Blood Money: Why the Powerful Turn a Blind Eye While China Kills Americans

“In the pages that follow, you will meet an American president who rarely challenges Beijing on anything, including the fentanyl poisoning of America, and whose family received $5 million from a businessman with links to a Chinese organized crime leader involved in the fentanyl trade. Indeed, some of that money appears to have flowed indirectly to Joe Biden himself.”

Schweizer employs insinuation and hyperbole—key elements often found in conspiracy narratives—to cast suspicion on President Biden’s relationship with China. The suggestive language like “appears to have flowed” introduces ambiguity and doubt, allowing Schweizer to imply corruption without making definitive accusations. By framing the financial link to a Chinese crime figure as a potential personal gain for Biden, the author enhances the sense of covert wrongdoing, inviting readers to question the integrity of political leaders while not taking responsibility for the accusation.

“Our investigation shows that some US political and business leaders are working or investing with known members of the drug networks poisoning Americans. Apparently, the money is just too good. Compromised by commercial opportunities that benefit them or their close allies and hiding behind the excuse of not wanting to ‘disrupt’ the US-China relationship, they effectively allow open season on Americans and sabotage our future generations.”

Schweizer employs reductive reasoning, as evidenced in the formulation “the money is just too good,” to distill complex geopolitical relationships into personal greed while building a portrayal of Americans as vulnerable and unsuspecting—aiming to invoke a sense of betrayal. By framing these leaders as knowingly “sabotaging” future generations, Schweizer heightens the emotional appeal of his argument and reinforces the narrative of a hidden, self-serving agenda among elites at the expense of national well-being—especially of the most vulnerable—the young.

“Though the ‘French connection’ for heroin dominated the US market and American imagination in the early 1970s, in New York City, detectives also eavesdropped on a ‘Chinese connection’ on US soil. In 1973, heroin in plastic bags was seized in New York, leading to the arrest of twenty members of a narcotics ring. Frank Rogers, the New York City narcotics prosecutor, declared, based on taped phone conversations, that there was a direct ‘Chinese connection.’ Brooklyn district attorney Eugene Gold added that this was ‘clear and substantive evidence we have that mainland China and Hong Kong (a British colony) are being used as a means of getting heroin into the United States.’ He noted that ‘The boss of the smuggling ring’ was ‘an important Chinese national’ who ‘confers with top government officials’ in Beijing.”

Schweizer’s historical allusion aims to draw a parallel between the infamous “French connection,” a heroin-trafficking scheme in the 1970s, and the involvement of China in the fentanyl drug crisis, highlighting The Interconnection of Organized Crime and State Interests. Thus, Schweizer creates the impression that America has been under attack all along. The emphasis on high-level involvement in the drug trade reinforces the conspiracy narrative, suggesting a coordinated, state-sponsored effort to weaken America from within.

“In the early 2000s, Xi was a rising star in the Communist Party, with a powerful father. It was in Fujian that he met his wife, Peng Liyuan, a gifted singer. She sang to Chinese troops ‘fresh from the Tiananmen Square massacre.’ Fujian has been notorious for not only how openly the triads and cartels operated but also how much they enjoyed the protection of local Communist Party and government leaders. Organized crime figures received ‘political protection’ and ‘managed to escape detection’ in the province, according to an official Canadian report published by the United Nations.18 Violent criminal gangs such as Fuk Ching operated openly in Fujian, extending their reach into California, Hawaii, North Carolina, Massachusetts, and New York City. During Xi’s tenure as a leader in Fujian, organized crime figures lived openly in the province.”

Schweizer uses the rhetorical strategy of association to suggest a link between Xi Jinping and organized crime, casting suspicion on his rise to power. Further on, he associates Xi with violence by linking his wife to the “Tiananmen Square massacre.” By drawing on external reports and linking Fujian’s criminal activity to Xi’s leadership, Schweizer frames Xi as complicit in allowing organized crime to flourish, implying that his political ascent was intertwined with corruption and criminal protection.

“Chinese Customs and the State Post Bureau are well known for screening every letter and package sent from or to China. The goal of this practice is to maintain control and prevent ‘harm’ from being done to the country, but with fentanyl shipments to the United States, they seem unable—or unwilling—to screen and seize the packages. According to the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), ‘China is the primary source of fentanyl and fentanyl-related substances trafficked through international mail and express consignment operations.’”

The juxtaposition of China’s ability to monitor letters and packages with their apparent failure—or unwillingness—to stop fentanyl shipments implies a covert agenda, reinforcing the conspiracy narrative. By citing the DEA as an authority, Schweizer bolsters the claim with external validation, adding weight to the accusation that China is deliberately allowing fentanyl to flood the US despite its known ability to control other types of shipments. Nevertheless, the DEA’s statement does not imply that the Chinese government is supporting the drug trade to destabilize the US.

“China’s contribution to the current US fentanyl crisis is more than lax law enforcement and does not end with the production of this poison. ‘There is no question there is interconnectivity between Chinese organized crime and the Chinese state,’ noted Frank Montoya, Jr., a former chief counterintelligence official at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. ‘The [Chinese Communist] party operates in organized crime—type fashion. There are parallels to Russia, where organized crime has been co-opted by the Russian government and Putin’s security services.’”

Schweizer employs comparison to emphasize the alleged collaboration between Chinese organized crime and the Chinese government, suggesting a deliberate and coordinated effort behind the fentanyl crisis. He invokes Frank Montoya Jr.’s authority to lend credibility to the claim, while the comparison to Russia’s intertwining of organized crime with state power deepens the sense of a global conspiracy. By framing the CCP as an organized crime collaborator, Schweizer blurs the line between government and criminal activity, aiming to erode the legitimacy of the Chinese government and developing the theme of The Interconnection of Organized Crime and State Interests.

“Assistant Secretary of State Kirsten Madison called the opioid crisis ‘the most ‘severe drug crisis’ the U.S. has ever faced.’ (Emphasis added.) In October 2017, President Trump declared the opioid crisis in general to be a national public health emergency under federal law and directed all government agencies to fight the crisis. It was an important shift in domestic resources. But no one seemed to want to call it a war.”

Schweizer highlights the discrepancy between the severity of the opioid crisis and the lack of a forceful governmental response. The emphasis on Madison’s description of the crisis as the “most severe” creates a sense of urgency, which is juxtaposed against the government’s reluctance to treat it as a war. Defining alleged Chinese interference as an act of war forms a running theme in Schweizer’s book.

“Though sometimes promising to help stem the flow, China has never cooperated on fentanyl, nor is its involvement accidental. This is a war. When Joe Biden delivered the State of the Union address in 2023, he talked about fentanyl, acknowledging the stigma associated with substance abuse, and called for better substance abuse services. In other words, he treated it as a conventional drug problem. So he promised more drug detection machines and more inspections of cargo. What he never mentioned was Beijing’s hand in the matter.”

By contrasting Biden’s framing of fentanyl as a “conventional drug problem” with the depiction of it as a covert war, Schweizer suggests that the government’s response is inadequate and misdirected. The omission of China as an actor in the fentanyl crisis in Biden’s address is framed as a significant oversight, reinforcing the conspiracy narrative that political leaders are intentionally downplaying or ignoring China’s role in the crisis.

“Despite all the evidence, Beijing denies that it has anything to do with the fentanyl trade and feigns offense that the United States is blaming it for an American cultural problem. In other words, it would have the world believe that the fentanyl problem is evidence of a weak American society, a demand problem rather than a supply problem. Somehow, based on the denial narrative that it has created, it would have the world overlook the fact that this particular drug is the product of an international supply chain that stretches from Chinese factories to the American heartland.”

Schweizer employs juxtaposition and irony to highlight Beijing’s denial of its involvement in the fentanyl trade. Schweizer frames the fentanyl problem in the US as a belligerent Chinese action against the US, without mentioning the social, economic, and health causes at the root of the fentanyl crisis.

“America is seemingly at war with itself, with violence, social division, and the resulting chaos on the rise. But there are important accelerants that are helping to turn sparks into an inferno. The Chinese strategy of unrestricted warfare involves using unconventional methods to weaken the United States, including, as we saw in Part I, drug warfare. But unrestricted warfare also involves undermining a country’s ‘national will, values, and cohesion.’ The ability to destabilize a rival country from within is a powerful weapon. This strategy—’Watch a fire from across the river’—has deep roots in Chinese history.’”

Schweizer’s rhetoric in this passage reflects the author’s conspiratorial strategy of portraying China as a mysterious and unseen but deliberate antagonist in America’s social and political turmoil. By dramatizing China’s strategy as “unrestricted warfare” and using the metaphor “sparks into an inferno,” Schweizer conveys the message that a colossal power poses a threat to US security, evoking a sense of emergency and crisis that plays on readers’ anxieties regarding The Erosion of American Values Through Foreign Interference.

“The influx of auto sear switches, suppressors, and weapons parts from China continues. In just the first quarter of 2023, officials seized 106 illegal suppressors at Dallas Fort Worth International Airport alone. In December 2022, US officials in Michigan indicted seven men for procuring switches from China. ‘These devices are an emerging threat to our communities, our children, our law enforcement officers, and anyone who stands in the path of their indiscriminate spray,’ said US attorney Mark Totten.”

Schweizer employs fear-based language and selective statistics to evoke alarm about China’s alleged role in supplying illegal weaponry to the US. The phrases “emerging threat” and “indiscriminate spray” amplify the perceived danger, enhancing the sense of urgency. By quoting an authority figure, US Attorney Mark Totten, Schweizer adds a façade of legitimacy, while the specific details—such as the number of suppressors seized—create a factual façade that supports his broader conspiratorial narrative, even if the evidence may be exaggerated or misinterpreted for effect. This strategy is also meant to overwhelm the reader and make it extremely difficult to fact-check his claims.

“Though the violent protests of 2020 are now history, the Chinese campaign to sow violent division in the interest of precipitating American decline remains very much alive and active. Beijing’s agents, both Chinese military officers and members of American extremist groups that pledge allegiance to the CCP, have actively worked to promote racial division, civil unrest, and violence in America—online and in the streets. Racial diversity is one of America’s greatest strengths and a hallmark of American exceptionalism. Perhaps this is why Beijing is so intent on subverting racial harmony.”

Schweizer uses emotionally charged language and generalization to suggest a coordinated Chinese effort to destabilize the US through racial division. Multiple words signifying violent conflict (“violent division,” “military officers,” “extremist groups,” “civil unrest,” etc.) and the formulation “actively worked” to imply ongoing, covert operations by Beijing, while introducing unsupported claims of American extremist groups aligning with the CCP. This oversimplified narrative blends factual-sounding assertions with speculative or false claims to amplify fear and distrust, employing the very tactics of Covert Manipulation and Disinformation Campaigns that form a central theme in the book.

“The night after the world saw the nine-minute George Floyd arrest video, a crowd descended on the police precinct where the officer had worked. The precinct was vandalized, along with dozens of other buildings. Over the next three days, the precinct was set ablaze, and hundreds of businesses were looted and burned throughout the Minneapolis metropolitan area. In an awful confluence of Chinese influence, George Floyd had both fentanyl—and the covid virus—in his system at the time of his death.”

By linking George Floyd’s death, a pivotal moment in the Black Lives Matter social protests, to China through references to fentanyl and COVID-19, Schweizer implies a foreign influence behind the protests without providing evidence for such a claim. With this allusion, he aims to delegitimize the validity of the BLM protesters’ grievances. This blend of emotional imagery and disinformation distorts reality, framing internal US issues as part of a foreign conspiracy.

“The end goal of both was to sow panic, fear, and distrust of the American government. During the summer of 2020, with BLM protests mounting, Twitter accounts started sharing posts with the hashtag ‘#dcblackout’ with claims that Washington, DC, was going to experience a blackout on both the internet and mobile phone networks, carried out by the federal government to control the population. The news was fake, but Chinese accounts pushed it aggressively and managed to create a brief spasm of alarm in the nation’s capital.”

Schweizer describes China’s alleged involvement as calculated and malicious. However, the author’s claims lack specificity and cannot be verified. This combination of fear-mongering and unsubstantiated claims fuels disinformation, framing China as a manipulator of American unrest and delegitimizing a major social movement in contemporary US society.

“One of the most divisive issues in America today is the debate over trans rights. Here, too, you see the hand of these Beijing-linked organizations and financiers. For PSL, the trans movement has become a central part of the radical Marxist movement. ‘The revolution will not be gender-conforming,’ stated one article that examined the substantial number of trans members of the PSL. These pro-Beijing groups see the trans movement as a powerful force to advance their pro-Beijing agenda and push to further radicalize the movement. ‘The unity of our movements terrifies them,’ they explain. Regarding attacks on the trans movement: ‘These are attacks that serve the interests of the capitalist class.’ Regarding linking black radical movements, the anti-police movement, and socialism: ‘The ability to link all of those things together is extremely, extremely dangerous to the capitalist order.’”

Schweizer employs hyperbolic language to frame the trans rights movement as part of a broader conspiracy linked to Beijing and radical Marxism. By referencing Beijing-linked organizations without evidence and presenting trans rights as a tool for “radicalizing” movements, Schweizer aims to exploit fears of foreign and ideological subversion, as well as populist ignorance of the trans and LGBTQIA+ movements.

“The United States is facing a hydra of Chinese information weapons specifically targeting our children. Unlike Cold War propaganda, videos of military parades, or glorious pictures of Chairman Mao, the new propaganda may not seem political, nor is it simply intended to persuade or misinform. It is highly sophisticated, designed to influence the brains of the younger generation, with profound effects. It is a dagger pointed at our children, hidden behind the smile of TikTok. In the Chinese Communist view, you can run from it—but you can’t hide.”

Schweizer uses suggestive language and the metaphor of a hydra to convey a sense of a grotesque entity (a weaponized TikTok) preying on the most vulnerable—the children. He also contrasts the new, subtle form of propaganda with Cold War–era tactics, framing it as more insidious and psychologically invasive. The phrase “hidden behind the smile of TikTok” anthropomorphizes the platform, transforming a social media app into a deceptive tool of foreign manipulation.

“The evidence is clear: Chinese psychological warfare strategists have Americans, particularly young Americans, in their crosshairs. They believe that not only are young people easier to influence but the effects of the propaganda messaging are longer lasting. The Chinese government is devoting serious amounts of resources to understanding how to manipulate young users. The Communist government recently opened an external propaganda office to target Generation Z audiences overseas.”

Schweizer’s militaristic imagery and fear-inducing language frame China’s influence as a deliberate and targeted psychological attack on American youth, underscoring the book’s thematic interest in the erosion of American values through foreign influence. Schweizer invokes a sense of danger and victimization, positioning young Americans as vulnerable targets. Schweizer amplifies the perceived threat and heightens the paranoia about foreign influence. The mention of a “propaganda office” targeting Generation Z further reinforces the idea of a calculated, long-term strategy.

“There is also the problem of data. The data threat posed by video games might be even greater than for TikTok. Gamers must usually provide their real names and payment information to the Chinese companies. They might also have to include a date of birth. If they chat with other players, they generate voice samples that can be stored and used for ‘deep fakes’ that can fool their friends and family. What the Chinese government might do with these data is unclear, but the possibilities are troubling.”

Schweizer employs speculative language and fear-based imagery to evoke concern about data privacy, using terms like “threat,” “deep fakes,” and “troubling possibilities.” His rhetorical strategy relies on the ominous tone, encouraging the reader to distrust Chinese companies by implying nefarious intent without providing concrete evidence. While alluding to real issues in the contemporary media landscape, such as privacy, identity theft, and others, Schweizer creates a sense of doom, where one evil actor—China—preys on a totally vulnerable one—the American public.

“Coproduction deals mean that the Chinese companies involved help finance the high cost of big Hollywood film productions and help distribute the films in China. These coproduction deals also make the entire production legally accountable to the Central Propaganda Department of the CCP, meaning that the CCP assumes the right to determine what is included in a film and what is not and, more subtly, the inclusion of messaging designed to advance the interests of the Party. Some Hollywood executives and stars seem especially willing to embrace Beijing’s messaging.”

Schweizer uses alarmist language and broad generalizations to suggest that Hollywood is complicit in advancing CCP propaganda through film co-production deals. He implies that China maintains an overwhelming control in the American entertainment industry. Schweizer uses speculative language (“seem especially willing”) to imply Hollywood’s complicity without providing evidence, relying on insinuation rather than substantiated claims. This tone, combined with vague accusations, exemplifies the book’s use of conspiracy-driven rhetoric.

“Films are ideal for spreading propaganda because audiences expect to be entertained and thus let their guard down. Big blockbusters such as Mortal Engines, Transformers: Age of Extinction, and Pacific Rim: Uprising were all produced by American studios and financed with Chinese money. Many of the main characters are Chinese. In Pacific Rim, a California pilot named Jake is living a ‘hedonistic’ lifestyle in the Golden State, when he is arrested early in the film. To avoid jail time, he agrees to travel to China to train pilots. As the story progresses, he learns that his selfishness is the problem and that he feels fulfilled by contributing to the defense of the Pacific Rim.”

Schweizer employs a simplistic cause-and-effect narrative to suggest that Chinese funding of Hollywood films promotes pro-China propaganda. By casting movies as a vehicle for subconscious influence, Schweizer presents a storyline (of the movie Pacific Rim) where the protagonist finds redemption in China. Thus, Schweizer uses selective examples and reductive analysis to insinuate that Chinese involvement in film is designed to shape Western audiences’ perceptions.

“Whether the virus emerged from a lab leak, which seems very likely, or was simply a natural occurrence, as some people continue to insist, Beijing manipulated the world. It conducted policies and actions that maximized the damage the virus would inflict. That in and of itself constitutes a bioweapon attack. China also used the virus to advance its authoritarian system of government in the United States and democratic societies around the world. The pandemic brought what US Supreme Court justice Neil Gorsuch called ‘the greatest intrusion on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country.’ In short, Beijing manipulated the world’s leaders into taking draconian measures to respond to the virus.”

This quote launches Schweizer’s full-fledged conspiratorial claims regarding COVID-19 and China’s allegedly deliberate use of the virus to sow conflict in the West. Thus, he equates China’s actions during the pandemic to a form of bioweapon attack, arguing that the CCP used the crisis to push authoritarian governance models, even influencing democratic nations like the United States. The reference to Justice Gorsuch emphasizes that the pandemic led to unprecedented restrictions on civil liberties, implying that global leaders were manipulated into adopting extreme measures influenced by China’s tactics, thus annulling the process of decision that many states went through during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as all the other research regarding “draconian measures” that proved effective.

“Lockdowns in the United States quickly became subject to political manipulation and control. As reported by CNN, hundreds of health care professionals wrote a letter supporting the Black Lives Matters protestors gathering in large numbers, which went against social distancing and lockdown rules. But they added, ‘This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders. Those actions not only oppose public health interventions but are also rooted in white nationalism.’ They never explained why rejecting lockdowns was a racist matter. Lockdowns enabled a chosen few—almost always Democrats—to exert control not only over people’s daily habits but over who had the right to speak out. It was straight out of George Orwell’s Animal Farm, except that in this case: All free speech is equal, but some free speech is more equal than others.”

This quote highlights perceived inconsistencies in the enforcement and rationale behind lockdowns in the US, suggesting political motivations influenced the application of restrictions. Schweizer makes an argument for selective enforcement of lockdown, implying that the US government, influenced by China, favored certain political ideologies while suppressing others. Overall, Schweizer’s claims are not substantiated.

“Other scientists were intimidated by the political implications of getting into the debate. ‘I suspect that this might even have led a part of the American scientific community to avoid addressing the question,’ said Professor Jacques van Helden of Aix-Marseille Université in France, ‘because expressing the possibility that the virus would result from a lab leak would have been perceived as support for Trump.’ Politics had infected medical science; believing that the virus emerged from a lab leak somehow meant you were supporting Trump or at least helping him in the 2020 presidential campaign.”

This quote implies that scientific inquiry was deliberately suppressed due to political bias, framing the lab leak theory as politically charged rather than scientifically grounded. It suggests that scientists avoided the lab leak hypothesis out of fear of being aligned with Trump, a portrayal that oversimplifies the nuanced nature of scientific debates. The assertion that medical science was compromised for political reasons lacks substantial evidence and appears intended to undermine trust in the scientific community by suggesting its motivations were purely political rather than driven by empirical research.