Skip to content

Matlock Report

  • About Matlock Report
  • Founder
  • Capital Markets & Technology
  • Governments and Law
  • Art of Foreign Affairs
  • Contact
Matlock Report

Matlock Report

Where MARKETS ↔ TECHNOLOGY ↔ GOVERNMENTS Interconnect

U.S. “First Red Scare” and Chinese Espionage: America’s Game Plan for China’s Communist Party

January 28, 2019 by Leticia Matlock

“The penetration of an adversary’s operation is the ultimate goal in foreign intelligence, and from all indications, the Chinese had succeeded masterfully.”

 – I.C. Smith, FormerSpecial Agent at the FBI

Thousands of lives were ruined or lost by the U.S. government’s attempt to combat communism this past century.  The use of propaganda, blacklisting, and witch hunts targeted the State Department, film industry, and War with Vietnam. Today’s use of threats and sanctions aimed at The People’s Republic of China (PRC) and The Russian Federation is a staunch reminder of the U.S. War with Communism. All for naught.

The Senate Judiciary Committee held a critical hearing on December 12, 2018 where Judiciary, FBI and Homeland Officials Testify on Chinese Espionage. Discussion was on communism and the “non-traditional espionage efforts against the United States…concerns over China’s 2025 industrial and technology strategy, criminal cases against Chinese employees accused of espionage.” As to be expected, the committee convoluted key topics.

Bill Priestap, Assistant Director at the FBI Counterintelligence Division testified that the Communist party is utilizing “non-traditional” means such as academia, journalism…researchers, scientists, students…” Coincidentally, this may help explain the prevalence of liberal attitudes in Hollywood and news outlets and the “political correctness” of several university campuses.  

Yet, the Committee, it appears, attempts to keep reported communist penetration in the State Department under the radar. What does it say of a government who criticizes Chinese communism while their own has been reportedly infiltrated for decades?

Senators, does the name Joseph McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) ring any bells? In the 1950s, Republican Senator McCarthy was reportedly “accused of creating a bogus Red Scare.” It is important to note that McCarthy’s claims were met with “fierce opposition from Senate’s liberal Democrats and even some of their conservative brethren.”  Why? Because “issues of infiltration and security laxness all had their genesis under Roosevelt and Truman.” And as this Senate Judiciary Committee and media focus on the Trump Administration exemplify, the witch hunt goes on.

“…the FBI throughout the war years and early postwar era was the only institution of the U.S. government that…clearly grasped the Communist problem, devoid of blinkers or delusions.”

– M. Stanton Evans

The beginnings of the “First Red Scare”

McCarthy’s claims go back to Democratic Senator Lee S. Overman. The 1919 Overman Committee reportedly investigated the First Red Scare, aimed at German and Russian threats. Next, in the 1930s, Martin Dies, Democrat from Texas was the first to co-create and chair the House Committee Investigating Un-American Activities (HUAC) focused on Soviet communists. Then in the 1950s, McCarthy reportedly targeted Chinese and Soviet communists.

The decades that followed reportedly gave rise to more committees investigating and targeting various groups to obtain “information on how foreign subversive propaganda entered the U.S. and the organizations that were spreading it.” According to historic records, the “committee” saw its end in 1975 and its documents and employees were housed under the umbrella of the House Judiciary Committee, which brings us to the December 12, 2018 Senate Judiciary Committee.

Senators, what say you?

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) Chair asks, “The question is how can we counter these activities, I hope we can come to an answer.”  In my August 2018 paper, U.S. National Security Special Report – Remotely Disabling Weapons: A Policy Analysis & Proposal Recommendation, I outlined how the State Department partakes in the business of arms transfer, all the while State universities and technical institutes are in the business of technology transfer to National, Multinational, and Transnational companies.

Sir, here’s my answer: First, design policies that incite corporations to bring their businesses back to the U.S.  Corporation’s self-imposed threats and inherent risk of Intellectual Property theft need not supersede consumers inherit economic consequences and concern over purchasing questionable products. Put simply, U.S. corporations “can’t have their cake and eat it too.” Right, Senator, in your dreams. But it is not my answer that’s naïve. It is your question. U.S. corporations have had a taste of profits beyond their dreams and there’s no going back. Second, the government needs to effectively vet their employees. Better a few trustworthy and reliable people than a diversity of questionable “assets.”

In my paper, I pointed to the hearing, “Combating Insider Threats,” which discussed the need to train Human Resources employees “to identify malicious activity.” They discussed putting into place risk management systems and procedures for reexamining the vetting of employees for security clearances. I emphasized that current HR protocols and guidelines are troubling not so much because they admit to ineffective recruiting but that State Officials accept it as the norm for State and Defense departments which are critical to security.

Sen. John Kennedy (R-Louisiana) asked, “What’s the Confucius Institute?” Priestap replied, “Foreign language and cultural exchange, but more importantly, it is funded and beholden to the Chinese government.”  I am reminded of M. Stanton Evans’ excellently researched book, Blacklisted By History. In it, Evans references the journal Amerasia and the Institute of Pacific Relations described as a “little red schoolhouse” from which “pamphlets and journals discussed . . . the upstanding character of the Soviet Union and the merits of the Reds in China.”  After countless examples, Priestap may have correctly concluded, “The communist party reigns supreme. They just don’t rely on spies.”

Sen. Kennedy, Sir, speaking of the FBI, it may behoove members of the committee to refer to J. Edgar Hoover’s reportedly confidential files of the 40s. Specifically, “What Hoover Told Truman”:

“ . . . information has been recently developed from a highly confidential source indicating that a number of persons employed by the government of the United States have been furnishing data and information to persons outside the Federal government, who are in turn transmitting this information to espionage agents of the Soviet government . . .”

Misdirection, the greatest trick every played

December 2018 was a month bombarded with multiple hearings ranging from Chinese Espionage to National Security. If these agencies did not want to bring wide attention to the seriousness of the subjects, their timing could not have been better – a busy public Christmas shopping  and inundated with media stories, and finally a government “shutdown” added to the distraction.

Was communism lying dormant for a century? Or, was it as the Senators argued, “lying in plain sight”? If so, did the U.S. Congress and State Department neglect the message when they “blacklisted” the messenger?

Answers to these questions seem pointless when one considers an economic reality: America is buying “communist” products and China is selling “capitalists” goods. If present today, McCarthy and his supporters may agree with my argument, people not questioning their reality is more disconcerting than questioning it.

Senators, did China call your bluff?

My attempt here is not to validate or invalidate Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s claims or actions. My intent here is twofold: First, question the logic of serious charges made by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee against two countries – China, a rising superpower that the U.S. has done business with for decades and will likely continue to do so, and Russia, a formidable adversary the U.S. President reportedly sees as a strategic ally; and Second, understand the differing ideologies of other governments and how they reconcile these with their political philosophies, beliefs, and economic goals, and their  effects on others.

I would argue that China’s rising power, “conviction, commitment, and confidence…” translated from President Xi Jinping’s speech on the 40th Anniversary of China’s Reform Policies, given six days after the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, stems from them being “a country with over five thousand years of civilization and more than 1.3 billion people. No one is in the position to dictate to the Chinese people what should or should not be done.”

It appears both the House and Senate Committees turned a blind eye to communism and in the midst of “shooting the messenger,” the message was ignored, only to be carelessly revisited. Consider, some things are dangerous when disturbed. Interestingly, the December 12th Senate Judiciary Committee follows Canada’s December 1, 2018 detainment of the Chinese company Huawei’s CFO Meng Wanzhou, at the bequest of the U.S. Huawei, a company that by market standards has been splendidly successful. But, did China call the U.S. bluff? If you pay close attention to President Xi Jinping’s translated words, you may find your answer: 

“Comrades and Friends, to build a solid national defense and a strong military commensurate with China’s international standing and consistent with its security and development interests, and deliver national prosperity and military spending at the same time is a strategic mission…”

McCarthy, for some, was seen as a “warrior,” and from reading Evans’ book, pretty much alone in his fight. He stood at the frontline and “campaigned to unmask communists.” But, he is “remembered as a demagogue, bully, and a liar,” a term best suited for world leaders who have betrayed their own people. 

Post navigation

Previous Post:

Statecraft or Command Decision? Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), Russian Federation, and Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Next Post:

The Oscars, Shakespeare, and Social Media: Look at me. Like me, or Not ;)

Recent Posts

  • MOTHERS’ WORST NIGHTMARE . . .
  • Russia, Motherland † Operation Белый лебедь 
  • Dark & Deadly Side of Rotten Apple
  • Ultimate Betrayal to Patriot Soldiers, Homeland Security Investigators and Officers “In the Line of Duty”
  • Tik Tok, Tik Tok…‘Kill Switch’ Failed!

Recent Comments

  • Technology on El Salvador’s Bitcoin Bust Amidst Corruption, U.S. Military Deals, and China Mining
  • Wealth Management on El Salvador’s Bitcoin Bust Amidst Corruption, U.S. Military Deals, and China Mining
  • Finance on U.S. War Merchants, Dare Play or Make Narrow Deals With the Master? ☻Checkmate!
  • Накрутка авито on U.S. War Merchants, Dare Play or Make Narrow Deals With the Master? ☻Checkmate!
  • 在线视频下载器 on HARRIS – Trump: Final Faceoff?

Archives

  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • February 2020
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018

Categories

  • Uncategorized

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
© 2025 Matlock Report - Powered by Minimalisticky