Is Dianne Feinstein the True Manchurian Candidate?

August 13, 2018 Updated: August 14, 2018

Let’s do a little thought experiment. Imagine a media report alleges that a long-time driver, or a housekeeper, or a gardener who works for the Trump family is a Russian spy and says that the FBI confirmed the allegation.

Then, suppose, President Trump writes this tweet:

“The FBI reviewed the matter, shared its concerns with me and the employee immediately left my office. He never had access to classified or sensitive information or legislative matters. The FBI never informed me of any compromise of national security information.”

We know what would happen next. CNN would have Michael Avenatti on every three seconds, accusing Trump of being a Russian asset before he was born. Robert Mueller would be on the spy like a duck on a junebug, if he hasn’t done that already.

The Democrats and their media allies will go into mass hysteria, calling for Trump to resign or be impeached. The GOP Never-Trumpers would say their prayers had been answered. The anti-Trump crowd would be seen in front of Trump Tower, celebrating the coming downfall of Trump.

I’m sure these scenes are a recurring theme in some Democrats’ dreams every night (well, maybe day, too). But these events are never going to happen. The FBI and the Mueller investigation have been at it for a combined two years. They have found exactly nothing to prove the allegations of Trump–Russia collusion.

Downplaying a Spy

The fact is, the Russia collusion narrative is a conspiracy to bring down Trump concocted by the Democrats. The Mueller witch hunt is only one of the monsters spawned by the scheme. They are not really interested in stopping foreign spies in the United States. Otherwise, how can one explain their deafening silence on the spy case involving Dianne Feinstein, the senior senator from California and ranking member of the Senate intelligence committee?

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Feinstein was notified by the FBI that a man who had worked for her for nearly 20 years was a Chinese spy. The person was allowed to retire from her service and was never charged. He’s still active in the San Francisco area.

Feinstein tried to downplay the significance of the incident. The hypothetical tweet I attributed to Trump above is based on one sent by Feinstein. There are at least three problems that have not been addressed by the California Democrat.

First, was the so-called “driver” merely a gofer for Feinstein? The Daily Caller’s investigation revealed that, at least in 2013, the alleged spy was listed as the “office director” at Feinstein’s San Francisco office.

Second, Feinstein claimed the spy never had access to sensitive or classified information. Where is the evidence that this is so?

Finally, the whole thing was kept secret. The spy’s office colleagues didn’t know. “They just kept it quiet,” a source told the San Francisco Chronicle. Who ordered the coverup? In 2013, the year that the FBI reportedly notified Feinstein about the spy, the FBI director was first Mueller and then James Comey (who succeeded Mueller in September 2013). Was Eric Holder, the attorney general of the United States at the time, in on this?

Feinstein’s China Connection

The spy, it turned out, was not the only one in Feinstein’s office who enjoyed a special relationship with the Chinese communist regime. An investigative report by The Federalist revealed Feinstein herself and her husband, Richard Blum, are buddies of top figures in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

The couple are personal friends of China’s butcher, Jiang Zemin, the former head of the CCP. Feinstein was said to visit Jiang regularly in the 1980s. Jiang was responsible for the nationwide suppression of the spiritual practice Falun Gong beginning in 1999, in which practitioners have been brutally murdered, tortured, raped, and had their organs pillaged by the regime. Despite Jiang’s terrible human rights record, Feinstein has reportedly never renounced him.

Why is Feinstein’s support of Jiang, an infamous dictator, so steadfast? Economic gains could be one factor. With Jiang’s help, Blum was among the earliest American investors to form partnerships with the CCP. Before long, the rapidly rising wealth of Feinstein and Blum caught the U.S. media’s attention.

According to a report in the Los Angeles Times, some critics worried that Feinstein’s ardent support for China’s interests “cannot help but benefit her husband’s efforts to earn profits there.” According to the New York Post, Blum has brokered deals worth over $100 million in China since 1996.

The CCP’s investment in Feinstein, of course, is super worthwhile. Feinstein is one of the most pro-China senators. She was in favor of granting “most favored nation” trading status to China in 1996. She also led the efforts to lobby the World Trade Organization to accept China as a member in 1999 and advocated discontinuing the annual congressional review of China’s human rights situation as a condition for “most favored nation” status. Feinstein and Blum still travel to China each year.

Some speculated the Chinese spy in Feinstein’s office wasn’t prosecuted because he supplied the CCP with “political intelligence and not classified information.” There’s a simpler explanation: Everyone involved wanted this thing to go away so that it wouldn’t blow into a major political scandal. As a result, the spy got a get-out-of-jail-free card.

This is in stark contrast to Donald Trump Jr.’s experience. In the Trump Tower meetings with Russians, his sole purpose was to gather “political intelligence.” However, there are people who claim he should be prosecuted for “conspiracy to defraud the United States.”

Letting a known Chinese spy go free because he is connected to a Democrat versus endlessly tormenting someone who truly didn’t have access to classified information in 2016 (but happens to be the son of a Republican president)—here we see the different standards of justice in this age of “collusion.”

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.