President Trump’s White House is not taking friendly fire lying down. After Senator Ted Cruz and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo publicly attacked the emerging Iran peace and denuclearization framework, top Trump allies hit back with a pointed message: get on board or get out of the way. The dispute burst into the open this week as Cruz and Pompeo both used social media and cable news appearances to label the diplomatic effort a form of appeasement, drawing sharp rebukes from inside the West Wing. As Fox News reported, White House allies unloaded after Cruz and Pompeo attacked the developing talks before the final terms were public. White House communications director Steven Cheung, deputy assistant Sebastian Gorka, and outside Trump adviser Alex Bruesewitz all pushed back after Pompeo and Cruz criticized the emerging Iran framework. Pompeo warned that the deal being discussed looked like an Obama-era approach and was not America First, while Cruz argued that Iran could walk away with money, enrichment capacity, and leverage over the Strait of Hormuz. The pushback was unusually sharp because it came from inside President Trump’s own orbit against Republicans who normally occupy hawkish ground on Iran. Senator Rand Paul also defended giving President Trump room to negotiate, arguing that critics should allow Trump the space to find an America First solution instead of trying to preempt the final deal from the sidelines. That combination made the dispute bigger than a standard foreign-policy disagreement. It became a fight over whether the President’s own allies should trust his leverage at the table before declaring the framework dead on arrival. The timing also put the White House in the position of defending an active negotiation from friendly-fire attacks while Iran and the rest of the world watched the public split. Cheung’s public response showed how little patience the Trump team has for outside pressure while the deal is still being worked. Mike Pompeo has no idea what the fuck he’s talking about. He should shut his stupid mouth and leave the real work to the professionals. He’s not read into anything that’s happening, so how would he know. https://t.co/l9sF8vdv6i — Steven Cheung (@StevenCheung47) May 23, 2026 The rebuke is notable because both Cruz and Pompeo are not random backbenchers. Pompeo served as Trump’s own Secretary of State during the first term and was instrumental in the “maximum pressure” campaign against Tehran. Cruz is one of the most prominent hawks in the Senate Republican conference. But the White House message was clear: Trump is the one in the arena, and second-guessing from the sidelines while a deal is being finalized does nothing but hand leverage to Iran. The backstory matters. Trump announced earlier this week that a deal with Iran is “largely negotiated” after what has been described as an 84-day pressure campaign that brought Tehran closer to the table than at any point in recent memory. As Fox News reported, Trump signaled the framework could bring a possible end to the standoff, though he has also insisted the United States will not rush into anything that doesn’t serve American interests. Trump said the agreement had been largely negotiated and that final details were still being discussed before any public announcement. One major piece of the framework involved opening the Strait of Hormuz, a critical passageway for global energy shipping and a repeated pressure point in Iran’s confrontation with the West. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had emphasized that Iran would have to surrender enriched uranium and accept real limits before the United States would bless any deal. That context matters because the criticism from Cruz and Pompeo landed before the final public language, inspections structure, and enforcement pieces were available for Americans to judge. The key public question is whether Trump is using the threat of force and economic pressure to lock Iran into a stronger deal, or whether critics are right that Tehran is trying to pocket concessions. The White House clearly wants that judgment made after Trump finishes negotiating, not before. That is why the Strait of Hormuz piece matters: it is a concrete test of whether Iran is yielding on strategic leverage, not just signing another symbolic document. Pompeo made the criticism plain in his own post, arguing that the floated framework was not America First. The deal being floated with Iran seems straight out of the Wendy Sherman-Robert Malley-Ben Rhodes playbook: Pay the IRGC to build a WMD program and terrorize the world. Not remotely America First. It’s straightforward: Open the damned strait. Deny Iran access to money. Take out… — Mike Pompeo (@mikepompeo) May 23, 2026 That point is key, because the Cruz and Pompeo critique rests on the assumption that Trump is giving away the store. Nothing about Trump’s track record suggests that is likely. This is the president who walked away from Kim Jong Un at the Hanoi summit when the terms were not right, who pulled out of the Obama-era JCPOA because it was a bad deal, and who has repeatedly demonstrated he will use maximum leverage and then walk if the price is wrong. The emerging framework reportedly includes significant denuclearization commitments from Iran, a result that years of conventional diplomacy never came close to achieving. Axios reported earlier this week that direct meetings between U.S. and Iranian officials had resumed, with the threat of further military and economic escalation serving as the backdrop that brought Iran back to the table. President Trump met with senior national security officials while deciding whether to return to military escalation or keep pushing toward an agreement. The talks were unfolding in a tense window where diplomacy was still alive, but the threat of renewed U.S. pressure remained on the table if Tehran refused to move. That backdrop is important because it shows the negotiations were not happening in a vacuum. They followed military pressure, economic pressure, and direct presidential decision-making over whether Iran had moved far enough to justify keeping the diplomatic channel open. Trump’s defenders are pointing to that exact leverage environment now: negotiate from strength, keep the pressure on, and let the President decide whether the final terms actually protect American interests. For the pro-Trump side, the complaint is not that Cruz and Pompeo oppose a weak Iran deal. The complaint is that they are treating the developing framework as weak before Trump has put the final package in front of the country. The same pressure campaign that created the opening is still part of the story, which is why the White House argument is that Trump should be judged on the finished terms, not the rumor mill around them. That is peace through strength in its purest form. Trump has also made clear publicly that he will not be rushed. The president told reporters the U.S. would take whatever time is needed to get the terms right, even as pressure mounts from multiple directions. The real question is why Cruz and Pompeo chose this moment to go public with their complaints. Criticizing a sitting president’s active negotiations is a risky move under any circumstances. Doing it from inside the president’s own party, while the other side is watching every crack in American resolve, is the kind of move that hands Tehran exactly what it wants: the perception of a divided front. Trump’s White House clearly sees it that way, and they are not being diplomatic about saying so. Cruz and Pompeo are both serious people with legitimate foreign policy credentials. But credentials do not automatically translate into better judgment than the commander in chief who is actually sitting across the table from the Iranians. Paul’s response captured the argument from the pro-Trump side: negotiations are not surrender when President Trump is the one holding the leverage. War virtually always ends with negotiations. Critics of President Trump’s peace negotiations should give President Trump the space to find an American First solution. — Rand Paul (@RandPaul) May 24, 2026 If the deal falls short, there will be plenty of time to criticize it. Undermining negotiations before the ink is dry is not conservative hawkishness. It is counterproductive. Trump has earned the benefit of the doubt on this one. He ripped up the last Iran deal because it was weak. There is no reason to believe he would sign a worse one.

President Trump’s administration is not playing around with Cuba sanctions enforcement. Federal officials have served administrative subpoenas on left-wing streamer Hasan Piker and CodePink cofounder Susan Medea Benjamin as part of a widening investigation into whether American activists violated U.S. sanctions law during a March trip to Cuba. The subpoenas, formally described as Requests for Information, came from the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and seek financial, logistical, and communications records related to the so-called “Nuestra America Convoy.” Piker and Benjamin are not the only ones in the crosshairs. Investigators are looking at as many as 40 American citizens who joined foreign nationals and activist groups connected to the convoy, and additional subpoenas are expected. EXCLUSIVE @FoxNews Digital: Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control has subpoenaed Marxist influencer Hasan Piker @HasanTheHun and pro-communist @CodePink cofounder @MedeaBenjamin, as part of a widening investigation into whether U.S. organizations and leaders… pic.twitter.com/xbirOxsTcz — Asra Nomani (@AsraNomani) May 24, 2026 Fox News Digital broke the story, reporting that the federal inquiry centers on whether delegation members engaged in prohibited financing, coordination, delivery of goods, or direct contacts with Cuban government personnel or entities. Federal officials served administrative subpoenas, also known as Requests for Information, to Hasan Piker and CodePink cofounder Susan Medea Benjamin as part of a widening investigation into the March Nuestra America Convoy trip to Cuba. The inquiry is focused on whether activists violated U.S. sanctions laws through financing, coordination, delivery of goods, or contacts with Cuban government personnel or entities. The RFIs seek financial, logistical, and communications records tied to the convoy, including communications with Cuban officials and travel-related arrangements. The dragnet reaches beyond the two big names. As many as 40 American citizens who joined foreign nationals and activist organizations connected to the Cuba trip are reportedly under scrutiny, and additional subpoenas are expected as officials at Treasury, State, and Justice examine the broader network. That makes this larger than one streamer or one anti-war activist. The government appears to be tracing the money, the organizers, the itinerary, and the regime contacts behind a trip that critics say crossed from political theater into sanctions territory under federal law. One specific line of inquiry: whether convoy members stayed at a hotel on the State Department’s Cuba Restricted List, a registry of entities tied to the Cuban military, intelligence, or security services. The State Department explains why the restricted-list question matters: The State Department says the Cuba Restricted List identifies entities and subentities under the control of, or acting for or on behalf of, Cuba’s military, intelligence, or security services. Direct financial transactions with those listed entities are generally prohibited. The official rationale is straightforward: the U.S. government says those transactions would disproportionately benefit the Cuban military, intelligence, or security apparatus at the expense of the Cuban people and private enterprise in Cuba. That is why the hotel question matters. If convoy members spent money with a restricted Cuban entity, investigators would have a concrete transaction to examine instead of merely a political argument about whether the trip was humanitarian, ideological, or regime-aligned. It also gives the administration a cleaner enforcement lane. Officials do not have to litigate the activists’ ideology first if the records show money flowing to entities Washington has already flagged as tied to the regime’s security state. Federal officials have served subpoenas to Marxist political influencer Hasan Piker and CodePink cofounder Susan Medea Benjamin as part of a wider investigation into whether U.S. organizations and leaders violated U.S. laws and sanctions in supporting Cuba's communist regime, Fox… — Fox News (@FoxNews) May 24, 2026 The legal framework here is not ambiguous. OFAC’s Cuba sanctions program lays out the enforcement lane: OFAC says its Cuba sanctions program implements multiple legal authorities, including statutes, executive orders, and the Cuban Assets Control Regulations at 31 CFR Part 515. Certain Cuba-related economic activity may be allowed only when licensed by OFAC or otherwise authorized under the regulations. The same OFAC page points users to licensing guidance, general licenses, enforcement information, sanctions lists, and the federal legal framework that governs transactions involving Cuba. The agency does not treat Cuba travel and Cuba-linked transactions as a casual political-tourism issue. That is the official background behind the RFIs. Treasury is not just asking whether activists went to Cuba; it is asking whether money, goods, logistics, lodging, or coordination crossed lines that federal sanctions law still controls. For the Trump administration, that is the enforcement hook. If activists moved resources, coordinated with restricted actors, or used listed regime channels, the politics of the trip do not erase the sanctions questions. Traveling to Cuba to coordinate with regime-connected entities without that authorization is exactly the kind of activity OFAC was built to police. Some supporters of the convoy have tried to frame the trip as a humanitarian “aid mission” involving medicine and medical equipment. NEW: Federal officials have subpoenaed Hasan Piker and CodePink co-founder Medea Benjamin over an aid mission to Cuba involving medicine and medical equipment. According to reports, the Treasury Department is investigating whether the activists violated U.S. sanctions during the… pic.twitter.com/mxr3sKI4wk — Brian Allen (@allenanalysis) May 24, 2026 Federal investigators apparently are not buying the framing at face value. The scope of the subpoenas, covering finances, logistics, and communications, suggests the government wants to know exactly who funded the trip, who organized it, and who the participants were meeting with on the island. Piker built a massive online following streaming left-wing political commentary on Twitch and has been a vocal critic of U.S. sanctions policy. Benjamin has spent decades running CodePink, an anti-war group that has repeatedly aligned itself with adversarial foreign governments. Neither Piker nor Benjamin has been charged with a crime. These are administrative subpoenas, not indictments. Still, the message from Trump’s Treasury Department is clear: ideological sympathy for communist regimes does not create an exemption from federal law. With 40 names on the investigative list and more subpoenas expected, this probe is just getting started. This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.

Former NBC Sunday Night Football sideline reporter Michele Tafoya is dominating the early Republican primary race for Minnesota’s open 2026 U.S. Senate seat. A Quantus Insights survey conducted May 6-8 among 663 likely Republican primary voters puts Tafoya at 52 percent, a staggering 43-point lead over her closest competitor. Former basketball player Royce White sits at 9 percent, followed by Adam Schwarze at 4 percent and Tom Weiler at 2 percent. More than a quarter of likely GOP primary voters, 27 percent, remain undecided, leaving room for the field to shift before primary day. Still, the size of Tafoya’s advantage this early is remarkable for a first-time candidate who only entered the race in January. Tafoya spent decades as one of the most recognizable figures in sports media, covering 11 Super Bowls as NBC’s lead sideline reporter before leaving the network. She became an outspoken conservative voice in the years that followed, making national headlines with appearances criticizing progressive policies on education, race, and gender ideology. Her transition from sports broadcasting to Republican politics was formalized earlier this year. As MPR News reported in January, Tafoya launched her campaign for the open Minnesota Senate seat, immediately becoming the highest-profile name in the GOP field. The seat is one of the most closely watched open-seat contests heading into 2026. Cook rates Minnesota as Lean Democrat, which means Republicans still have a serious general-election climb even if Tafoya consolidates the primary. Her FEC filings confirm an active campaign operation for the 2026 cycle. A few important caveats: this is an early primary poll, not a general election matchup. Minnesota has not elected a Republican senator since Norm Coleman won in 2002, and the eventual GOP nominee will face a tough general election fight in a state that has trended blue in recent cycles. But inside the Republican primary, the survey shows a race that is not close right now. Tafoya’s combination of name recognition, media savvy, and conservative cultural credibility has given her a lead that would be the envy of most seasoned politicians. If that 27 percent undecided bloc breaks even modestly her way, the rest of the GOP field will have very little room to catch up. Fresh reaction to the poll has centered on just how wide Tafoya’s lead is: Michele Tafoya is absolutely DOMINATING the Minnesota GOP Senate Primary! Michele Tafoya: 51.8%Royce White: 8.9%Adam Schwarze: 4.1%Tom Weiler: 1.6% She’s running away with it. Would you support Michele Tafoya for U.S. Senate? — GRANDPA’s FREE ADVICE (@GOP_is_Gutless) May 23, 2026 Another post framed the race the same way: Tafoya is the clear early frontrunner. Former sports broadcaster Michele Tafoya has emerged as the clear frontrunner in Minnesota’s Republican Senate primary https://t.co/ThrC7G3gfx — whiteaglesoring (@whiteaglesoarng) May 24, 2026 Trending Politics and Quantus Insights laid out the new Minnesota primary numbers this way: Trending Politics reported that a Quantus Insights survey found Michele Tafoya holding a commanding lead in the Republican primary for Minnesota’s open U.S. Senate seat. The poll was conducted May 6-8 among 663 likely Republican primary voters. On the initial ballot, Tafoya drew 51.8 percent support. Undecided voters accounted for 27.3 percent. Former NBA player Royce White was at 8.9 percent, Adam Schwarze was at 4.1 percent, Tom Weiler was at 1.6 percent, and 6.3 percent said they would prefer a hypothetical other Republican. Quantus Insights posted that Tafoya was holding a commanding early lead while more than one-quarter of likely Republican primary voters remained undecided. The numbers show two things at once: Tafoya is over 50 percent in an early primary survey, and a large undecided bloc still gives the campaign room to move. No named rival reached double digits, which makes the gap the biggest story in the poll. Federal Election Commission records confirm Tafoya is formally in the race: The Federal Election Commission lists Michele Tafoya as a 2026 U.S. Senate candidate in Minnesota. The FEC identifies Tafoya as a Republican and lists her candidate ID as S6MN00556. The same official record lists Tafoya for Senate, committee ID C00935528, as her principal campaign committee. The committee record shows the campaign is not merely a media rumor or a one-day announcement. It is an active federal campaign structure tied to the open Minnesota Senate race. That matters because Tafoya’s sports-media name recognition is now being tested inside a real political operation. She is formally filed, publicly polling, and showing a large early lead inside the Republican primary lane. For a first-time candidate, that is a much stronger starting position than most campaigns ever get. It also gives Republican voters a concrete name to measure against the rest of the field before the filing deadline closes. Cook and MPR News provide the bigger race context: Cook lists the 2026 Minnesota Senate race as an open seat because Democrat Senator Tina Smith is retiring. Cook currently rates the race Lean Democrat and lists Minnesota’s partisan voting index as D+3. Cook also lists the filing deadline as June 2, 2026 and the primary election as August 11, 2026. MPR News reported in January that former sports broadcaster Michele Tafoya entered the U.S. Senate race in Minnesota. MPR also described the seat as open because Smith was retiring. That context is important for readers watching the early poll. Tafoya may have an early command of the GOP primary, but Minnesota remains a hard general-election battlefield for Republicans. The immediate story is the Republican primary lead; the larger fight is whether that lead can turn into a credible statewide campaign after the nomination battle ends. That is why the poll matters now, before the race becomes a fall campaign about turnout, money, and the Democratic nominee. This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.

President Trump’s DOJ has now charged 15 people in what the Department of Justice is calling the Minnesota Health Care Fraud Takedown, a sprawling set of schemes involving more than $90 million in intended losses to taxpayers. The DOJ announced on May 21 that the cases include the two largest Medicaid fraud cases ever charged in the District of Minnesota. The Justice Department laid out the scope of the Minnesota takedown in its official announcement: The department announced criminal charges against 15 defendants, including child care center owners and Medicaid providers, for alleged fraud schemes involving more than $90 million in intended loss across taxpayer-funded health care and social service programs. DOJ said the cases include the two largest Medicaid fraud cases ever charged in the District of Minnesota, first-of-their-kind charges involving additional Medicaid programs, and allegations that fraudsters drained resources meant for children, vulnerable patients, seniors, and people with disabilities. The announcement also included a national Medicaid fraud enforcement expansion, with funding for 15 new trial attorney positions in the Health Care Fraud Section. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the alleged scammers ripped off taxpayers, harmed legitimate beneficiaries, and that the Minnesota cases are only the beginning of a broader effort to dismantle benefit fraud schemes across the country. Investigative journalist Nick Shirley, whose reporting helped push the Minnesota fraud story into the national spotlight, put it simply. The Minnesota fraud empire is falling:Yesterday 15 fraudsters were charged and $90 million was busted. The MSM tried to cover for the fraudsters. @GovTimWalz called it "white supremacy" to expose it and @IlhanMN is completely SILENT. Independent journalism defeated an entire… pic.twitter.com/zarN1qgTZc — Nick shirley (@nickshirleyy) May 22, 2026 That last part should make every taxpayer sit up straight. The centerpiece of the takedown is what the DOJ described as the largest Medicaid autism fraud case ever charged by the Department, a $46.6 million scheme targeting Minnesota’s Early Intensive Developmental and Behavioral Intervention (EIDBI) program. According to DOJ, EIDBI is a Minnesota Health Care Program for medically necessary services for people under age 21 with autism spectrum disorder. Federal officials said claims in that program jumped from more than $600,000 in 2018 to more than $400 million by 2025. According to federal prosecutors, defendants paid kickbacks to parents, diagnosed children with autism regardless of medical necessity, and billed for autism services that were never actually provided. The growth of the program tells the story of how badly it was exploited. EIDBI claims in Minnesota went from just over $600,000 in 2018 to more than $400 million by 2025. That is not organic growth. That is a program being systematically looted. The fraud extended well beyond autism services. The DOJ also announced charges related to Integrated Community Supports, including allegations that a vulnerable recipient who required 24-hour care was billed for services he never received. That individual was later found deceased. Eight additional defendants were charged with defrauding Housing Stabilization Services of approximately $15.7 million. DOJ said some defendants were Pennsylvania residents who traveled to Minnesota for what federal officials called fraud tourism. The department said Minnesota shuttered the HSS program in October 2025 because of fraud, showing how these schemes can destroy programs meant for vulnerable beneficiaries. Federal officials said some of those defendants were Pennsylvania residents who engaged in what prosecutors called “fraud tourism,” traveling to Minnesota specifically to exploit its programs. CBS Minnesota added more local context from the federal press conference: The charges covered seven state-managed Medicaid programs, according to the local report, and federal officials described a pattern in which suspects allegedly billed the state for services they did not provide. The money was then spent on real estate, cars, jewelry, and other lavish items, according to the same report. Federal officials described Minnesota-run programs as a personal piggy bank for alleged fraudsters. CBS also connected the national attention around the scandal to Nick Shirley’s viral reporting, which was amplified by Elon Musk, Vice President JD Vance, and former Attorney General Pam Bondi after years of mounting controversy over fraud in Minnesota programs. Federal prosecutors have estimated Minnesota fraud could top $9 billion, a figure Gov. Tim Walz disputes. Walz has argued that his administration spent years cracking down on fraud and accused President Trump of politicizing the issue. Federal prosecutors have estimated total Minnesota Medicaid fraud could exceed $9 billion. Governor Tim Walz disputes that figure and claims his administration has cracked down on fraud, though the scale of the charges announced this week raises serious questions about how long this was allowed to fester. Assistant Attorney General Colin M. McDonald announced the DOJ is expanding its Health Care Fraud Section with 15 new trial attorney positions to combat Medicaid fraud nationwide. Fifteen new prosecutors to go after a problem that may run into the billions. The cleanup in Minnesota is clearly just getting started.

A growing coalition of climate activists, anti-Israel protesters, and communist-linked movements has found a new common cause: shutting down American AI data centers. That is the finding of a new investigation from Fox News Digital, which reported that these disparate activist groups are increasingly converging around campaigns that experts say weaken America’s competitive position against China in the global AI race. Fox News Digital laid out the warning this way: Climate activists, anti-Israel protesters and other activist movements with very different agendas have become strange bedfellows united by a shared disdain for America and funding from China, according to experts who warn the trend is weakening the United States amid a rapidly accelerating AI race. Critics say the same activist ecosystem is now targeting America’s AI infrastructure and industrial power, in a development that experts warn could undermine the United States in its technological competition with China. The growing convergence increasingly includes communist and Islamist activist movements, and it recently extended into campaigns targeting America’s artificial intelligence data centers, with activist and environmental groups helping delay or block dozens of such projects worth billions of dollars over concerns about energy use, water consumption and environmental impact amid rising power demand. Fox News Digital has observed many of the movements protesting side-by-side at demonstrations across the country despite their otherwise stark ideological differences. Activists from CodePink, which Fox described as a far-left feminist activist group that has received funds from Neville Roy Singham, recently circulated a video attacking a Utah data center project backed by investor Kevin O’Leary. Climate activists, anti-Israel protesters, and anti-AI groups now target U.S. data centers worth billions — forming what experts call a 'red-green-green alliance' that weakens America's tech race against China. Hudson Institute fellow says the common thread binding these… pic.twitter.com/5MS9MSFHw9 — Fox News Politics (@foxnewspolitics) May 24, 2026 Zineb Riboua, a fellow at the Hudson Institute, told Fox News Digital that the pattern is unmistakable. Fox News Digital quoted Riboua directly: “What all of these protests have in common — the protests against AI data centers or the environmental protests or the protest against Israel — is that anti-American trend within them,” Hudson Institute fellow Zineb Riboua told Fox News Digital. “Climate change was also one of those very trendy causes to protest for or against, and now there’s always this quest to find what is the next thing to revolutionize,” Riboua added. “And this revolution against the United States is always welcome, no matter what type of forms and shapes it takes.” Fox News Digital also reported that Singham, a U.S.-born tech tycoon living in Shanghai, “funneled roughly $285 million into six activist nonprofits accused by lawmakers and analysts of promoting pro-China narratives and anti-American protest movements.” The report tied those accusations to lawmakers and analysts, keeping the funding claim focused on the reported activist network rather than every protester on the ground. Riboua warned that “Third Worldism” casts the United States and the West as the source of global problems, uniting otherwise unrelated activist causes under one anti-Western framework. Energy expert Brenda Shaffer described what she sees as a “red-green-green alliance” involving communist movements, Islamist activism, and environmental protest groups. Shaffer warned that energy is the backbone of the AI race, and that China stands to benefit directly when Western countries sabotage their own energy and industrial capacity from within. Fox News Digital also quoted Shaffer on the energy stakes behind the AI race: Energy expert Brenda Shaffer, a research faculty member at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, described the broader activist convergence as part of a “red-green-green alliance,” an ideological overlap between three elements: communist movements, characterized by the color red; Islamist activism, described as green; and environmental protest groups, symbolized as green. Shaffer warned the growing convergence is increasingly affecting industries critical to America’s economic and technological competition with China. “Energy is crucial to the AI race, to the data centers,” Shaffer told Fox News Digital, arguing that while activist groups in the West target fossil fuels, AI infrastructure, and industrial development, China continues rapidly expanding coal production, manufacturing capacity, and energy generation. “China really benefits from these policies that we adopt and we just let them keep forging ahead with coal,” Shaffer said, comparing the pattern to Cold War-era anti-nuclear activism that benefited Soviet energy leverage in Europe. Shaffer also warned that Western dependence on Chinese renewable-energy supply chains can create strategic vulnerabilities because China dominates major parts of the global solar and inverter market. Expert warns ‘red-green-green alliance’ helping China gain AI edge https://t.co/wyo4aAi3ey via @@YahooNews — Brenda Shaffer (@ProfBShaffer) May 24, 2026 The concern is not hypothetical. Fox News Digital previously reported that Neville Roy Singham, a U.S.-born tech tycoon living in Shanghai, funneled roughly $285 million into six activist nonprofits. Lawmakers and analysts have accused those nonprofits of promoting pro-China narratives and fueling anti-American protest movements. Fox noted that activist groups have also targeted a Utah data center project backed by investor Kevin O’Leary, though Fox reported it had not independently verified O’Leary’s specific claim that China-linked funding was behind the Utah opposition. Climate activists, anti-Israel protesters, and anti-AI groups are now coordinating attacks on U.S. data centers. Three movements with nothing in common ideologically except one thing: opposition to America. A Hudson Institute fellow calls it a "red-green-green alliance." The… https://t.co/LTQGhC5bsV pic.twitter.com/LR9e5rSovN — Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) May 24, 2026 The bigger picture is hard to ignore. The United States is in an all-out sprint to build the AI infrastructure needed to stay ahead of China, and President Trump has made energy dominance and AI leadership central pillars of his agenda. Every data center that gets blocked or delayed is a win for Beijing, whether the activists on the ground realize it or not. The convergence of these movements around anti-data-center campaigns represents a serious strategic vulnerability at exactly the moment America can least afford one. When the climate movement, anti-Israel radicals, and communist sympathizers all end up pulling in the same direction, it is worth asking who benefits most from the result. The answer is not the United States.