It was revealed last week that Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)’s driver for 20 years was a Chinese spy. But it was discovered five years ago by the FBI and never disclosed until Politico and San Francisco Chronicle uncovered it. Now more questions are being raised not only about the spy but about Feinstein’s closeness to the Chinese.
Feinstein’s driver also represented her at various functions and acted as a liaison to the Chinese community. Although the FBI advised her five years ago, it wasn’t made public and the driver was allowed to quietly retire. He was never arrested. Neither the FBI or Feinstein ever informed or questioned her staff about him or what they might know. And presumably, that means they also didn’t check other staff to see if anyone else had been compromised.
This raises lots of questions. The excuse for not charging him was it was judged he hadn’t passed anything top secret to the Chinese. But he had passed information to them. So why was he never charged? Even for failing to register as a foreign agent? Why is he still not being named?
And why hasn’t this been picked up by the national media?
And it prompts new questions about Feinstein’s closeness to the Chinese.
From Daily Wire:
On September 24, 2015, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) proposed legislation that would rename the street across from Red China’s embassy after pro-democracy activist Liu Xiaobo. “This would be the street sign that the Chinese ambassador would look at each day,” Cruz said. “This would be the address that every piece of correspondence going into the embassy and coming out of the embassy would have written on it … the PRC officials will be forced to recognize the bravery of Dr. Liu and to acknowledge it dozens of times a day – day after day after day.”
To Cruz’s horror, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) took the floor to object:
I can only infer that it has political implications, because the President of China is due to arrive here tomorrow and, therefore, this would be passed today, moved out of committee without a vote in front of the Senate. I don’t think that is the way we should do business in this Senate. Maybe people don’t believe diplomacy makes a difference, but I do.
Cruz, visibly angry, came back to the Senate floor. “The presence of President Xi in this country is precisely the reason that we should stand in unanimity in support of human rights,” Cruz said, his voice escalating. “Dr. Liu is in a Chinese prison, and the senior Senator from California is standing and objecting to recognizing this Nobel laureate’s bravery, is standing and objecting because presumably it would embarrass his Communist captors. I, for one, think as Americans we should not be troubled by embarrassing Communist oppressors.”
Exactly. Who could reasonably object to that?
In 2001, Harry Wu, who spent 19 years in the Chinese Gulag and dedicated his life to exposing the Communists’ human rights abuses, made this point:
Congress gave me nice support — Sens. Helms and Paul Wellstone of Minnesota. When I met Sen. Wellstone, he said, “Harry, I don’t need a brief — just tell me what you want me to do.” But they were only some of the senators. Others took a stand for communist China based on family or business interests. For example, Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.), her husband is a board member of COSCO [The PLA’s Chinese Overseas Shipping Corporation] and he has other investments in China. You see, this is the kind of person [Feinstein] who is never interested in my work.
More? In 2010, Jens Kastler wrote this for the Asia Times:
No US politician is believed to enjoy ties to China’s previous and present-day leaderships as close as Feinstein. During 30 years of frequent visits to Beijing, Feinstein developed friendships with Chinese officials as high-ranking as former president Jiang Zemin, former premier Zhu Rongji and Chongqing Party Secretary Bo Xilai – now arguably a rising political star in the country.
Controversially, on most of her trips to China, Feinstein has been accompanied by her investment-banker husband Richard Blum, to whom Feinstein has been married since 1980. Blum has been reported by US media as having extensive business interests with China. Feinstein is often described as one of the most powerful women in US politics.
But perhaps her worst reaction in commenting on the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. It’s still not clear how many people were killed when the Chinese government sent the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) into the square to clear out the peaceful protesting students.
But in a Wall Street Journal interview in 2010, Feinstein sought to explain the massacre in the best possible light for the Communist Party and the government.
“It just so happens I was here after that and talked to Jiang Zemin and learned that at the time China had no local police. It was just the PLA. And no local police that had crowd control. So, hence the tanks.”
Really? No, the PLA who killed the students only operates at the direction of the Party and the government. And it was ordered by the Politburo, as reports later revealed. It wasn’t “just the PLA.” There are no excuses. And unlike some protests here, the Chinese protesters, until they were attacked by the PLA were completely peaceful. The government attacked them and took them out because they had hundreds of thousands of people supporting them and the government was afraid of that support.
Feinstein has also demanded that a commission be created to explore human rights issues invoked by the “success and failures [of] both Tiananmen Square and Kent State,” suggesting a false equivalency between the two events. Kent State involved a shooting of protesters by the National Guard in 1970, not an order of the government.
As the Daily Wire notes, sadly, Liu Xiaobo died last year in Chinese custody and the street still does not bear his name.