves NASA,” Hasan said during a 2022 livestream.
Murat, meanwhile, appears to have largely kept his own politics out of the spotlight. His public profile is considerably less incendiary than his brother’s, and there is no indication that he has improperly disclosed classified information.
But the combination of Murat’s years inside America’s defense-industrial complex, his access to sensitive military programs, and his unusually close relationship with one of the country’s most prominent anti-American political commentators raises obvious questions, including just how much sensitive knowledge Hasan Piker’s younger brother — and Hasan himself — had access to while working at Boeing.

Untitled design (6)

The ‘Top Secret’ Access Hasan Piker’s Brother Had To America’s Military Secrets

air force one

boeing

hasan piker

security clearance

A high-ranking member of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is behind the purchase of a historic building just hundreds of feet from the White House, according to a new investigation.
The Philip Qiu and Family Foundation purchased the Securities Building, located approximately 650 feet northeast of the White House grounds, for $8.4 million on July 21, <a href="https://dailycaller.com/2026/08/13/exclusive-ccp-intel-official-building-purchase-steps-from-white-house/">according</a> to the Daily Caller. 
The foundation&#8217;s namesake, Philip Qiu, has held multiple positions in Chinese government, security, and organizations linked to the Chinese Communist Party&#8217;s United Front Work Department, the Caller reported. 
“The CCP is like a kind, but firm parent,” Qiu said in 2021, according to the Caller&#8217;s translation of a Chinese announcement. “It has guided our people out of hardship, led China’s sons and daughters to build a new country and is steering us toward great national rejuvenation.”
The purchase has raised national security concerns due to both Qiu&#8217;s background and the building&#8217;s proximity to the White House. Former CIA operations officer Bryan Dean Wright told the Caller that a property in such a location could be used for intelligence collection, including as a listening post or for collecting electronic communications.
Qiu, whose Chinese name is Qiu Feili, began his career as a detective with the Criminal Investigation Team in Shanghai, which is part of Shanghai&#8217;s Public Security Bureau, a subordinate to China&#8217;s Ministry of Public Security. 
The Caller investigation also found that Qiu has held at least three positions in organizations connected to the CCP&#8217;s United Front Work Department, whose activities the House Select Committee on the CCP has described as a combination of influence and intelligence operations.
Among those positions, Qiu has served since 2021 as chairman of the Shanghai Overseas Chinese Foundation (SOCF), which operates within Shanghai&#8217;s United Front system. At a 2021 foundation meeting, Qiu pledged that the organization would carry out Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s orders on overseas Chinese affairs, often referring to the CCP as “our party,” according to the Caller. 
The Philip Qiu and Family Foundation is also connected to the Chinese American Museum in Washington, D.C. (CAMDC), which Qiu co-founded in 2017 with Chen Xiaoping, also known as Neil Chen. Chen previously chaired the SOCF and has held several positions in the Chinese government.
The museum says it is not &#8220;funded, controlled, or influenced by any foreign government,&#8221; but the Caller found that Chinese government entities have co-sponsored at least eight of its programs. Four reportedly received support from religious entities controlled by the United Front Work Department.
Michael Lucci, CEO of the national security advocacy group State Armor, told the Caller that the risks posed by Qiu&#8217;s ownership of the property were &#8220;screamingly obvious&#8221; and urged the federal government to intervene.
At the time of publication, Qiu and the CAMDC had not responded to The Daily Wire’s request for comment.

Chinese Intel Asset Buys Real Estate On White House Doorstep

chinese communist party

united front work department

white house

world

More than 140 research papers written by Harvard researchers were authored in collaboration with Chinese universities known as the Seven Sons of National Defense, according to a report from the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, Fox News <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/harvard-china-links-unearthed-congress-finds-140-papers-coauthored-ccp-military-universities">reported</a>. The Pentagon and other U.S. officials have identified those schools as central to China’s defense research and military modernization.
Lawmakers argue in the report that Harvard’s approach to research gave way to partnerships that could advance the technological and military capabilities of its biggest adversary.
“From allowing violence against anti-China protestors to collaborating with entities linked to the PLA [Chinese People&#8217;s Liberation Army], Harvard has made serious mistakes and must act now to prevent more,” said Committee Chairman Rep. John Moolenaar (R-MI). “It should use this investigation as a catalyst for significant reforms that end CCP influence on campus and prioritize secure American research.”
Education Department data cited in the report show Harvard received more than $600 million from China under Section 117 foreign gift rules, more than any other American university. The committee says the volume of that funding raises the need for tighter oversight of research partnerships and disclosure practices.
<div>
One 2023 paper looked at bio-inspired soft robots for deep-sea exploration. A Harvard-affiliated researcher shared authorship with a scientist from Beihang University (Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics), which has been on the Commerce Department’s Entity List since 2001.
While Harvard’s research compliance office described the project as nonmilitary research, lawmakers noted the project could help possible military applications, such as underwater detection. The paper was one of the examples the committee highlighted when examining Harvard’s collaborations with institutions linked to China’s defense research.
<section></section>
</div>
Another 2023 paper involved a researcher at China’s National University of Defense Technology, an institution on a U.S. restricted list. That study examined magnetic materials and acknowledged partial support from the U.S. Army Research Office.
Engineering accounted for the largest share of the Harvard-affiliated research involving Seven Sons institutions, the committee found after reviewing publications across dozens of disciplines.
Harvard said it “shares the Committees&#8217; concern about geopolitical risks, including threats posed by the Chinese Communist Party, and is committed to continuing to conduct research and academic programming with protections that prioritize U.S. interests and national security.”
“Harvard follows national security standards and guidance set by the federal government for its international collaborations,” a university spokesman said. “Additionally, where appropriate, federal agencies who are best able to assess real-time national security risks work with Harvard to put in place agency approved risk mitigation measures for federally funded research.”
The university added that it “disagrees with mischaracterizations that fail to reflect the university’s documented record of compliance, cooperation, and commitment to protecting and advancing U.S. interests, national security, and global standing.”
The committee also investigated Harvard’s executive education program with China’s National Healthcare Security Administration, which trained Chinese health officials on international health insurance systems. 
Attendance and registration records listed officials connected to the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, or XPCC, in connection with some sessions. The Treasury Department sanctioned XPCC in 2020 over human rights abuses against Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in Xinjiang.
The report acknowledges it is unclear whether XPCC officials ultimately attended every program in question. It states, however, that Harvard had advance participant information for a 2020 online session that included XPCC-affiliated officials and did not take further action. 
Harvard professor Winnie Yip, who helped organize the program, told committee investigators she did not know XPCC was a sanctioned entity at the time and had not received training on sanctions compliance.
Committee members argued that Harvard’s research security process stayed too focused on narrow legal compliance and underweighted broader national security risks of working with Chinese military-connected institutions. Harvard research official John H. Shaw told investigators the university reviews collaborations on a case-by-case basis and does not ban all projects with Chinese institutions. The panel, however, said that research with entities inside China’s military civil collaboration system can still have military applications even when the work is unclassified and intended for publication.
The report also raises questions about Harvard Global Research and Support Services, a nonprofit affiliated with the university that can accept awards when Harvard is unable to accept a sponsor’s terms directly. 
The report recommended that Harvard prohibit research relationships with entities on restricted or sanctioned lists and centralize its research security oversight. It also urged Congress to strengthen foreign funding disclosure requirements for universities.

Widener Memorial Library with Huge Veritas Banners Harvard University Cambridge MA

Ivy League Elite Quietly Collaborated With China’s Top Defense Universities

harvard university

house select committee on the chinese communist party

john moolenaar

politics

In late July, a series of images began circulating on social media that perfectly captured the surreal, self-inflicted decline of Western civilization.
In broad daylight, on a European beach, an African migrant was caught performing a depraved act of public indecency in front of families and children. He was jerking off on a public beach in front of kids.
It was an act that, in any sane society, would have resulted in the immediate arrest and incarceration of the predator. When bystanders rightfully intervened to stop him, i.e., beat the sh*t out of him, and rightfully so, a startling thing happened: a white woman threw herself into the fray.
But she didn’t intervene to protect the children.
She wasn’t calling for the police, nor was she shielding the innocent. Instead, she placed herself in harm&#8217;s way to protect the predator. She leaned toward the man with a look of intense, therapeutic concern, a gaze usually reserved for a patient on a therapist’s couch, not a criminal caught in a most disgusting act.
When I recently commented on this incident, observing that I want a man who looks at me the way liberal white women look at invaders who commit such acts, the predictable outrage machine went into overdrive.
But my critique wasn&#8217;t merely about a single viral video; it was an indictment of a much deeper, more dangerous pathology taking root in our culture.
While this specific nightmare took place on a European beach, it serves as a grim &#8220;coming attractions&#8221; trailer for our American future if we don’t stop it in its tracks. We are currently witnessing an epidemic of pathological empathy among liberal white women, and it is quietly becoming the single greatest threat to our national security.
This isn’t compassion; it’s a desperate need for moral validation. We have raised a generation of progressive white women who have been taught that their primary duty to society is to apologize for it. They have been conditioned by an education system and a cultural elite into believing that &#8220;safety&#8221; is a microaggression, that &#8220;borders&#8221; are racist, and that &#8220;sovereignty&#8221; is a code word for bigotry.
The result is a global double standard that would be hilarious if it weren’t so deadly. In Spain, when tens of thousands of migrants swarm an enclave in a single weekend, the media rightfully calls it a crisis. The European Union holds emergency meetings.
But here in America? Under the Biden-Harris administration, we’ve had millions cross our southern border — a slow-motion colonization that makes the European crisis look tame. Yet, if you, a tax-paying American citizen, dare to call it an invasion, you are immediately branded a racist. You are a bigot. You are deemed a threat to &#8220;democracy.&#8221;
This performative empathy extends far beyond the beach; it is fundamentally altering our behavior at the ballot box. These same progressive voters, who claim to be the vanguard of &#8220;women’s rights,&#8221; are the primary engine behind a radical effort to erase women. They march for equality while simultaneously carrying water for radical ideologies that view women as second-class citizens. They scream about bodily autonomy while rolling out the red carpet for cultures that view women as property.
It is the ultimate political Stockholm Syndrome of the 21st century.
This is not just a political disagreement; it is a mental illness breakdown on a national scale. Liberal white women have been told that their inherent &#8220;privilege&#8221; is a sin that can only be washed away through a policy of radical self-destruction.
They view themselves as the moral arbiters of society, and welcoming the &#8220;invader&#8221; — no matter how dangerous or lawless — is their way of proving they are &#8220;good people.&#8221; They prioritize the comfort of the lawbreaker over the safety of the citizen because their manufactured guilt will not allow them to do anything else.
They would rather see their cities burn and their daughters shower next to grown men than risk being called &#8220;intolerant&#8221; at a wine-and-cheese mixer. The progressive Left has been trained to hand over the keys to the kingdom and then apologize for the locks being too difficult to pick.
They are welcoming criminals who despise our values, our laws, and our way of life, all while nodding along in a trance of performative empathy. And we have enabled this destruction from within, handing the future of our country over to pathological empathizers.
If this is the &#8220;future&#8221; the Left is building, I want no part of it. It’s time to wake up, throw the &#8220;Coexist&#8221; bumper stickers in the trash, and start acting like a nation that actually wants to survive.
We need to return to a reality where &#8220;illegal&#8221; actually means illegal. Because if we can’t tell the difference between a refugee seeking asylum and a public predator exploiting our goodwill, we don’t have a country anymore — we have a crime scene.
America first, or America is finished.
***
Congresswoman Nancy Mace is the U.S. representative for South Carolina’s 1st congressional district.

FDA Commissioner Califf Testifies In House Oversight Hearing

Nancy Mace: The Liberal White Woman Is A National Security Threat

border security

europe

illegal immigration

nancy mace

opinion

President Donald Trump&#8217;s former National Security Adviser John Bolton pleaded guilty Friday to one of 18 counts against him pertaining to his handling of classified documents.
The plea agreement could help Bolton, who has since become a vocal critic of the commander-in-chief, avoid prison time, according to the Associated Press. His sentencing is scheduled for October 28.
The ex-federal official faces up to 60 months behind bars, according to NBC News. He has also agreed to pay a $2.25 million fine while forfeiting his pension.
<div style="max-width: 728px; margin: 0 auto;"><iframe style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; max-width: 100%; width: 100%; margin: 20px auto 5px; border: 0;" src="https://player.mux.com/DrMtAa9EHGLdjH7300ZSm7m024JOCnnjwT?metadata-video-content-type=embed_video&amp;metadata-video-id=ca93cd42-9700-45f7-a274-7e0ed1200e52&amp;metadata-video-stream-type=on-demand&amp;metadata-video-title=2026-06-26%20John%20Bolton%20Pleads%20Guilty&amp;poster=https%3A%2F%2Fdailywireplus-v2.imgix.net%2Fimages%2Fembedded-videos%2Fea5cfd47-2887-4965-ac98-86b701063dca.png&amp;autoplay=false&amp;accent-color=%23DB3D3B&amp;primary-color=%23ffffff&amp;secondary-color=%23000000" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
Credit: CSPAN
</div>
The plea agreement, however, recommends a prison sentence that doesn&#8217;t exceed five years.
Bolton is accused of retaining information that was &#8220;classified at the highest classification levels,&#8221; U.S. Attorney Kelly O. Hayes said during a press conference following Friday&#8217;s hearing.
The document at the center of his guilty plea &#8220;revealed intelligence about an adversary&#8217;s plans for an attack conducted against U.S. forces&#8221; serving overseas, &#8220;human intelligence using sensitive sources and methods,&#8221; and &#8220;a covert action program,&#8221; Hayes said. In total, Bolton shared more than 1,000 pages of information related to his role as national security adviser.
&#8220;As national security adviser to the president of the United States, Mr. Bolton had access to and was responsible for safeguarding the most sensitive national defense information, including classified material. Mr. Bolton knew how to handle classified information, where it should be stored, how it should be stored, and with whom he could share that information,&#8221; Hayes said.
&#8220;He also knew the damage to national security that could be caused by mishandling that sensitive information. Nevertheless, as Mr. Bolton just admitted, he put our national security at grave risk in violation of the law,&#8221; she added.
Some of the classified information was contained in diary entries that Bolton shared with relatives while authoring a memoir, according to the AP. The indictment centered on notes Bolton shared with his wife and daughter.
In sending one message containing classified information, Bolton wrote to his family members, “None of which we talk about!!!,” according to the AP, which cited prosecutors&#8217; allegations. A relative then responded, “Shhhhh.&#8221;
The federal government began investigating Bolton before Trump&#8217;s return to the White House. The FBI searched Bolton&#8217;s home in Maryland in August 2025.

John Bolton Expected To Plead Guilty In Classified Documents Case

John Bolton Pleads Guilty In Classified Documents Case

donald trump

John Bolton

When I served as White House Chief Information Officer under President George W. Bush, my responsibility was protecting the technology the federal government relied on every day while anticipating future threats. That same mindset is urgently needed as America enters the next era of artificial intelligence.
President Donald Trump has an opportunity very few presidents have ever received: the chance to shape the future of a technology that will transform our economy, national security, military capabilities, and everyday lives. The decisions made during this administration will determine whether America continues leading the AI revolution or allows adversaries like China to set the rules of the next technological era.
The recent dispute between the White House and Anthropic over its newest frontier AI models should serve as a wake-up call. After officials raised concerns about a potential security vulnerability known in the industry as a “jailbreak,” the administration moved to restrict international access to Anthropic’s latest models.
The company and government officials reportedly disagreed over the severity of the risk. Anthropic argued the vulnerability was limited, while federal officials viewed the potential national security implications differently.
The lesson is bigger than one company or one model. Technology has advanced faster than the systems we have built to secure it, and America cannot afford to create artificial intelligence policy one emergency at a time.
President Trump understands something Washington too often forgets. American strength comes from American innovation. We cannot regulate ourselves into second place, but we also cannot ignore the reality that powerful technologies require serious safeguards.
The first wave of generative AI introduced millions of people to tools capable of answering questions, drafting documents, and creating images. The next generation is far more powerful — as frontier AI models, Loop engineering, and Agentic AI become capable of stronger autonomy, reasoning, coding, and processing enormous amounts of information.
Agentic AI represents the next major shift, moving from tools that simply respond to humans toward systems that can independently complete tasks. Instead of asking a chatbot a question, a person may soon give an AI system a larger goal. The AI can create a plan, interact with other software, analyze results, and execute complex workflows with limited human involvement. The AI could create its own AI agent helpers and teach itself new skills without a specific human prompt.
The opportunities are enormous, but so are the risks. As someone who has spent my career focused on implementing cutting-edge technology, innovation, and cybersecurity, I know an important reality that we typically do not design with the human in mind, and that no technology system is perfectly secure, including artificial intelligence.
The goal cannot be building an AI model that is impossible to manipulate. Every major technological advancement brings vulnerabilities that must be discovered, measured, and addressed. The better question is how we determine which vulnerabilities represent manageable risks and which create true national security threats.
That is why the reported discussions between the White House and Anthropic to create shared benchmarks for evaluating AI security flaws are an important step forward. Cybersecurity professionals have long understood that not every vulnerability is the same. A minor weakness, a theoretical exploit, and a catastrophic breach require very different responses. Artificial intelligence needs that same level of maturity.
The government has a responsibility to prevent our adversaries from exploiting advanced technology. Frontier AI could reshape cybersecurity, intelligence operations, economic competition, and military capabilities, which makes protecting America’s advantage one of the most important national security challenges of our time.
President Trump has the opportunity to build the foundation for a new era of American technological dominance that protects our country while unleashing the entrepreneurs, engineers, and companies that make the United States the greatest innovation engine in the world.
However, how the government responds matters. Businesses, innovators, and our allies need clear rules because sudden interventions create uncertainty and make it harder for responsible companies to plan, invest, and compete.
The nations that control the most advanced AI infrastructure will have significant strategic advantages, and the countries that get this right will define the next century. The private sector is already adapting as companies seek greater flexibility and control over their AI systems through lower-cost models, open-source alternatives, and multi-model approaches.
America does not need an AI strategy built around reacting to crises. We need one designed before the crisis happens, with clear technical standards, transparent security evaluations, strong enterprise protections, audit trails, responsible access controls, and meaningful cooperation between government and industry.
It also means remembering that artificial intelligence remains a human responsibility. As <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/world/pope-leo-warns-ai-risks-becoming-tool-domination-exclusion-death-new-encyclical">Pope Leo XIV warned</a> world leaders during discussions about AI, humanity cannot surrender its own decision-making authority to machines. Technology should strengthen human judgment, not replace it.
Artificial intelligence is no longer just another software tool. It is rapidly becoming a critical infrastructure that will shape businesses, governments, and national security for generations.
America has led every major technological revolution because we have embraced innovation, competed aggressively, and led with confidence. President Trump has a chance to make American AI leadership a defining legacy of his presidency if we build the strategy now, rather than waiting until the next crisis forces us to act.
***
Theresa Payton served as White House Chief Information Officer under President George W. Bush and was the first woman to hold the position. She is currently the CEO of Fortalice Solutions, a cybersecurity and intelligence operations company.

Global threat digital interface

I Protected Technology At The White House. President Trump Can Define America’s AI Future.

anthropic

DW Opinion

Information Technology

Former National Security Adviser John Bolton has agreed to plead guilty to a single felony count of illegally retaining sensitive national security information, dramatically narrowing a case that originally included 18 criminal charges.
According to multiple reports, Bolton is expected to formally enter the guilty plea during a June 26 hearing in federal court in Maryland. As part of the agreement, he has also agreed to pay a fine of approximately $2.25 million.
The Justice Department declined to comment on the agreement when contacted by The Daily Wire, referring inquiries to the court docket.
The plea deal significantly reduces Bolton&#8217;s legal exposure. Federal prosecutors originally <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/former-trump-adviser-john-bolton-plead-guilty-retaining-national-secur-rcna348479">charged</a> the former Trump administration official in October 2025 with eight counts of transmitting national defense information and ten counts of unlawfully retaining that information.
Under the agreement, Bolton will plead guilty to just one count of illegal retention of national security information. The charge carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison, though reports indicate he could ultimately receive anything from probation to a prison sentence.
<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/former-trump-adviser-john-bolton-plead-guilty-retaining-national-secur-rcna348479">According to sources familiar</a> with the matter, the conduct underlying the plea centers on  diary-style entries Bolton maintained during his time as national security adviser. The information was allegedly contained in electronic diary entries that he shared with family members.
Importantly, the plea does not involve allegations that Bolton provided classified documents to foreign governments or publicly released classified materials. &#8220;There’s no allegation that he took home any classified documents, or that he leaked any documents or that he shared any documents with foreign adversaries,&#8221; one source familiar with the case told NBC News.
Reports also indicate Bolton is not pleading guilty to the transmission-related charges that were included in the original indictment. The agreement comes after prosecutors alleged Bolton improperly retained sensitive information from his time in the Trump administration and shared more than 1,000 pages of information through a personal email account with unauthorized recipients, widely reported to be family members.
Federal investigators later examined Bolton&#8217;s handling of the information after his personal email account was reportedly compromised by Iranian-linked hackers.
Bolton, who served as President Donald Trump&#8217;s national security adviser from April 2018 until September 2019, had previously pleaded not guilty and repeatedly defended his conduct.
A source close to Bolton told <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/former-trump-adviser-john-bolton-plead-guilty-retaining-national-secur-rcna348479">NBC News</a> that the former national security adviser agreed to the plea in part to avoid a trial that could require additional classified information to be disclosed in court. &#8220;This was a very difficult decision for him,&#8221; the source said. &#8220;Most importantly, he is doing what leaders do and taking responsibility.&#8221;
Following the June 26 hearing, a federal judge will have up to 90 days to determine Bolton&#8217;s sentence.

Inside John Bolton’s Plea Deal: Former Trump Adviser Admits Guilt Over Classified Secrets

John Bolton Will Plead Guilty To Retaining National Security Secrets

Court

emails

Hacked

justice department

maryland

trial

President Donald Trump made the largest military spending request in history on Friday, with a proposed budget for the 2027 fiscal year of $1.5 trillion in defense spending, of which $1.1 trillion would be allocated for the Department of War and $350 billion specifically for critical munitions.
The record request was announced in January after former Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro’s capture, but before the United States launched attacks on Iran. To pay for the uptick in defense spending, the White House proposes to reduce non-defense spending by 10%.
The White House says the spending request reflects the current global threat environment and restores the readiness and lethality of the United States military. The money would also include a salary increase for all military personnel, with junior enlisted members receiving the largest salary bump at 7%. Mid-level service members, E-6 to O-3, would receive a 6% pay raise, and higher-ranking officers would receive a 5% raise. The White House predicts the increase will help with service member retention and recruiting efforts.
Funds would also be directed to the construction of the United States’ “Golden Dome,” which would be similar to Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system. The Golden Dome would track missiles through launch, in midcourse, and on their descent, potentially using space-based technology to intercept missiles. Unlike Israel’s Iron Dome, America’s Golden Dome would aim to stop long-range missiles and potentially hypersonic weapons, which are a growing concern posed by adversaries like China, Russia, and North Korea. 
The budget would also focus on “making shipbuilding great again,” adding 18 battle force ships and 16 non-battle force ships to the United States naval fleet. By ship count, <a href="https://www.usamm.com/blogs/news/ships-us-navy">China</a> currently has the largest navy, with the United States in second place.
Another large category of investment will be in critical mineral stockpiles. Currently, the United States Department of the Interior lists 60 minerals as critical, of which 15 are rare earth elements. The list ranges from aluminum to zinc, and the push reflects a broader strategy Trump employed in global negotiations. The president pushed to bring steel and aluminum production back to the United States while also taking a stake in MP Materials, which is the only fully integrated rare earth producer in America. Rare earth minerals are used in magnets and batteries, as well as defense applications and AI chips, making them a national security priority.
One of the Senate’s most prominent fiscal hawks, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), told The Daily Wire: “With total debt approaching $39 trillion, reduced spending in other areas will be required,” and &#8220;aggressively eliminating the $700 billion to $1 trillion in annual fraud would be the primary target.”
Johnson sees the road to getting the president’s request passed before the fiscal year begins on October 1 as challenging.
“Even though defense of our nation is the top priority of the government, Democrats will not support the president’s request,” said Johnson. The senator sees two paths ahead: Republicans voting to end the filibuster or pursuing a reconciliation appropriation process to get Republican votes.
If Republicans take the nuclear option, they would be able to pass bills with a simple majority of 51 votes instead of 60. The reconciliation appropriation process would also be challenging due to the Byrd Rule, which allows senators to block or remove parts of a reconciliation deal. A provision can be stripped out unless 60 senators vote to keep it, and with Republicans holding 53 seats, the road to 60 would be challenging.
President Trump signaled on Wednesday that defense spending is a top priority. “We’re fighting wars. It’s not possible for us to take care of day care, Medicaid, Medicare—all these individual things. They can do it on a state basis. You can’t do it on a federal.”
The federal government currently runs a deficit of $2 trillion. 
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the initial plan was for him to raise the United States&#8217; revenue by $1 trillion and for Elon Musk to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse by spending $1 trillion to balance the budget. Lutnick and Trump launched tariffs to increase revenue and created the gold card, which charges foreigners <a href="https://www.trumpcard.gov/">$1 million</a> for United States residency on the condition of background check approval. Revenues and spending cuts have fallen short of these expectations, creating tensions around increased military spending amid a runaway budget.

USS Nimitz, USS Gridley arrive in Panama on Southern Seas 2026 tour

Why Trump Just Requested The Largest Military Spending Budget In U.S. History

Budget

Defense

Department of Defense

department of war

U.S. Military

In current foreign-policy debates on the Right, some have pushed for dividing the world into “spheres of influence.” The United States would get the Americas, the People’s Republic of China would be granted sway over Asia, and Vladimir Putin would have carte blanche to intervene in European affairs. Far from being steely-eyed “realism,” splitting up the world in that way might actually not take the national interest seriously enough.
The “spheres of influence” gambit has a superficial logic. By some measures, the United States is a smaller portion of the global economy than it was fifty years ago. It faces growing fiscal burdens. Its industrial infrastructure has withered. Some of its longstanding allies have hit economic and demographic slumps. The growth of other regional powers means that the geopolitical landscape has become more multipolar. Yet withdrawing from much of the globe would hamper the ability of the United States to respond to those changed circumstances and would also undermine the policy aims of American populists. International networks will be critical for renewing American industry and reinforcing national sovereignty.
While some European partners need urgent reforms (from cutting red tape to hiking defense budgets), the continent remains a major global economic hub. The White House’s recent <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2025-National-Security-Strategy.pdf">National Security Strategy</a> observed that Europe “is home to cutting-edge scientific research and world-leading cultural institutions” and that it retains robust manufacturing and technology sectors. A full-scale American withdrawal from Europe could close down a crucial market for American industry (including defense sales) and could also threaten regional stability. Ending NATO and shuttering American military bases would create a power vacuum in that continent and also hurt the ability of the United States to project power abroad.
Nor can the United States afford to ignore Asia. Responsible for about half of <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/media-center/cusp-of-new-era-in-asia">global manufacturing output</a>, Asia has become the workshop for the world. The People’s Republic of China is already a manufacturing powerhouse, and it could consolidate industrial dominance if the United States severs its commitments to allies in the Pacific. That is especially the case for the advanced technologies that are the building blocks of the digital economy. A link in countless international supply chains, Taiwan produces about <a href="https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/taiwan-semiconductors-including-chip-design-ai">90%</a> of the world’s most advanced semiconductors. If the People’s Republic of China conquered that island, it would have a chokehold on the American and global economies. It could cut off the chips that are needed for cars, computers, missiles, and phones. Beijing is already trying to use its control of key market sectors to influence policymaking in the United States. Responding to American tariffs and industrial policy, China has floated restrictions on some critical minerals, including those that are essential for <a href="https://www.csis.org/analysis/chinas-new-rare-earth-and-magnet-restrictions-threaten-us-defense-supply-chains">defense technologies</a>.
Populists have rallied around the claims of national sovereignty, but allowing the Chinese Communist Party to cut off the American economy at a whim is the antithesis of national independence. While building out American domestic semiconductor production is a national-security imperative, that’s also a very long process. The United States cannot afford to surrender economic self-governance for the indefinite future while it waits for some eschaton of economic autarky.
Conversely, coordinating with allies in Europe and Asia can bolster economic agency. For example, the PRC is responsible for over <a href="https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2025/mcs2025-tungsten.pdf">80%</a> of the global annual production of tungsten, which is used for drills, computer chips, aerospace, x-rays, and more. The United States has not even mined tungsten commercially in over a decade. In addition to bringing back domestic tungsten production, American allies could help de-risk the tungsten market. Australia has massive tungsten reserves, and South Korea’s <a href="https://www.mining.com/sangdong-tungsten-mine-in-south-korea-returns-to-production-after-30-years/">Sangdong Mine</a> has returned to production for the first time in decades. Accessing those resources will require keeping Pacific alliances strong — and not surrendering that region to Beijing.
Likewise, allies in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East will continue to be important for American national-security aims. Even as it has stressed the need to reform certain geopolitical arrangements, the Trump administration’s foreign-policy strategy is premised on the United States being a global great-power. Losing the hard power that backs the dollar’s reserve-currency status would cause an immediate economic crisis at home, but a global defense infrastructure also helps target American foes abroad. The Jacksonian tradition of foreign policy — which prioritizes the targeted use of military force to defend the national interest — has achieved a renewed prominence in the Trump presidencies. Jacksonianism could be a way of rebalancing global commitments by keeping America’s rivals off-balance without tying down the United States. International alliances can help optimize such Jacksonian exertions of force.
From its very founding, the United States has prioritized having access to global markets. When the Barbary pirates threatened American ships, Thomas Jefferson sent frigates to Tripoli. To open up Japan, Commodore Matthew Perry brought the United States Navy to Edo Bay. The network of alliances in the aftermath of World War II could be seen as an extension of a long-term strategic imperative: that the Stars and Stripes should be able to move freely throughout the world and that those who live under that banner should be safe from both foreign and domestic threats.
We now face a very different political landscape from 1946 or 1999. Implementing “liberal democracy” in a country is a lot harder than getting an Amazon package there. If policymakers had sought to integrate the world into some post-historical bazaar, their dreams have been sorely disappointed. Great-power competition is back, and populist movements have roiled political establishments on both sides of the Atlantic. Those changes indicate the need to rethink international alliances without abandoning them entirely.
Yes, the United States needs to recognize the limits of power and to try to defer existential conflict with its competitors. It also needs to understand the interests of those competitors. At the same time, the United States needs to understand its own interests. Cutting itself off from allies in Europe, Asia, and elsewhere would squander a major geopolitical advantage and undercut efforts to build a stronger nation at home.
* * *
Fred Bauer is a writer from New England. Find his work at National Review, City Journal, The Atlantic, UnHerd, and The Washington Post. @fredbauerblog

Strategic world map with shipping infographics, flags and dice

The Plan To Split The World Into Spheres And What It Means For America

The Plan To Split The World Into Spheres And What It Could Means For America

Economics

russia

U.S. Navy

In a major escalation against foreign cyber threats, the Department of Justice on Thursday <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-disrupts-iranian-cyber-enabled-psychological-operations">announced</a> the seizure of four web domains allegedly used by the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) to facilitate psychological operations, destructive hacking, and what officials described as &#8220;transnational repression.&#8221;
The targeted websites — Justicehomeland[.]org, Handala-Hack[.]to, Karmabelow80[.]org, and Handala-Redwanted[.]to—allegedly served as the digital infrastructure for so-called &#8220;faketivist&#8221; groups that U.S. officials say operated as fronts for the Iranian government.
According to court documents, these sites were used to leak stolen data, dox dissidents, and incite violence against American citizens, journalists, and Israeli officials.
Attorney General Pamela Bondi characterized the move as a vital strike against state-sponsored extremism.
“Terrorist propaganda online can incite real-world violence,” Bondi said. “This network of Iranian-backed sites will no longer broadcast anti-American hate.”
The investigation, led by the FBI’s Baltimore Field Office, outlined what officials described as a coordinated Iranian cyber warfare &#8220;playbook.&#8221;
Authorities say operatives used the &#8220;Handala Hack&#8221; persona to claim responsibility for a March 2026 malware attack targeting a U.S.-based medical technology firm. The same network allegedly published the private information of nearly 190 individuals linked to the Israel Defense Forces, accompanied by warnings that their homes were under surveillance.
Perhaps most alarming were the &#8220;death threats&#8221; delivered via email accounts linked to the seized domains. Investigators uncovered messages sent to Iranian dissidents in the United States and abroad, claiming the regime had partnered with the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG) to carry out assassinations.
One email offered a $250,000 bounty for the beheading of two targets, declaring, &#8220;Our partners&#8230; in America and Canada have been given a list of our enemies.&#8221;
FBI Director Kash Patel said the operation disrupted a broader intimidation campaign.
&#8220;Iran thought they could hide behind fake websites and keyboard threats to terrorize Americans,&#8221; Patel said. &#8220;We took down four of their operation&#8217;s pillars and we&#8217;re not done. This FBI will hunt down every actor behind these cowardly death threats.&#8221;
The seizure also highlights Iran’s efforts to punish international adversaries. The Justice Department noted that the domain Justicehomeland[.]org was used to leak sensitive Albanian government documents in apparent retaliation for Albania&#8217;s support of the Iranian dissident group Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK).
Assistant Attorney General for National Security John A. Eisenberg reaffirmed the government’s commitment to dismantling Tehran&#8217;s cyber infrastructure, describing Iran as &#8220;the leading state sponsor of terrorism worldwide.&#8221;
In conjunction with the seizures, the State Department’s Rewards for Justice program is offering up to $10 million for information leading to the identification of foreign actors engaged in malicious cyber activities against U.S. critical infrastructure.

Iran’s Digital Terror Playbook Exposed As DOJ Just Took Out Key Pieces

Cybercrime

iran

I do not personally know Joe Kent, the former director of the National Counterterrorism Center, so I cannot speak to his character or private motives. But as someone who has publicly claimed friendship with Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard, I find it hard to see how detonating an <a href="https://x.com/C__Herridge/status/2034050521359634577?s=20">atomic bomb</a> on the eve of her testimony before Congress served anyone other than himself.
I sat next to Kent during Gabbard’s confirmation hearing before Congress last year as she showed the United States, our allies, and our adversaries exactly why she was capable of leading the greatest intelligence operation in the world. She handled herself with dignity and with the kind of steady resolve shown by someone who deeply desired to serve her country.
Kent, seated just behind her, wore a Hawaiian lei in a visible show of support for her leadership, her loyalty, and her judgment. That’s why his choice to resign publicly, and to communicate his dissent the way he did, raises an obvious question: where was that support for his friend when it mattered most?
Director Gabbard, for her part, got it exactly right. She has consistently pushed for exhausting diplomacy, but she also made clear that <a href="https://x.com/DNIGabbard/status/2033989780116033948?s=20">the president</a> is the one who decides what qualifies as a viable threat. That is how this works. A political appointee provides an assessment; the commander in chief makes the call. The Trump administration made its call based on the threat Iran posed to Americans and to our way of life.
And that is part of what makes Washington so maddening. This city is full of people who talk endlessly about loyalty, friendship, and principle, then abandon all three the moment public positioning becomes more useful. D.C. has earned its reputation as a town crowded with failed theater kids who routinely avoid demonstrating integrity or loyalty.
Again, I won’t pretend to know Mr. Kent’s intentions in releasing his letter, but his assessment contradicts both his own past <a href="https://x.com/joekent16jan19/status/1214960125200330752?s=20">statements</a> and the views of experts who have spent their lives studying the Middle East. People are free to change their minds, but that usually comes through deeper learning and self-correction. This does not seem to be that. I was not in the room for the threat discussions he now struggles to identify, though he seems to have no trouble tweeting about them, but I have studied Iran closely. And while I do not speak Farsi, I am confident “death to America” is not a warm salutation.
Isolationists fail to grasp a basic reality: this is not utopia. Our enemies, animated by a deep-seated hatred for everything America stands for, cannot be escorted hand-in-hand to peace and partnership. Meeting a threat on their doorstep is not a distraction from protecting the homeland — it is how you keep that threat from reaching ours.
The idea of shuttering our borders completely, allowing no one in or out, is both absurd and self-defeating. The world does not work that way. Plus, I would still like to plan my dream vacation to the South of France, for one thing, and for another, America would not have the power it now has to defend itself if it embraced that kind of isolation.
We are now 18 days into a military operation targeting a threat that has been at our doorstep for far too long. All Americans should support our warfighters and those standing with us against a regime that has terrorized the United States, our allies, our values, and its own people. We also have a duty to ask what our tax dollars are funding and why; questioning is good, because you learn things when you do.
Mr. Kent has every right, as a private citizen and taxpayer, to question and disagree with a military action. But the purpose of questioning is to educate, not to diminish American agency. The reflexive habit of crediting Israel, a nation the size of New Jersey, for every major policy decision made by the president of the United States undermines America’s military strength, economic power, and the very intelligence capabilities Mr. Kent supported. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the best: it had to be done.
To be clear, Iran’s leadership is the world’s number one sponsor of terrorism, a regime directly responsible for the loss of thousands of American lives. A regime that regularly murders its own people en masse and shuts down the internet for its 90 million citizens, cutting them off from telling the rest of the world the truth. A regime that bombs its own neighbors in the Middle East, just because it can. This is the same regime that sent representatives to the illegal, non-democratic swearing-in ceremony of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro. A regime that aligns closely with China and Russia in order to enforce authoritarian rule throughout the world and displace American influence. Failing to recognize the imminent threat Iran poses to Americans is either a severe misunderstanding of the danger or an intentional deflection.
Joe Kent’s public <a href="https://x.com/joekent16jan19/status/2033897242986209689?s=20">resignation letter</a> places him on a growing list of people whose judgment I have found deeply disappointing. Why? It is disappointing for several reasons. It is disappointing because Kent once spoke <a href="https://x.com/mtracey/status/2033955443010080897?s=20">clearly</a> about the <a href="https://x.com/joekent16jan19/status/1840425323743395853?s=20">threat Iran</a> poses to the <a href="https://x.com/joekent16jan19/status/1838963575320412395?s=20">United States</a>, only to now cloud that reality. It is disappointing because, until yesterday, he occupied a high-consequence role charged with protecting the homeland from major threats, which makes his sudden uncertainty confusing. And it is disappointing because, at this moment, during an ongoing conflict, his public dissent undermines America’s national security posture and, in turn, the safety of the warfighters carrying out the mission.
* * *
Taylor Hathorn is a foreign policy and national security analyst specializing in U.S. defense strategy, Iran and China policy, cybersecurity, and geopolitical risk. She serves as a National Security Fellow with the Independent Women’s Center for American Safety and Security and an Iran Policy Fellow with The Hamilton Society/Public Interest Fellowship. As a Gold Star sister, she is committed to policies supporting veterans and military families and frequently speaks on national security issues affecting service members and their families. She has appeared on NEWSMAX and PBS, and her writing can be found in The Hill, RealClearDefense, RealClearWorld, Townhall, and Evie Magazine. Follow her on X @taylorhathorn.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Menu