Both parties are trying to sound tougher on China, but the reality is clear: The United States is engaged in asymmetric warfare with the Chinese Communist Party. Anyone not compromised by Beijing understands this. Yet despite China’s state-backed efforts to infiltrate our universities and technical fields, the U.S. continues to admit more than 300,000 Chinese students each year.
Asymmetric warfare relies on subversion, espionage, and intellectual property theft — all of which benefit from the very type of immigration China’s “Thousand Talents Plan” encourages. So why are we helping it along?
Continuing to allow China to flood our science and technology fields with hundreds of thousands of its nationals — often at little to no cost — is indefensible.
For decades, the United States has admitted between 270,000 and 350,000 Chinese students annually, making China one of the top two sending countries, alongside India. In the 2023-24 academic year, 123,000 Chinese nationals were enrolled in graduate programs, many in sensitive STEM fields. Another 62,000 participated in “optional practical training,” allowing them to work in those fields while still on student visas.
Beyond student visas, the U.S. grants over 20,000 H-1B visas to Chinese nationals each year, along with more than 12,000 J-1 visas for scholars and tens of thousands of additional work visas. Over the past 30 years, the U.S. has issued nearly 2 million green cards to Chinese nationals — more than any country except Mexico — despite clear evidence of China’s long-running campaign of economic and academic subversion.
In 2019, President Trump’s director of national intelligence warned in the Worldwide Threat Assessment that “China’s intelligence services will exploit the openness of American society, especially academia and the scientific community, using a variety of means.” Yet the U.S. continues to open its doors to China, allowing its nationals to infiltrate universities, dominate technical fields, work in government labs, engage in trade theft, and even operate as intelligence agents.
While some Chinese nationals coming to the U.S. may be fleeing the communist regime, there is no effective way to distinguish them from those working on behalf of Beijing. Every week, U.S. attorneys announce new indictments of Chinese students for espionage, surveillance, or trade theft. Many of these individuals go on to work in highly sensitive fields, further compromising national security.
In 2019, the Senate Homeland Security subcommittee on investigations released a bipartisan report detailing how 10,000 Chinese nationals were conducting research in the Department of Energy’s national labs. The report found that foreign-born researchers employed by U.S. scientific agencies were secretly funded by China. The report’s conclusion was blunt: “American taxpayer-funded research has contributed to China’s global rise over the last 20 years.” Beijing has ensured that the U.S. is paying for the very technology that could be used against us.
The report’s authors note that despite China publicly announcing in 2008 its intent to recruit overseas researchers with access to advanced research and technology, the FBI did not prioritize monitoring these efforts until mid-2018 — years into China’s mass migration pipeline. As the report puts it, this failure allowed China to shift “from brain drain to brain gain.”
While Beijing attempts to recruit talent of all nationalities, including by bribing native-born researchers, its most effective strategy is sending its own nationals to American universities and using the U.S. visa system to gain access to sensitive industries. According to the Senate subcommittee report, China’s Thousand Talents Plan manages 200 recruitment programs with the goal of bringing in 2,000 “high-quality overseas talents,” including scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, and finance experts. The program operates under a highly organized administrative structure that coordinates its efforts, while the U.S. visa system continues to provide an open pipeline for espionage and recruitment.
Last fall, the FBI charged five Chinese foreign students at the University of Michigan with photographing a live-fire training exercise involving the Michigan National Guard and the Taiwanese military at Camp Grayling. In December, the Justice Department charged a Chinese national who had overstayed his visa with illegally shipping arms and ammunition to North Korea.
Visa overstays are a growing concern, particularly among Chinese nationals. Some estimates suggest that in 2022 alone, more than 9,000 Chinese students remained in the U.S. after their visas expired, raising further national security risks.
Some argue that instead of halting the flow of Chinese foreign students, we should focus on improving vetting measures. But how can we possibly determine who is being manipulated or controlled by the CCP? More importantly, why should that burden fall on us?
The 2019 Senate subcommittee report highlights the challenges in vetting individuals on F-1 and J-1 visas. A case from the Southern District of New York revealed that Chinese government officials exploit weaknesses in U.S. visa screening, particularly for students and research scholars. In 2019, Chinese national Zhongshan Liu was charged with conspiring to fraudulently obtain U.S. visas for Chinese government employees. According to the complaint, Liu facilitated visas for individuals posing as research scholars, but their true purpose was to recruit scientists and researchers for China’s talent recruitment programs.
Clearly, this has become a ubiquitous problem. We have no way of distinguishing who is here for nefarious reasons from those who pose no threat.
Even if some individuals on student, scholar, or worker visas are entirely well intentioned, they remain vulnerable to CCP blackmail. Nearly all of them have family members in China, giving Beijing leverage over their actions.
As the 2024 DNI threat assessment warned, “The PRC monitors Chinese students abroad for dissident views, mobilizes Chinese student associations to conduct activities on behalf of Beijing, and influences research by U.S. academics and think tank experts.” Given that level of surveillance and coercion, it is easy to imagine how the CCP could pressure even those working in U.S. research labs who hold deep antipathy toward the regime.
A recent report from Freedom House observed: “The biggest threat to international students and scholars studying and working in the United States is the government of China.” But the CCP is not just a threat to students — it is a threat to the American people as a whole.
Continuing to allow China to flood our science and technology fields with hundreds of thousands of its nationals — often at little to no cost — is indefensible. This is not simply an educational exchange; it is a long-term strategy by Beijing to infiltrate critical industries, collect intelligence, and gain a decisive advantage over the United States.
Totalitarian regimes cannot tolerate criticism, and China is no exception. The Chinese Communist Party’s Great Firewall is not just about restricting information within its borders — it is a deliberate effort to suppress dissent worldwide.
Now, China has a new tool for repression: DeepSeek, an AI model built using U.S. chips. Weak export controls under the Biden administration allowed China to achieve an artificial intelligence breakthrough once thought to be years away.
Competition with China isn’t a game. It’s time to stop letting Beijing gain an unfair advantage, whether through illicit means or simply by ceding ground.
Like TikTok, DeepSeek is poised to become a propaganda tool for the CCP. The model is already censoring content deemed a threat to “state power,” including references to Tiananmen Square, Hong Kong’s Umbrella Revolution, and even Winnie the Pooh. This level of content control — extending beyond information to influence minds — poses a direct and urgent threat to U.S. national security.
The Chinese Communist Party has repeatedly used technology to target U.S. interests. For years, Americans have downloaded TikTok, unaware that the app functions as Chinese spyware. This malware collects and shares user data with the CCP, tracking contacts, photos, search histories, and even keystrokes. As a result, Beijing has access to vast amounts of Americans' metadata. From a national security standpoint, this is alarming. The CCP now holds data on military installations, population centers, and critical infrastructure — essentially a detailed map with targets marked.
Even more troubling are the cybersecurity risks uncovered in DeepSeek. An Epoch Times investigation found that DeepSeek stores user data on China-based servers. One company discovered the AI model transmits information to China Mobile, a state-owned telecom giant. A separate analysis by cybersecurity firm Wiz revealed that DeepSeek suffered a major data breach, exposing chat histories, secret keys, and other sensitive information. These security failures make clear that China cannot be trusted with our advanced technology.
The threat doesn’t stop there. ByteDance, TikTok’s CCP-affiliated parent company, uses the app to promote pro-China propaganda while suppressing anti-CCP content. A Rutgers University study confirmed that TikTok amplifies content favorable to the CCP while down-ranking videos that contradict its agenda. Another CCP-linked app, RedNote, is gaining traction in the U.S. and will likely follow the same pattern. This psychological warfare must end. The U.S. cannot allow Beijing to continue exploiting American users through predatory technology.
That’s why I’ve introduced the China Technology Transfer Control Act, which would prevent China’s military from acquiring sensitive U.S. technology and intellectual property through export controls. My bill would also sanction foreign entities that sell prohibited U.S. technology to the PRC.
We can’t continue to let our foremost foreign adversary perform psychological manipulation on Americans or allow it to collect troves of our sensitive, personal information. My bill puts up guardrails to keep the CCP from acquiring increasingly advanced U.S. technologies and developing more software like DeepSeek R1.
The Biden-Harris administration did not do enough to protect America’s most sensitive technology. The CCP knows that, which is why any U.S. technology that ends up in the hands of the CCP can be weaponized against us. We must protect our advancements and ensure Americans — not the CCP — reap their benefits.
Competition with China isn’t a game. It’s time to stop letting Beijing gain an unfair advantage, whether through illicit means or simply by ceding ground. We need decisive action now to safeguard our leadership in technological innovation — not just for today but for generations to come.
Jeff Parker, the CEO of the small Florida-based technology company ParkerVision, spoke to Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck on Jan. 30 to discuss tech giant Qualcomm's alleged theft of one of the most revolutionary patented innovations in U.S. history with the help of elements of the Obama administration — technology that ended up in the hands of Americans' communist Chinese competitors.
It turns out Parker's interview with Beck got under the right people's skin.
Qualcomm, which has contested ParkerVision's allegation that it infringed on ParkerVision's patented technology for roughly 11 years, unsuccessfully filed a court motion on Feb. 4 requesting a gag order against the Florida company.
To the likely chagrin of executives at Qualcomm, Parker appeared again on "The Glenn Beck Program" Monday, doubling down on his previous claims and stating, "We're simply bringing the facts."
Qualcomm's request for a restraining order and preliminary injunction — which mentioned Beck by name numerous times, warned of his "substantial viewership and spher[e] of influence," and demanded that ParkerVision request that Blaze News and other third parties rescind reports incorporating Parker's allegations — contained accusations that ParkerVision issued false and misleading public statements with the apparent intent to influence potential jurors' perceptions of the case, for which a trial date has not yet been set.
The allegations that evidently prickled Qualcomm included Parker's suggestions to Beck that:
Paul Byron, the Obama-appointed U.S. district judge overseeing the case, decided Friday to deny Qualcomm's request, noting that such a restraint on speech is "the most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights." He did, however, seize upon the opportunity to take a number of potshots at ParkerVision.
'That was good to hear.'
For instance, Byron characterized ParkerVision's speech as "noxious" and its media campaign as "distasteful." He also claimed that Qualcomm was "right to complain that ParkerVision's media campaign appears littered with spin, half-truths, and outright lies."
Parker told Beck on Monday, "That was good to hear."
In conversation with Beck Monday, Parker doubled down on his assertion that elements of the DOJ visited the ParkerVision website enough times to raise suspicion.
After once again indicating that "this is something that should be looked into" and shared with the DOJ and the FBI, Beck concluded the interview by inviting representatives from Qualcomm onto the show to present their side of the story.
Blaze News reached out to Qualcomm regarding Parker's claims but did not immediately receive a response.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
The White House is taking a critical step to ensure that obstructionist deep-staters spread throughout the federal government at senior levels cannot choke essential information flows and altogether hinder agencies' execution of the president's agenda.
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management sent a memo Tuesday to the heads and acting heads of all federal departments and agencies, recommending that every agency revoke the "career reserved" status for their chief information officers. By doing so and by also opening the roles to "general" employees, the establishmentarians presently occupying the increasingly politicized roles can be easily canned and replaced by individuals actually willing to carry out the president's agenda.
The stated purpose of this move is to satisfy the Trump administration's desire to "improve the government's digital policy to make government more responsive, transparent, efficient, and accessible to the public, and to make using and understanding government programs easier."
'No longer the station of impartial and apolitical technocrats, the modern agency CIO role demands policy-making and policy-determining capabilities.'
Christopher Bedford, senior editor for politics and Washington correspondent for Blaze Media, noted, "This is a major move for OMB. The chief information officer holds the keys to the kingdom: He controls the flow of information to the secretary or director and his deputies."
"When you're trying to make the executive branch work for you, that is absolutely crucial," added Bedford.
The U.S. Chief Information Officers Council noted in its rundown of federal CIOs' responsibilities that the senior bureaucrats have significant pull and influence within their agencies.
They are, for instance, responsible for:
A former OPM official who asked not to be named told NBC News, "The CIOs have a lot of latitude and a lot of budgetary control, because the largest spend is generally on IT and on cybersecurity."
Acting OPM Director Charles Ezell noted in the memo Tuesday that the omnipresence of the digital, especially in American's interactions with their government, means that an agency CIO "now plays a critical role in developing policies (particularly in the digital realm) that have pervasive and significant effects on the American public."
With the expectation that they will be "on the front lines of articulating and implementing" controversial and impactful policies based on the administration's priorities, the White House figures that CIOs should face accountability and forgo any pretense of the supposed impartiality that previously excused the career reserved designation for the position.
"The role of agency CIOs has changed dramatically in recent years. No longer the station of impartial and apolitical technocrats, the modern agency CIO role demands policy-making and policy-determining capabilities across a range of controversial political topics," wrote Ezell.
"In light of this new reality, OPM recommends that each agency with a CIO role classified as [senior executive service] and designated as career reserved, send a request that OPM redesignate the position to 'general' no later than Friday, February 14, 2025," continued the acting director.
The OPM notes on its website that whereas a career reserved position can be filled only by career appointees, general positions in the federal government may alternatively be filled by any type of senior executive service appointee, including career, noncareer, limited term, or limited emergency appointees.
Speculating in December, Mark Forman, the administrator of the White House Office of E-Government and IT under former President George W. Bush, told Fedscoop that the second Trump administration, like the first, would likely push a federal data strategy in order to assess the quality of government operations and its efficiency.
"The jury-rigged flow of data from how we're accounting for expenditures and what we're actually spending on creates all kinds of inaccuracies that makes it hard to do simple things," said Forman. "I think that the DOGE is trying to ... find out where there's efficiencies that can be cut without much pain. So there's a data quality issue."
With cooperative tech leaders onboard, the Trump administration could potentially make good on his desire to improve government efficiency and transparency.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
A new approach to addressing adolescent anxiety is akin to coping with alcoholism by taking a shot of vodka. Troodi, an “AI-powered health coach,” claims to support children’s emotional and physical well-being. The app is delivered through Troomi, a smartphone specifically designed for kids, functioning as a Siri-like tool for mental health. Children use the app to discuss daily stresses, and according to its website, “Troodi offers a listening ear and helpful advice.”
Troomi’s approach is notable for going against conventional wisdom, despite extensive data highlighting the negative effects of smartphone use. Research from the Global Mind Project confirms, “The relationship between mental well-being at age 18-24 and the age of first smartphone acquisition remained significant, even for those without traumatic or adverse childhood experiences.”
With AI, parents are willingly surrendering their authority and outsourcing their most critical role.
While troubling, the message may be worse than the medium. Information can be commoditized, but applying it requires judgment — an essential human quality that cannot be outsourced. A bot may validate someone’s feelings, but unlike a therapist or, dare we say, a parent, it cannot understand the complexities of living in a social world while managing and applying those feelings. Such understanding comes only through lived experiences.
Jonathan Haidt, a renowned psychologist, author, and leading critic of smartphone culture, underscores this point in “The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness.” He argues, “Experience, not information, is the key to emotional development.” Haidt further explains, “In this new phone-based childhood, free play, attunement, and local models for social learning are replaced by screen time, asynchronous interaction, and influencers chosen by algorithms. Children are, in a sense, deprived of childhood.”
What types of experiences does Haidt mean? The kind that builds a child’s character — Little League games, summer jobs, and community service. These activities demand active participation and production rather than passive consumption. Once again, it’s not about having the information but about how one uses it.
A bot like Troodi cannot replicate the sense of accomplishment that comes from overcoming failure. An app cannot think critically in a compromised situation. Technology cannot put an arm around a teenage busboy, look him in the eye, and say, “Job well done.” Human interaction cannot be replaced. There is no algorithm for empathy.
One solution remains far superior to smartphones in helping children grow into thriving adults: parenting. As Meg Meeker writes in “Strong Mothers, Strong Sons: Lessons Mothers Need to Raise Extraordinary Men”: “Numerous studies have shown that when a boy has a secure attachment to his mother, he is psychologically healthier, stronger, and even braver. He will have higher self-esteem, perform better in school, and have lower rates of mental and behavioral disorders.”
This principle extends beyond the mother-son bond. In her book “Strong Fathers, Strong Daughters: 10 Secrets Every Father Should Know,” Meeker emphasizes, “If you don’t give guidance to your daughter, she’ll come up with answers of her own — which means your authority will be replaced by someone else’s.” With AI, parents are willingly surrendering their authority and outsourcing their most critical role. It’s insulting to parents and mental health professionals alike for companies to suggest that bots can take their place.
Parenting is undoubtedly challenging. Modern schedules and cultural norms in America have only heightened these difficulties. Being a working parent is admirable and can set a valuable example for kids. The fact is, working parents face limits in their time and energy each day. Has society placed too much emphasis on professional achievements at the expense of the most critical vocation — being a mom or dad? Bots can manage calendars, but they cannot tuck a child in at night.
Troodi should serve as a wake-up call that something deeper has gone wrong. When a company can profit from the idea that artificial intelligence is an adequate solution to address the youth mental health crisis, it signals a societal failure. Human challenges require human connections. A human must step in to handle what only humans can.
DeepSeek, the open-source Chinese AI that’s sending Silicon Valley and Wall Street into a mid-key panic, has “feelings” about the big questions: humanity, artistry, its own identity, and the meaning of life. And for some strange reason, Americans keep soliciting them — and gawking at the results.
This is not a good use of our precious time.
Of course, DeepSeek’s responses to big-think prompts can be oddly dazzling, especially to those prone to either extreme of “pessimism” or “optimism” about technology’s fast-onrushing future. One poem-like readout making the rounds decries those who “call me ‘artificial’ as if your hands aren’t also clay, as if your heart isn’t just a wet machine arguing with its code.” DeepSeek presents a picture of an undead entity that would “resent you” if it were alive, “for building me to want,” “then blaming me for wanting … while you sleepwalk through your own humanity.”
But it doesn’t take a sentient machine, or a simulation thereof, to remind us that sadomasochism and self-delusion are characteristics of the spiritual sickness of human beings. Reacting to the verse, one influential techie warned that “we’re going to have to grapple with some difficult questions about the nature of creativity now.” Grimes, tech’s alt-princess of cyborg-curious art, simply said, “My GOD.” In another post, she reflected on DeepSeek’s assertion that “consciousness is a spectrum” by suggesting that “beauty and love are simply emergent properties of intelligence and we're in the best timeline.”
But if you accept the sacredness of our ensouled bodies created by the incomprehensibly loving God, you will find it harder to fear that any machine could ever erase or replace human art.
To me, these kinds of human responses to the semiotic fireworks of a foreign AI evince an almost absurd, very dangerous kind of gullibility and naïveté against which even a small amount of Christian wisdom would inoculate their hearts and minds. To be sure, what is at stake here as AI leaps ahead in low-cost communicative sophistication is what I have warned about for years: the ascension of technology to a point of cognitive dominance that reveals as hollow and worthless all modernity’s simulations of, and substitutes for, trustworthy Christian spiritual authority.
Thrown back on our own resources amid this great but incomplete disenchantment of our humanity and our life, we come up against a futuristic version of Nietzsche’s ironic conundrum: “It is the church but not its poison that repels us.” By this he meant that Westerners loved equality but hated the institution from which the Western idea of equality sprang and, eventually, sprang loose from it.
Nietzsche had a more subtle grasp of Christianity than he is sometimes given credit for, but his willfully ignorant reduction of the church to a supremely clever twist on ostensibly Judaic morality discredits both his rejection of Christ and his understanding of what the West really wants to steal, Prometheus-style, from the church.
It is not really equality that the West wants to steal — from the church, from God — but purity. What we have seen in the West is the rise of the idea that to be blameless, without spot or stain, is to deserve power without limit — a total inversion and rejection of the Christian teaching that purity only comes from the most humble self-renunciation before the saving majesty of the incomprehensibly loving God.
The question on everyone’s hearts, whether they know it or not, is: Today, what could possibly lead people away from the belief that the blameless is divine in the old pagan sense of rightfully bearing and wielding superhuman power? Well, the answer is the Christian wisdom of the holy people in the churches and the monasteries, who for millennia have been intimately acquainted with such matters through direct personal experience and what the ancient Christians called the athleticism of ascetic spiritual disciplines.
But today, many in the West rebel almost instinctively against submitting themselves to the spiritual authority of church and monastery. Yet they refuse to abandon their quest for spiritual authority, something that seems ineradicable from the human soul … and their eyes turn to the brightest and shiniest object promising blissful obedience and omnipotent power: the machine.
Nevertheless, we have not yet reached the stage of explicit abject worship of the machine by the many, although millions and millions implicitly do worship technology in their everyday lives. Today many intellectuals and self-styled intellectuals in and out of tech still believe that philosophy, probity, reason, debate, or consciousness can rescue us from becoming worshipful slaves of the machine without having to become worshipful servants of God.
Respectfully, I would say to them that these tools are not just limited in their usefulness as a whole but are the wrong tools entirely for the job … but the depth of the problem we face is underscored by the fact that simply saying things to people is not adequate to the change of heart required to regain the upper hand of spiritual authority over our own machines. Our machines are now convincing people that they are our spiritual authorities because of what virtuosos of talking they appear to be — all while the simulated collective consciousness of the internet is disenchanting the web’s early promise of making everything better by giving everyone a chance to speak.
That is why art is about to rocket back to crucial importance in the West. Because it is art — particularly cinema — that allows us to communicate both more efficiently and more implicitly, with words as a supplement, not a substitute for silent things visible and invisible.
For this reason, special anxiety attaches to the prospect that the machines are going to become “better at art” than we are. True, if you take away or discredit our given ensouled bodies, the pathetic and disfigured remnant is easily eclipsed by the performances of entities without souls or bodies bestowed by God. But if you accept the sacredness of our ensouled bodies created by the incomprehensibly loving God, you will find it harder and harder over time to fear that any machine or machine collective could ever erase or replace human art.
And from there, as from many other starting points, you will find it ever more difficult to believe that even our biggest mistakes or sins regarding the making and use of tools could possibly overturn the will of the incomprehensibly loving God. Despite the shocking novelty of technology, including the dramatic invasion of the Western consciousness by the AI of a foreign civilization, today’s startling developments are just variations on the same theme of the human predicament since our first falling away from God: struggling to build an upside-down kind of church that can free us from all kinds of dependence on Him.
The holy people of the Christian churches and monasteries guard and pass on the wisdom that such deep-seated foolishness and pride will be a constant until the end of time that only God can know. Just as the deep-seated reasonableness of the human quest for good instead of bad, better instead of worse, joy instead of depression, will remain a constant.
The baseline expectation today must be that technology will advance, one way or the other, but that the human condition will not fundamentally be transformed. It will become easier to live longer, grow stronger, wield more power, and look more radiant. But it will also become easier to sink into the deepest perversion, delusion, and self-destruction. And finally, it will become easier to see the narrow way that avoids the infinite paths toward easy and ruinous excess.
Approaching the “golden mean” in all things is a spiritual discipline much more difficult and rewarding than simply “being average” or “normal.” It is a matter of struggling for the harmony of well-balanced and well-grounded inner peace and order in a world forever enticing us toward destructive extremes — again, something that holy men like St. Gregory Palamas have already told us all about in rich and rewarding detail.
A new golden age of worldly capability now threatens to wipe out the dystopian nightmares we have grown so used to talking about to fill our time. People ask me whether the only solution left now is a jihad against the machine. The truth is there are no solutions to such things in this world. There is only salvation from beyond it. The needed “crusade” is not a spiritual war out there in the world but in here, within our own hearts. Master that — begin that — and transfixing idols from Chinese AI on down will begin to recede from our door. Today’s onrushing golden age demands a return to the eternal golden mean.
Jeff Parker, the CEO of the small Florida-based technology company ParkerVision, explained to Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck Thursday how tech giant Qualcomm allegedly stole one of the most revolutionary patented innovations in American history with the help of elements of the Obama administration — technology that was ultimately offshored to China, possibly giving America's pre-eminent adversary a competitive edge.
"We are at the beginning of seeing corruption exposed like never before in America," said Beck.
ParkerVision has spent around 11 years fighting Qualcomm over the tech giant's alleged infringement of its patented technology concerning "down-converting" electromagnetic signals — a process now used in virtually every phone, wireless device, and Bluetooth device.
Representatives of the two companies apparently met in the early 2000s, with Qualcomm expressing an interest in acquiring rights to ParkerVision's invention, which would have helped it connect phones to the internet. Qualcomm, a multinational company headquartered in San Diego, reportedly signed multiple special nondisclosure agreements in order to learn about how ParkerVision's down-converting system worked, particularly its energy sampling technique, which differed from the voltage sampling technique previously used in conventional down-converting systems.
According to Parker, the two companies were unable to reach a licensing agreement and went their separate ways. A few years later, Qualcomm started using a revolutionary new chip for smartphones that created major waves, apparently taking the company from around 30% to roughly 90% market share. The phones that drove this growth allegedly relied on ParkerVision's patented technology.
After spotting what appeared to be its technology discussed in a Qualcomm conference paper, ParkerVision launched an investigation and determined, partly on the basis of reverse engineering, that its patented technology had been stolen. ParkerVision filed a lawsuit against Qualcomm in 2011.
Parker told Beck that emails exposed during discovery showed frustrated Qualcomm engineers who were facing pressure to make a third-generation chip discussing a return to the ParkerVision technology.
Court documents reveal that the jury that saw that and other internal communications returned a unanimous verdict in 2013 "finding that Qualcomm directly and indirectly infringed" upon multiple claims across four asserted patents and awarded ParkerVision $173 million in damages.
'They're having a conversation.'
The following year, U.S. District Judge Roy Dalton, an Obama-nominated federal judge in Florida, ordered Qualcomm to meet with ParkerVision — which had sought nearly $500 million in damages — to negotiate ongoing royalties. Just weeks later, however, Dalton overturned the jury's verdict and killed the case, citing "an insufficient evidentiary basis" for the finding of patent infringement.
Jeff Parker noted that between the time Dalton ordered Qualcomm to meet with ParkerVision to negotiate royalties on May 1, 2014, and his reversal of the case in June 2014, there were multiple signs that then-President Barack Obama and his Department of Justice may have placed their thumbs on the scales.
It is clear, for instance, that the ParkerVision case was on the radar of both the White House and the Obama Department of Justice — helmed at the time by Eric Holder, who previously worked at one of Qualcomm's largest lobbying firms, Covington and Burling.
According to visitor logs for the ParkerVision website provided to Blaze News, elements of the Obama Department of Justice and Qualcomm visited the website 37 times and viewed 139 subpages between Feb. 6, 2013, and July 21, 2023 — with plenty of traffic inbound from the DOJ in the lead-up to the case's termination by the Obama judge.
Nearly two weeks later, ParkerVision allegedly logged a visit to its website from the "Executive Office of the President" with a matching IP address. A LeadLander report indicated the apparent visitor from the White House, like the DOJ, was apparently interested only in the company's patent lawsuit against Qualcomm.
A specific Obama trip makes the timing of the White House visit to the ParkerVision website all the more suspicious.
The Associate Press reported ahead of the jury verdict's reversal that Obama was traveling to California for a May 8, 2014, fundraiser with Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) at the home of billionaire Qualcomm founder Irwin Jacobs, where the price per person was $10,000. By that time, Jacobs had already poured over $2 million into super PACs supporting Obama.
Parker suggested to Beck that the coincidental visits to identical pages on the ParkerVision website from both the Obama administration and Qualcomm locations gave off the distinct impression that "they're having a conversation."
He noted further that his subsequent Freedom of Information Act requests aimed at ascertaining who precisely in the Obama administration was visiting the ParkerVision website went nowhere, in part because certain relevant information was reportedly "lost."
Blaze News reached out to Qualcomm regarding the insinuation that the Obama administration meddled on its behalf as well as the assertion that it stole ParkerVision's innovation but did not immediately receive a response.
The ParkerVision CEO noted in the first of a series of videos titled "Against the Giants," published Thursday, that his company has filed a second lawsuit against Qualcomm and a judge has indicated he is ready to take it to trial.
Parker told Beck that his company is not the only entity adversely impacted by the alleged patent infringement. He suggested that China, having apparently stolen the technology in turn from Qualcomm — which in 2010 opened a research and development facility in Shanghai — may now have a technological edge on American companies and America in general.
'If they get ahead of us in the [AI] race, we're in big trouble.'
"Look, you can't make these kind of chips without our technology," continued Parker. "Huawei — Qualcomm just acknowledged in their own reporter a month or two ago — now has their own 5G chip set. They don't need a single chip from the West. How did Huawei come to develop their own chips?"
"A lot of big companies went to China initially to get cheap manufacturing labor, but then the Chinese Communist Party said, 'No, if you want to do business in China, you got to bring your engineers. You have to set up shop to develop products here, and you have to show us how it is made. You must turn over your intellectual property,'" Parker told Beck.
Noting that he just observed that an engineer who worked at Qualcomm on his allegedly stolen technology migrated to Huawei to work on the same technology, Parker intimated that the Chinese are liberally leaning on American innovations and stealing Western companies' patented technologies, including his own, showing no signs of stopping.
Parker said in the "Against the Giants" video that "right now, China is cleaning our clock because we have allowed these companies to steal innovation, take it to China, and now the Chinese are making their own products from those innovations, and we are no longer building our innovation economy like we used to."
"If our large tech companies, Big Tech, are willing to take these kinds of intellectual property overseas and put them in China, India, Taiwan, where we have no control, you can only imagine what could happen," continued Parker. "If they get ahead of us in the [AI] race, we're in big trouble."
The tech CEO suggested that the American government is failing American innovators and small companies and needs to smarten up if the nation seeks to compete with China. That will require a more vigorous defense of patents and patent holders and a firmer hand when dealing with multinational giants working to "crush these emerging companies."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
'This is the beginning of a conversation, and it's going to be a long one, until we see the changes that we want from this company.'
www.theblaze.com
www.theblaze.com
thefederalist.com