If you go to China once, you visited China.
If you go there a few times, you like China.
If you go there a half dozen or more times you love China.
If, like Democrat Vice Presidential nominee Tim Walz, you go there dozens of times (the New York Times estimate is 30 times), lived there for a year, and sing China’s praises, you are a Chinese asset.
With the above in mind, please read the following quote from author/commentator Peter Schweizer regarding Vice Presidential nominee Tim Walz’s association with China:
On Sunday Morning Futures this weekend, host Maria Bartiromo asked Schweizer the following question:
“Your reaction to what we’ve heard from Tim Walz, he’s praised Chinese communism as a system where everyone is the same and everyone shares. Do you believe that the Communist Party has been grooming Tim Walz?”
Schweizer’s answer:
“Oh, I think there’s no question about it, Maria. It goes back to the exchange program that he ran and brought hundreds of students from the United States to China. In the early press accounts, Tim Walz describes it as unique and unusual and different, a program that nobody else has. And at the same time that he’s bringing those students there, by the students’ accounting, Tim Walz is saying things like, well, in China, nobody is poor because everybody shares in China as if sort of a compulsive arm of the CCP is voluntary. I mean, sharing is voluntary. It’s a ridiculous statement to make. There are other comments he made he told students going to China to downplay their American-ness. There’s an account from one student, I haven’t been able to independently verify saying that he brought back lots of copies of Mao’s Little Red Book when he was in China. So this is a relationship that’s long-standing and it carried forward when he joined Congress and the actions that he was taking in Congress as well.
“He goes to China in 2016 with a few other Democrats. He recounts how he’s meeting with Chinese officials, and he says, oh, I was in China, I was here in China in December of 1989, and they said no, it was February of 1990. I mean, in other words, they had been tracking him when he was a young man, but in that meeting with Premier Li, it’s a classic example of elite capture and what the Chinese call big help with a little bad mouth. Tim Walz has talked about the human rights condition in China, but it’s never in the context of doing anything about it, and during this meeting with Premier Li, he told Premier Li, ‘Well, don’t look to the United States as an example of how to do this because we don’t know how to do it right either.’ Those are his descriptions of what he told Premier Li. So it’s this massive moral equivalence, which is exactly what China wants from elites in the United States. Talk about human rights, but don’t do anything about it. And also create this moral equivalence that the Chinese system is not any worse than ours. That is exactly what Tim Walz has done over the years.”
Is this the person you want one heartbeat away from the presidency?
Is this the person Democrats actually vetted before OKing him as Kamala Harris’ running mate? If so, who did the vetting? Mickey, Donald or Goofy?
And, importantly, in the weeks since Walz was selected to run with Harris, where are any mainstream media exposés of Walz’s decades-long love affair with this freedomless, brutal communist country?
Are most of our mainstream media so completely in the tank for Harris and the Democrat Party that they are willing to ignore Walz’s decades-long love affair with China – which, if the public became aware of it, would almost certainly have a hugely negative impact on the Harris/Walz campaign?
The answer, self-evidently, is yes, they are.
The prospect of cackling flyweight Kamala Harris, who won’t (can’t?) answer any questions about her candidacy, and what appears to be the Manchurian Candidate, Tim Walz, in control of our country: that is what we face right now. This is our alternative to Trump/Vance.
Think about it. Think about it long and hard. Think what it means to our country. Think about what the fact that most of our media are diligently looking the other way tells you.
Then make your judgments.
