In the Market with Janet ParshallJoin our husband-and-wife team this hour as they look at the headlines of the day through the lens of Scripture. Listen as they apply the whole Truth of the whole Gospel to the whole world. Join us for some fascinating conversation.
Hi friends, thank you so much for downloading this podcast and it is my sincere hope that you'll hear something that will equip you, edify you, encourage you, enlighten you, and then gently but consistently push you out into the marketplace of ideas where you can let your light so shine before men and go and tell them the good news. Before you listen to this podcast, let me just tell you about this month's truth tool. It's called The Jesus Book, written by pastor Jack Graham. I love it because he really does recognize the fact that biblical literacy is declining, and that a lot of people think that the Bible is too complicated, that it's written for pastors or for scholars. And yet, in truth, Jesus is there from Genesis to Revelation. And that book was written for every single one of us. We just need a better way to know how to study God's Word. And that's exactly what the Jesus Book is all about. So when you give a gift of any amount this month, I'm going to give you a copy of The Jesus Book by doctor Jack Graham. Just call 877 Janet 58. That's 877 Janet 58 or give online to in the market with Janet Parshall. Also consider becoming a partial partner. Partial partners always get the monthly truth tool, but in addition, they get a weekly newsletter that includes some of my writing and an audio piece only from my partial partners. So whether you want to give one time or you want to support the program every single month, just call 877 Janet 58 or online at In the Market with Janet Parshall. Scroll to the bottom of the page. Thanks so much for letting me take a moment of your time. And now please enjoy the broadcast.
Here are some of the news headlines we're watching.
The conference was over. The president won a pledge.
Americans worshiping government over God.
Extremely rare safety move by a major 17 years.
The Palestinians and Israelis negotiated.
It is not everyday.
But our witness today is a whistleblower and not just a whistleblower. But a longtime executive at Facebook.
I am here at considerable personal risk because you have the power and the authority to hold them accountable.
She worked directly with Mark Zuckerberg. She was a part of the Facebook brass. Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg have lied to the American people repeatedly. $50,000. Every time she mentions Facebook in public, they are attempting to destroy her reputation. And I think the question is why?
I sit before this committee today to set the record straight about these illegal and dangerous activities.
They are willing to build data centers, store data in China. They are willing explicitly to give the Chinese government access to it. And if that means that American user data is also compromised, they're willing to do that, too. All for profits in China. There was virtually nothing they weren't willing to do. Have you ever known Mark Zuckerberg to censor on behalf of China?
One thing the Chinese Communist Party and Mark Zuckerberg share is that they want to silence their critics.
Did Facebook actually brief members of the CCP on artificial intelligence, to your knowledge?
Yes, Senator, we are engaged in a high stakes AI arms race. China is developing AI models for military use, relying on Meta's llama model.
Do you buy this latest reinvention of Mark Zuckerberg?
This is a man who wears many different costumes. I have a lot of questions for Mark Zuckerberg, but he has proven that you cannot believe his answers. He's lied to members of Congress, he's lied to employees, and he's lied to Americans.
I have a message to Mark Zuckerberg as well. It's time for you to tell the truth. You should come to this committee and take an oath and answer this evidence. Stop trying to silence her. Stop trying to gag her. Come to this committee. Take the oath. Sit there and let us question you and give the American people the truth. We will be waiting for you.
Hello and welcome to In the Market with Janet Parshall. Happy Tuesday to you. Craig, partial is with me, and we're going to take a look at that story and a whole lot more this hour. Thank you so much for joining us. You know, this actually took place last week, but it's so significant that Craig and I want to break it down for you. It was a hearing that was held on Capitol Hill. That voice that you heard, that male voice is Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri. He happens to currently chair the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism. It was a bipartisan hearing, and the solo witness was a woman by the name of Sarah Wynn Williams. You heard in that opening montage that Josh Hawley acknowledged her as someone who was in the upper echelons of Facebook. This is profoundly significant because what it does is it underscores Craig. If I can use the word and tell me if I'm out of bounds here, it seems to me that Mark Zuckerberg has probably committed perjury before the committees on the Hill. Time after time, and almost every time he's come to speak. You and I have done some analysis. We've shared some audio with our listeners because most people are too busy living real lives to follow some of the hearings on Capitol Hill. But this linkage between Meta and Communist China cannot be ignored. We had a fabulous and fruitful conversation with Bill Gertz yesterday. If you missed it, just go to where you find your favorite podcast. Download our two of yesterday, bill Gertz of The Washington Times was with us, and he continued to sound the alarm on the growing menace that Communist China is. Again, this isn't against the Chinese people. This is the government in and of itself. So it begs the question of why Mark Zuckerberg would decide that he would share data of American citizens with Communist China when they're absolutely unashamed. Declared goal is hegemony total global domination, one soul at a time. And when asked this question in the past, it seems that Mark Zuckerberg who is Mr. Meta Mr.. Facebook, has nuanced the answer far too many times. We're going to give you some of the audio from the hearing. In fact, I want to go to the very first bit of information I can share with you from Sarah Wynn Williams. She got up and she talked about in her opening statement that American security and American values have been undermined and betrayed. Have a listen.
My name is Sarah Wynn-williams, and I served as the director of global public policy at Facebook Now Matter for nearly seven years, starting in 2011. Throughout those seven years, I saw meta executives repeatedly undermine US national security and betray American values. They did these things in secret to win favor with Beijing and build an $18 billion business in China. We are engaged in a high stakes AI arms race against China. And during my time at meta, company executives lied about what they were doing with the Chinese Communist Party to employees, shareholders, Congress and the American public.
Surely this is more than a children's fairy tale where all this is is a King Midas story that that Mark Zuckerberg wants to be richer than he already is, and that what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but he loses his soul? Surely he cannot see the communist regime as a friend of America. So is it strictly the love of money? Which is my mama taught me was the root of all evil.
Look, every not only every Silicon Valley tech giant, but every large multinational corporation wants to do business with China because of the multiplicity issue. That is the vast number of potential consumers and therefore the vast amount of potential revenue that's been known for years. Uh, but Silicon Valley itself, these big companies, you know, like, uh, meta, which really means Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, because they're all owned by meta, or whether it's Google. Google did search activity helping the Chinese government to censor its people through tracking who was doing, uh, on inappropriate searches on Google to help the Communist Party. Uh, Apple has its products, uh, constructed over there by Chinese labor. And now, of course, we get, uh, Mr. Zuckerberg. First of all, you can't show up in, uh, a congressional hearing under oath, uh, and testify as a whistleblower unless, you know, your facts are true. Because, of course, criminal perjury is always a possibility. Now, speaking of Mr. Zuckerberg, well, he has been hailed before Congress on more, uh, opportunities than I can count. And he has testified about the relationship with China. When Josh Hawley says that our investigation, quote, has revealed Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg did business with the Chinese Communist Party, built censorship tools, turned over data. Lied about it to Congress and the American people, as he did in ex. Uh, I think there's something there. There, there is there. And it's just a matter of how deep this goes.
We've got much more audio from that hearing. Again, this took place last week on Capitol Hill. Josh Hawley again, the chairman of the Senate subcommittee dealing with counterterrorism. And that certainly is the question that's being raised here. Why would an American businessman continue to partner with a regime that wants to dominate America? Back after this? The Bible wasn't meant to be studied by pastors and scholars only. It was written for all of us. That's why I've chosen the Jesus Book as this month's truth tool. Learn to read, understand, and apply God's Word in a new and powerful way. As for your copy of the Jesus Book, when you give a gift of any amount in the market, call eight 7758. That's eight 7758 or go to in the market with Janet Parshall. Craig and I are in the middle of watching an absolutely fascinating video series predicated on Rob Dreyer's book, Live Not By Lies. If you can watch it, be sure and do it. It's an angel right now. If you get Angel Studios as one of your streaming platforms. I had the privilege of talking to Rob about that book, and what we are learning, quite simply, is that there is hard totalitarianism and there is soft totalitarianism. And when you're in the midst of soft totalitarianism, which is exactly what we have here in the United States, you get censorship. And we are talking about censorship committed by an American citizen, by offering data on U.S. citizens to a known enemy of the United States. Yes, we are kind of a twisted business partner, but under this new administration, that linkage is being disconnected. I give you the subject of tariffs. We discussed that yesterday with Bill Gertz. If you want a deeper conversation on that, again, go to where your favorite podcast can be found in the market with Janet Parshall. So last Monday, Josh Wednesday, Josh Hawley of Missouri, who is the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism, had this bipartisan hearing. I should tell you also, that Thursday of last week, Holly sent a letter to Zuckerberg requesting his testimony before the subcommittee, writing, The American people deserve to know the truth about your company. So going back to the hearing, I want you to hear some more from Sarah Wynn Williams. By the way, this is a woman who had a pretty high position. She began working at meta, then known as Facebook, as the director of Global Public policy in 2011. She was there almost seven years, she told the panel she witnessed the company provide, and I quote, custom built censorship tools. Again, this is meta. Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook giving to the communist regime custom built censorship tools for the Communist Party. She said a Chinese dissident living in the U.S. was removed from Facebook in 2017 after pressure from Chinese officials. So not only is he providing he's responding to the dog whistle from the communist regime. They say, get rid of this guy. The guy gets shown the door. Facebook said at the time it took action against the regime critic for sharing someone else's personal information. That seems to be the choice du jour in language every time somebody gets kicked out. So I want to go back to her hearing because Sarah did not show up for this hearing without personal risk, by the way. Nobody likes a whistleblower. There are deep pockets in Facebook. There are deep pockets in the communist regime. But she was interested in the truth. Something in my town is rare. So going back to the hearing, I want you to hear more of what Sarah had to say. This time. She talks about how meta was trying to silence her. Have a listen.
I relied on the commitment given in 2018 that they would waive their rights to pursue forced arbitration, despite their public commitment. They brought a case against me for hundreds of millions of dollars. Now they have a legal gag order that silences me even as meta and their proxies spread lies about me. This order is so expansive that it prohibits me from speaking with members of Congress. The gag order was sought by a company whose CEO claims to be a champion of free speech. The American people deserve to know the truth. Meta has been willing to compromise its values, sacrifice the security of its users, and undermine American interests to build its China business. It's been happening for years, covered up by lies, and continues to this day.
So, Craig, pretty scary stuff in there when she talks about a legal gag order that prohibits her from speaking, even to members of Congress. First of all, the fact that you would include that in the gag order says volumes, right? In other words, these are the last people on Earth. We want to know our nefarious actions. Um, and so she talked about the fact that they were absolutely willing to undermine American business again for the sake of coins. You know, we talk about 30 pieces of silver this week during Holy Week. This is another example of how money can take people and lead them astray. Your thoughts on what she said thus far? Because I cannot get over the fact that she sat there and she must have had butterflies in her stomach, knowing that she was at risk legally. She was at risk. Some say that she's got concerns about her physical safety as well. So your thoughts?
Yeah, I'm in terms of the details. And this is getting down to the weeds a little bit, but I'm not I'm assuming that Facebook wanted her. Metta wanted her to sign a nondisclosure agreement NDA, which is pretty typical of particularly of big corporations that worry about their reputation both at home and abroad. But here's the fact. The fact is that for a long period of time, Mr. Zuckerberg has been lauding his company and himself as champions of free speech. There was a speech many years ago, well-publicized at Georgetown University, where he talked about his commitment to free speech. He has told Congress on a number of occasions that that's what he stands for.
Apparently just free speech in China.
Right. Right. In fact, um, you know, some commentators have said, well, he's warmed up, you know, the Trump administration. He's willing to go to both political aisles and he's nonpolitical and so forth, and he's seen the light. He stopped his, uh, company's, uh, what I call nefarious fact checking system, which used, uh, legacy media reporters to, in many cases, stretch the truth about what is accurate or what isn't, and then make sure that Mr. Zuckerberg's censors people on the basis of it, a little.
Bit like fox guarding chicken. Yes, I got it.
Yes. But it's it's too little too late for Mr. Zuckerberg to say, oh, we're abandoning this nefarious, uh, technique that was, uh, striking down and blocking pro-life organizations and conservative groups and political enemies that, you know, his friends didn't like and his company disagreed with. It's a little late to do this, but particularly in light of his many protests, protestations. And by the way, one of his protestations was not just adhering to free speech, which now is called into question, but also whether this is a truly pro-American company or whether it's up for sale internationally. Now, remember, everything that takes place in China has a connection to the Chinese government, and everything in the Chinese government has a link to its military. And I, as an example in censorship techniques, are all its open market for them, the Chinese military to use against us.
To that point, again, harkening back to my conversation yesterday with Bill Gertz, again, go to where you find your favorite podcasts in the market with Janet Parshall, our two of yesterday. He's written extensively about this and how China sees themselves as the leader of AI and has all kinds. And I'm going to use your word again. Nefarious plans for the use of AI, including. And he wasn't making it up. He said it sounds like something out of a movie. Their plans to literally do mind control. So when you think about it, of course they want data. Thank you, Mr. Zuckerberg. Your check's in the mail. That will help us fine tune our weaponry. Now, there's a whole lot more to this hearing and more from Wynn-williams. We're going to continue our conversation. This is in the market with Janet Parshall. Craig Parshall is with me. We'll continue our conversation about last week's hearing right after this. So let me go back immediately to the hearing that was on Capitol Hill last week, chaired by Josh Hawley of Missouri. It was the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism, one witness, one witness only. Sarah Wynn-williams, who began working at meta back in 2011 as the director of global public policy. She finally just said, I got to come forward. You have to know exactly what's happening. And happening. And she's very concerned because she feels national security and American values are being compromised. She is alleging that Mark Zuckerberg handed over data on American citizens to the communist regime. In my neck of the woods, Craig. But what do I know? I'd call that treason, but I digress. So the point is, she was up there. She was giving testimony to what was going on. And Josh Hawley is the right of the chair, had the opportunity to question her. Part of it went like this. Have a listen.
Was Facebook ever willing to share user data with the Chinese Communist Party?
Yes, Senator.
In fact, they had a plan for that, didn't they? Here's some more documents. Internal documents. Update I spoke with the China team yesterday. They flagged a potential complication arising from our negotiations with the Chinese government. I emphasize this is a Facebook document. Now, these are Facebook executives. And in exchange for the ability to do operations in China, Facebook will agree to grant the Chinese government access to Chinese user data. There it is in black and white. Facebook will agree to grant the Chinese government access to Chinese user data, including Hong Kong's user data. And then they talk about they're going to have to get the the Hong, their Hong Kong citizens to agree to terms of service so they can slide this right by them. This is extraordinary. Can I just ask you, Miss Wynn Williams, was American's user data ever compromised, or did they ever plan to compromise American user data in any way? Do you know?
One of the challenges with the servicing a market as big as China was the internet infrastructure that would underpin that. So I mentioned the cable that, uh, they joined between the US and China, and that would be very helpful. But the in in servicing this market. But it would still still mean that the service would be slow. So they contemplated, um, using Pop servers and Pop servers as a technical data service that brings the data closer to the end user. The challenge with Pop servers is that you can't segregate data. It would have American data. It would have Chinese user data, and it would be on Chinese soil.
So I want to just be clear about this here. In this document, Facebook is talking about making Chinese user data available to the Chinese government because they're going to store that data in China. Is that correct? Correct. But when you store that data in China, Americans who exchange messages or other information with Chinese Facebook users, that would mean the Chinese government could get access to the American data as well. Is that correct?
Through the Pop servers? Potentially, yes.
And Facebook was willing to take that risk.
Yes. There was a lot of discussion about this. And ultimately, yes.
I mean, this is this is extraordinary. This is exactly contrary to what Facebook has represented for years. Here. They are willing to build data centers, store data in China. They are willing explicitly to give the Chinese government access to it, and if that means that American user data is also compromised, they're willing to do that to all for profits in China. There was virtually nothing they weren't willing to do.
Stunning. So all the while, you're being entertained on Facebook using meta and they're robbing from you. Nothing free. Soft totalitarianism. Look away, look away. Nothing to see here. We'll just take your data. By the way, during the course of her testimony, when Williams talked about the use of something called virility counter, and apparently what that did is it flagged posts that got over 10,000 views for review by a, quote, chief editor and even a Democratic senator. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut called it an Orwellian censor. Here's somebody who's tuned in to what's going on. These virility counters were used not only in mainland China, but also in Hong Kong and Taiwan, all according to her testimony. Craig react to what she said so far.
Well, it's very troubling. Um, first of all, if it was just Chinese citizens being spied on with the help of Mark Zuckerberg's massive social media platform, that would be a human rights concern for all of us. But the fact that American citizens may also be having their data raises something in my memory. In fact, a couple of years before Elon Musk took over Twitter and turned it into ex US. You may remember that, uh, some of our Defense Department's uses of the old Twitter had been hacked into. Chinese hackers have been attacking American data, and, uh, our, our information for years. That's a known fact. You've had, uh, a number of guests on your show to talk about that threat. So they have an interest in getting our information, because right now we are in the information age, which means information drives everything. It empowers nation states. And you have to realize that when you have a country the size of China and you have a platform like meta, as big as it is, in fact, there's just a handful of these companies. Most of them have economic capitalization larger than many medium sized nations. The only thing that's stopping them from being a nation state in themselves is a standing army. They have the revenue, the reach, and the political influence internationally and nationally that a nation would have. They even have their own set of ambassadors, quote unquote, that go to these foreign countries and negotiate. So is it in American interests to have a massive social media platform formed in and operating in Silicon Valley in the United States to do business with, really our economic enemy and certainly an opponent militarily? I have a real caution about that. And I think Congress is probably thinking right now, what are we going to do about it?
Craig, when we come on the other side, and I'm going to go back to this hearing because I still have more audio I want to share. Give us an update on TikTok, because the president did do another extension here. And this is a parallel problem. This is TikTok. Oh look at what I can do. Look at the information. Look at the things I can post. And in the meantime, it's owned by the Chinese where they just like meta are culling data. Now the Congress said, nope, you're not going to do that anymore. It's going to either be purchased by an American company or go away. You're not going to have any business in the United States. We'll give you an update on that when we return. This is in the market with Janet Parshall. Craig Parshall is with me. We're reviewing a very important hearing on Capitol Hill last week. Buyer beware. Back after this. Anyone can read the news every day on in the market. We're committed to telling the news as seen through the lens of Scripture. As Christians, we must be informed about what's going on in the world and respond appropriately. When you become a partial partner, you ensure that we continue here on your station, equipping the church to discuss current events, using the Bible as our solid foundation. Why not become a partial partner today? Call 877 58. Or go online to in the market with Janet Parshall. Again, this is a hearing that many of us may have missed, but it's so important. Craig and I want to bring it to your attention. It was a committee that was held last week in front of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism. Josh Hawley, senator from Missouri, is the one who chaired the committee and the sole and single witness. And if you've ever seen it, you have all these people sitting in the committee chairs. You have this gaggle of the press, and then this long table with one lone woman sitting at it. Sarah Wynn Williams, who worked at meta, then known as Facebook, as the director of global public policy in 2011. She was with the company for seven years and she just had it. She had to tell somebody what Mark Zuckerberg and Meta were doing in its liaison with China, Communist China, giving American data to the Chinese when unless you're suffering from the Rip Van Winkle syndrome and you've been asleep for 40 years under a tree, they have made it known that their goal is global domination, and any and everything they do pushes them forward to that end. That is their stated and declare goal. As Bill Gertz said yesterday in our conversation, it is marxist-leninism with communist characteristics, but it is about hegemony. He, President XI, is deified. They absolutely believe, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the world should be under communist rule and President XI should be the emperor of the globe. I think I wrote a story about that somewhere, Craig, and I don't think it ended too well, but I digress. So I want to go back to this hearing to have more audio. So you get a sense of this now. Moms and dads, there's a cautionary tale here. So you think I don't get it? You know, I posted where we our family went to the beach for the summer and we wanted to put a picture on Facebook, and I failed to see or feel or smell the growling and the hot air of the wolf that's breathing down my throat. When I do that, I get it. That's why conversations like this are important. You have to see the danger behind the screen on your computer. Why is this important for moms and dads? Because the targeted audience we discovered vis a vis this whistleblower was 13 to 17 year olds. Now, let that sink in. Why would the communist regime want data on 13 and 17 year olds? Perhaps? Let me put this out there as a mom. Perhaps they thought these would be the future warriors should America ever respond to Chinese aggression. Let me go back to the hearing. More from Sarah. Have a listen.
One example is that Facebook was targeting 13 to 17 year olds. It could identify when they were feeling worthless or helpless or like a failure, and they would take that information and share it with advertisers. One of the things about advertising is advertisers understand that when people don't feel good about themselves, it's often a good time. That to pitch a product, you know, people are more likely to to buy something. Uh, and so what the company was doing was letting these advertisers know that these 13 to 17 year olds were feeling depressed and saying, now's a really good time to serve them an advertisement. Or if a 13 year old girl, um, would delete a selfie, that's a really good time to try and sell her a beauty product. Or if a if a 13 year old girl is.
So let me interrupt right there. If she deleted a selfie, then, um, Facebook was in essence or meta Instagram. They were in essence tracking her activity online.
Absolutely. That that was taken as a signal and then shared with advertisers.
That was Senator Marsha Blackburn from Tennessee, Tennessee, who interjected that question. Craig, I will tell you, as a mother, that makes me physically ill to fact that again, I'm going to say it without blush or hesitation. This is soft totalitarianism. This is tracking our children just like something out of George Orwell's 1984, being watched constantly by Big Brother. But more importantly, you've got somebody who is becoming rich by selling personal information. It's disgusting. It is a Bible tale at its core when you think about it. And the idea was you're depressed to let's sell you something. I'll tell you something else that hit me. And again, it harkens back to my conversation with Bill Gertz yesterday. Again, go to where your favorite podcasts are in the market with Janet Parshall, our two yesterday, Bill Gertz, an award winning columnist for The Washington Times best selling author, just got through with a trip to the Indo Pacific region with Secretary of Defense Hegseth, and they talked an awful lot with Japanese leaders. Leaders in Australia dealing with the growing, the aggression. And that was the word that he heard over and over again, the aggression of China to move forward with global domination. And so if you're depressed, remember, China is the one who works with the drug cartels to bring fentanyl in. Who knows with this data how they can get into pockets of cities where they think there are enough depressed people that we could get them on fentanyl and take their lives? Remember, I remember Bill gates sharing with me, China can take the life of an American citizen without having to fire one bullet by using fentanyl. Your thoughts?
We're talking about behavior modification in terms of advertising. Look, all advertising is designed to, in one way or the other, influence the potential consumer, right? We all understand that. But I keyed into the 13 year old because there is a fine line between behavior, uh, influence and behavior modification and a thin line, even thinner, I think, between behavior modification and indoctrination not just of behavior, but of beliefs and opinions. Now, the 13 year old age bracket that we're talking about was exactly the age bracket that the Nazi Party in the 1930s used as the beginning point for the Nazi youth. I had always wondered, and I ran across this, about how young did the Nazi Party, which was trying to use then scientific methods for disastrous and nefarious reasons in terms of breeding, in terms of eliminating their enemies and basically opinion manipulation. And it's interesting that that age, which now we consider, you know, middle schoolers, very fertile ground for indoctrination and manipulation because they, they are still are beginning to form opinions. You know, you and I have heard, uh, developmental psychologists who deal with adolescent, um, behavior and psychology say, you know, the the finesse and the sophistication of thinking process. Abstract thinking sometimes doesn't really take hold until maybe 17 or 18 years of age, 13 years of age, you're forming kind of critical thinking skills, but very basic ones.
The frontal lobe isn't even fully developed until they're in their 20s.
They're ripe for manipulation. And China, Communist China is, I think, rife with theories and ambitions about manipulating opinion in their favor.
You know, Sarah Wynn Williams said something else that I thought was very interesting. I'm a why person. My question was, why would Zuckerberg do this? Could it? I mean, he's a gazillionaire as it is. He's got a yacht that's bigger than five homes put together, for heaven's sakes. And I wondered, is there something more than money? Well, according to her testimony, she said that Zuckerberg was, quote, personally invested, personally invested in Meta's business relationship with China. And apparently Zuckerberg was committed to learning Mandarin and had weekly Mandarin sessions with employees. This sounds like something out of The Manchurian Candidate.
Well, and this is one of the issues, and it's a deeper discussion, perhaps some other time. But I am firmly convinced that we don't understand the technology dilemma that we're facing, particularly, you know, internet driven social media platforms and what they're whether they're good or they're bad or they should be regulated or what the nature of our free speech rights are on those platforms. All of that. We don't understand the answer to those questions until we understand the worldview of those Silicon Valley masters who have created the universe of digital platforms, and they are searching souls. They are, by and large not all, but by and large a lot of them are in search of a sort of spirituality that is very, very different than the spiritual grounding our father and founders had when they constructed with, I believe, providential, uh, guidance by the Lord. Uh, the principles that we see in the Constitution that will protect individual fundamental rights.
Let me throw some AI into this, because, as I noted earlier, China wants to be the leader. They've said that point blank. Uh, during her testimony, she said she alleges that Meta's AI intelligence model, known as Lama, was used to help Deep Seep. Deep Seek is Chinese AI company. It sent shockwaves through the American tech industry earlier this year, when its AI model was shown to be competitive with OpenAI's ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost. And in a statement last year, En Lama meta spokesperson Andy Stone wrote, and I quote the alleged role of a single and outdated version of an American open source model is irrelevant when we know China is already investing over it to surpass the US technologically. And Chinese tech companies are releasing their own open AI models as fast or faster than US ones. And so when Williams encouraged senators to continue investigating Meta's role in the development of AI in China as they continue their probe into the social media company that was founded by Zuckerberg, you know, you can't say we weren't warned. China makes the declaration. Now you've got this guy who's a spokesperson recognizing how aggressive I'm going to use the word that Bill Gertz heard when he was on his tour with the secretary of defense. The the plans are for China to use AI to advance them in terms of global domination. And so fraction of the cost faster, better. We're going to beat you. We're going to. So this is an arms race. Only instead of talking about nuclear warheads, we're talking about artificial intelligence.
We've had We've had an arms race, we've had a space race, and now we have an AI race. And it is a genuine race that has profound implications for which country is going to be a global leader. And if it's a totalitarian country like China and it becomes the global leader in commerce or military or the internet, then that has dire consequences for the United States.
So, brothers and sisters, the purpose of this and I still have more audio I want to share with you is, again, not to make us fearful because God didn't give us that spirit, not a spirit of fear, but of power, love, and of a sound mind. But we can discern the times, and we can redeem them, and we can recognize evil when it is afoot. And most important of all, we can look well to the ways of our household back after this. So I still have more from the hearing that took place last week. It was Senator Josh Hawley from Missouri who chaired it. It was on the Senate side, and it was a committee, a subcommittee dealing with crime and counterterrorism. The sole and single witness, Sarah Wynne Williams. She worked at meta for years and has come forward now saying that there are some serious concerns about Meta's relationship with communist China. In fact, she said this. She said the greatest trick Mark Zuckerberg ever pulled was wrapping the American flag around himself and calling himself a patriot and saying he didn't offer services in China while he spent the last decade building an $18 billion business there. And of course, a meta spokesperson said your testimony is divorced from reality and riddled with false claims. Yeah, I bet they would say that. So Senator Hawley again in his interaction. And by the way, Josh Hawley is a little hot under the collar on this because, as he noted earlier, Zuckerberg has come to testify in front of him on Capitol Hill multiple times. Now, you know, their witness came and lied to your face. I'm going to be curious to see whether or not they're going to follow up with perjury charges under this. When you come to testify, you have to raise your hand and say you're going to tell the truth. So when he was asked point blank about the intersection with China, the answers were not exactly coming into alignment with what Wynn Williams had to say. But Senator Hawley was particularly put off. When we talk about vulnerable audiences, I don't think there was a parent out there whose stomach didn't flip when they going after 13 to 17 year olds taking their data and tracking those who were not feeling good about themselves and going in like vipers, saying, here's a point of vulnerability, and now we can sell them something that wasn't their only targeted group. Listen to this exchange.
One other line of questions if I could just one other subject. You actually touched on it with Senator Blackburn. She was talking to you about the kind of research that Facebook has done and the kind of advertising that they're willing to sell. And to me, what's so interesting about this is we've seen, frankly, the moral bankruptcy of this company and its leadership when it comes to China. And we've seen them be willing to lie to Congress, lie to the American public. We've got the documents in black and white. We've seen them be willing to give away American user data, but they were also trying to find out a way to make a buck on Americans, teenagers, children in times of distress right here in the United States. And I just want to give you an opportunity to comment on this. Here's an internal Facebook chat where a policy of Facebook policy director asks, is it is it really accurate that Facebook is doing research into young mothers and their emotional state? Is it your understanding that there's other research related to young mothers? Answer yes. I looked at one list of research topics and saw one about young mothers and their emotional state coming down. The person says, I'm wondering about asking my apparently morally bankrupt colleagues if they are aware of any more. This is about Facebook's program to target ads to people when they are in emotional distress. Is that right? Is that what we're seeing here?
That's correct.
Senator. And that included teenage girls, as you were discussing with Senator Blackburn, those who had maybe recently deleted a selfie, maybe not feeling very good about themselves. And Facebook said, oh, fantastic opportunity. We can sell this to advertisers. It apparently also included young mothers who are in moments of distress.
Targeting moms. It's disgusting. It's soft totalitarianism. There's no other way I can put it. If you don't believe me, I want to encourage you to watch that video series. Even better, read Rod's book live. Not by Lines, lies. That's a line that comes right out of an address by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who is a Soviet dissident and ended up in the Gulag there and came to the United States and warned us, this is coming, can you not see it? And he gave an address at Harvard University that started the chattering classes to really have to do some deep introspection as to whether or not we are moving toward soft totalitarianism or not. I think if you look around, you're going to see that that's happening right before our very eyes. So this raises a couple of questions. Let me go by the way. And this you have to contextualize this. Now you understand if even if you're being told, oh, it's going to cost you more to buy your Christmas lights because of the tariffs. That's why last week, the administration increased tariffs on imported goods from China to 125%. This is a tool used to try to let Communist China know enough. This is a new administration. It's going to be peace through strength. We're going to disenfranchise detangle our linkage between China, Communist China and America. Because water and oil don't mix. You have communist ideas, ideals. We believe in democracy and freedom. The two don't meet. I stood on the stairs of the US Capitol with the man who was the head of the AFL-CIO. I was representing a conservative organization. We didn't coalesce very often with the AFL-CIO, but we were there together on that day trying to push back against Congress, giving permanent, normalized trade relations status to China Up to that point, every year we reviewed China's human rights abuses, and if they were not where they needed to be in terms of improvement, we withheld aid. It was effective. It was a carrot and stick approach. It was peace through strength. And then we thought, oh, I don't know. Let's just have contracts for cell phones and Christmas lights. And then they're going to see how wonderful capitalism is. And they'll give up their wicked, wicked ways. Shame on us tomfoolery. We were absolutely naive to think that somehow that was going to happen. And so China has never deviated from their declaration. So this takes us to tick tock. The administration now says they're extending this. Obviously I did the background before Congress says you got to sell it. We're looking for an American buyer. ByteDance, the company that owns TikTok, says, uh, we're not giving up our algorithms. So where are we at?
Um, April 4th, President Trump extended the deadline for TikTok to either be banned or save itself by selling itself as a company to a Non-china affiliated organization or group of investors. There have been several offers from a number of investors to buy it. China says no. They want to hang on to some element of it. They don't want to totally divest. But think of this in terms of the trade war that's going on right now between China and the Trump administration as well. Um, so I think it's a matter of who's going to blink first. So President Trump has given 75 days from April 4th for the negotiations to continue with China and inviting them to sell lock, stock and barrel to a non-Chinese related or affiliated entity, business or group of investors. And then, in which case, TikTok's welcome to continue operating in the United States.
But again, it's it's sound and fury signifying absolutely nothing because you can't have a sale if you don't have a seller. in China, said we're not giving up our.
Exactly. You got a lot of buyers, but you don't have a seller. Now, again, who blinks first? How badly is China going to be hurt by the tariffs that have been imposed? It has retaliated with its own tariffs 75 days perhaps. The white House is thinking is enough time for China to feel the hurt and then say, okay, we'll give up TikTok. You better lower your tariffs.
By the way, if you want more of this. Sarah Wynn-williams put out a memoir just last month entitled Careless People A Cautionary Tale of Power, greed and Lost Idealism about her time at meta. Wow. There's one for the ages. So something to think about again. Not to be afraid, but parents look well to the ways of your household. There is a cautionary tale here, and I tell you what it's what our Sunday school teacher taught us a long time ago. The love of money is truly the root of all evil. Thanks so much. We'll see you next time.
