Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

International

New U.S. Intelligence: ‘Endemic’ CCP Corruption, Organized Crime, and Graft Tied to Xi’s Network

Published

7 minute read

WASHINGTON — An explosive new disclosure by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has pulled back the curtain on endemic corruption in the Chinese Communist Party—reaching the top echelons of power, including President Xi Jinping. Released as an unclassified document and drafted by ODNI’s National Intelligence Council, the report explains how graft, bribery, and political favoritism are an essential feature of CCP power structures, festering for decades, involving organized crime and factional struggles—even under Xi’s trademark anti-corruption campaign.

By publicly releasing these findings, U.S. officials are signaling a readiness to reveal what intelligence agencies have long documented but kept classified. Sources with knowledge of the matter indicate Washington appears increasingly willing to trace corruption and international money laundering directly to the Politburo, citing explosive cases such as a Western intelligence investigation that allegedly linked Xi Jinping’s cousin, Ming Chai, to a casino money-laundering junket in Australia.

In an era of sharply escalating tensions—spanning trade, technology, and territorial disputes—Washington’s move seems aimed at exposing internal vulnerabilities in Xi’s regime while also undermining the offshore money laundering and strategic corruption Beijing is believed to use for influence-building across the Western Hemisphere and the South Pacific. It offers American citizens a transparent glimpse into what the U.S. government views as key fault lines within China’s ruling party, as the world’s two most powerful states appear set on a collision course—driven in no small part by Xi’s urgent push to subsume Taiwan.

In a striking detail, the ODNI cites journalistic research, initially blocked by Bloomberg before eventually being reported by The New York Times in 2012, that tied immense family wealth to both then-Premier Wen Jiabao and the incoming President Xi. The Times reported that Wen’s immediate family controlled at least $2.7 billion in assets, while Xi’s siblings, nieces, and nephews collectively held more than $1 billion in business and real-estate holdings. Beijing promptly tightened its censorship apparatus in the report’s aftermath, curtailing foreign news outlets that delved into elite wealth.

“Xi may have urged family members to divest holdings as he came into power. However, industry research provides evidence that, as of 2024, Xi’s family retains millions in business interests and financial investments,” the ODNI report says. It adds that corruption cases reaching the highest levels—relying on open-source rather than classified U.S. intelligence—“shows corruption cases within the CCP Central Committee span leading officials overseeing a range of portfolios and projects.”

Among the examples cited is Zhang Wei, a Chinese businessman arrested in 2020 for “organizing, leading, and participating in organized crime; illegal detention; and illegal possession of firearms and ammunition,” before being found guilty the following year of illegally absorbing public deposits.

Another high-profile instance is Chen Gang, who was accused in 2019 of accepting over $18 million in bribes—some tied to his oversight of 2008 Beijing Olympics construction projects. More recently, in April 2024, Yao Qian, Director of the China Securities Regulatory Commission was investigated for “serious violations of discipline and law,” possibly connected to China’s Central Bank Digital Currency initiative.

The fact that Xi—who carefully cultivates an image of austere probity—has family members reportedly retaining millions of dollars in investments remains a deeply sensitive topic for Beijing. In highlighting these details, U.S. intelligence appears to be drawing attention to a broader governance model that incentivizes graft, even as Xi’s “tigers and flies” campaign claims to have taken down nearly five million officials since 2012.

The ODNI’s document underscores how Xi’s crackdown is not merely a legal imperative but also a party-directed instrument for punishing “political indiscipline and ideological impurity.”

“Although Xi has not used the campaign primarily to target his political rivals, a drive to eliminate competing power centers factored significantly into decisions made in the initial phases of the campaign. Early in Xi’s tenure, senior officials with ties to his predecessors were targeted with investigations and arrests,” the report says. “More significantly, political connections to high-ranking officials have not protected officials from prosecution, including those with close personal ties to Xi himself; the anti-corruption campaign has purged top officials considered loyal to Xi and who had risen under his patronage.”

Significantly, the ODNI highlights persistent corruption in the People’s Liberation Army—and a surge of high-level purges driven by Xi’s effort to consolidate control before the PLA’s target of full combat readiness by 2027, with Taiwan looming as the central focus. “In 2024, Xi stressed during a speech to military commanders that ‘the barrels of guns must always be in the hands of those who are loyal and dependable to the Party,’” the report states, adding that Xi’s emphasis on PLA loyalty “may also reflect concerns that corrupt practices will prevent the military from acquiring the capabilities and readiness he has directed it to achieve by 2027, in preparation for a potential conflict over Taiwan.”

The ODNI’s broader assessment emphasizes that corruption is not merely an occasional lapse but a systemic challenge to China’s governance, facilitated by centralized CCP power, a Party-centric concept of law, and minimal transparency. Studies suggest that corruption has persisted in China since its founding, intensified by rapid economic growth in the 1980s and 1990s, and has been so pervasive since 2000 that it threatens the very legitimacy of the regime.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Focal Points

Pharma Bombshell: President Trump Orders Complete Childhood Vaccine Schedule Review

Published on

Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH's avatar Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

After unnecessary hepatitis B vaccine dropped for 3.6 million annual healthy live births, POTUS calls for entire ACIP schedule to better align with other countries

After the CDC ACIP panel voted 8-3 to drop the hepatitis B vaccine for millions of healthy babies born from seronegative mothers, President Trump who has previously said the ACIP schedule is a “disgrace” has ordered a review of the US vaccine schedule in relationship to the countries. Alter AI assisted in this review.

Based on the 2025 immunization schedules published by health authorities worldwide — including the CDC/ACIP (U.S.)Public Health England/UKHSAHealth CanadaAustralia’s Department of Health, and the EU’s national public health programs — there are significant differences in how intensively children are vaccinated from birth to age 18.

Although all developed countries recommend broadly similar vaccines (targeting diphtheria, measles, polio, etc.), the United States stands at the top in total injections and doses, followed by Canada, France/Germany, the UK, Australia, Sweden, and Japan.


🇺🇸 United States — Approx. 30–32 vaccine doses (counts combination products as single dose) before age 18

The 2025 CDC/ACIP schedule (see CDC PDF schedule, 2025) remains the most aggressive among Western nations.

By age one, a typical American baby receives 20+ doses spanning nine diseases (Hepatitis B, Rotavirus, DTaP, Hib, Pneumococcal, Polio, COVID‑19, Influenza, RSV). By age two, 32 individual antigens including monoclonal antibodies have been received in utero and after birth.

By age six, most children have accumulated around 27 to 29 doses, and around 30–32 total doses by age 18 (including HPV, meningococcal, Tdap boosters, annual flu shots, and now COVID boosters). Doses include combination products, so the number of antigens is much greater approximately 72-93 depending on maternal injections and other factors.

The U.S. uniquely begins vaccination at birth with Hepatitis B (now restricted to ~25,000 seropositive/carrier mothers) and adds multiple annual vaccines regardless of local exposure risk. It also promotes simultaneous injection of up to six vaccines at once (“combination vaccines” or same-visit stacking), magnifying early childhood exposure to adjuvants and preservatives.


🇨🇦 Canada — ≈ 25–28 doses

Canada’s national and provincial schedules (see Health Canada) mirror the U.S., but some provinces delay or skip optional vaccines (like flu or COVID‑19 for healthy children). Fewer boosters are required for diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis after age seven, and not all provinces include HPV for boys.
Canada therefore averages 2–4 fewer total doses than the United States.


🇫🇷 France / 🇩🇪 Germany — ≈ 22–25 doses

European Union countries vary widely:

  • France mandates 11 childhood vaccines (including Hep B and Hib), but does not recommend early COVID‑19 or influenza vaccination for all children.
  • Germany (STIKO guidelines) offers a schedule very similar to the U.S. through age 2 but limits repeated influenza and COVID vaccination to high-risk groups, capping childhood totals around 22–24 doses.

European nations also tend to delay vaccination start ages to 8–12 weeks instead of giving Hep B or other shots at birth, resulting in fewer injections during infancy and more gradual immune stimulation.


🇬🇧 United Kingdom — ≈ 20–21 doses

The UK’s NHS and UKHSA recommend a smaller, slower schedule than North America’s. Infants receive about 16–18 doses by age 5, increasing to 20–21 by age 18.
Notably:

  • The UK still does not include chickenpox (varicella) as a routine childhood vaccine (unlike the U.S.).
  • No routine flu or COVID vaccination for healthy children under school age.
  • Uses combined 6‑in‑1 (DTaP/Hep B/Polio/Hib) and MMR vaccines, minimizing injections.

🇦🇺 Australia — ≈ 20 doses

Australia’s National Immunisation Program (NIP) mirrors the UK more closely than the U.S.
Infants start at 6–8 weeks, not at birth (Hep B exception). Only one influenza vaccine per year is recommended, and chickenpox is given later. No universal COVID vaccine for healthy under‑5s.
Total injections: about 20 by adulthood.


🇸🇪 Sweden / 🇳🇴 Norway — ≈ 16–18 doses

Nordic countries follow some of the world’s most minimalist Western schedules:

  • No routine chickenpox, no birth shots, no annual flu or COVID for healthy kids.
  • Combined vaccines reduce needle count.
  • Emphasis on fewer but spaced doses (e.g., 3‑dose DTaP schedule instead of 5).

Children typically receive around 16–18 total injections before 18 — roughly half the U.S. burden — without suffering higher rates of “vaccine‑preventable” illness, challenging the dogma that more vaccines equal better outcomes.


🇯🇵 Japan — ≈ 14–16 doses

Historically the most cautious industrialized nation, Japan delayed and later reduced its vaccine schedule after serious adverse events in the 1990s.
Although it now recommends many standard vaccines, lower frequency, single-antigen use, and minimal early‑life stacking mean the total doses remain lowest in the developed world, around 14–16 through adolescence.
Japan’s infant mortality and autism rates are lower than in the U.S., prompting renewed scientific interest in whether slower schedules might lower iatrogenic risk.


📊 Summary — Total Vaccine Doses (Ages 0–18 Years)

Rank Country Approx. cumulative doses Notes on schedule intensity 1 🇺🇸 United States 30–32 Most intensive; starts at birth; annual flu + COVID 2 🇨🇦 Canada 25–28 Slightly milder than U.S.; fewer mandatory boosters 3 🇫🇷 France / 🇩🇪 Germany 22–25 Similar core vaccines; delayed start; selective flu use 4 🇬🇧 United Kingdom 20–21 No varicella or universal flu/COVID; efficient combinations 5 🇦🇺 Australia ≈ 20 Spaced schedule; limited COVID coverage 6 🇸🇪 Sweden / 🇳🇴 Norway 16–18 Simplified; no birth or seasonal routine vaccines 7 🇯🇵 Japan 14–16 Most delayed; minimal birth and combination doses


💡 Interpretation

The data show a clear gradient: the United States vaccinates children more frequently and at earlier ages than any other Western nation, often stacking combinations before immune maturity. Nations with slower, smaller schedules — Sweden and Japan most notably — maintain equal or superior child health metrics, casting doubt on the premise that maximal dosing guarantees better outcomes.

The U.S. model prioritizes population‑wide compliance and theoretical herd immunity, while Europe and Japan incorporate a more individualized risk‑based approach. Given the expanding scientific literature on rising childhood allergic and neuropsychiatric illnesses, these cross‑national differences underscore the need for independent, transparent studies comparing long‑term health outcomes by cumulative vaccine burden — something major regulatory agencies have conspicuously avoided.

FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse) is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Please subscribe to FOCAL POINTS as a paying ($5 monthly) or founder member so we can continue to bring you the truth.

Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH

Continue Reading

Daily Caller

Trump Orders Review Of Why U.S. Childhood Vaccination Schedule Has More Shots Than Peer Countries

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Emily Kopp

President Donald Trump will direct his top health officials to conduct a systematic review of the childhood vaccinations schedule by reviewing those of other high-income countries and update domestic recommendations if the schedules abroad appear superior, according to a memorandum obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

“In January 2025, the United States recommended vaccinating all children for 18 diseases, including COVID-19, making our country a high outlier in the number of vaccinations recommended for all children,” the memo will state. “Study is warranted to ensure that Americans are receiving the best, scientifically-supported medical advice in the world.”

Trump directs the secretary of the Health and Human Services (HHS) and the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to adopt best practices from other countries if deemed more medically sound. The memo cites the contrast between the U.S., which recommends vaccination for 18 diseases, and Denmark, which recommends vaccinations for 10 diseases; Japan, which recommends vaccinations for 14 diseases; and Germany, which recommends vaccinations for 15 diseases.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has long been a critic of the U.S. childhood vaccination schedule.

The Trump Administration ended the blanket recommendation for all children to get annual COVID-19 vaccine boosters in perpetuity. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Marty Makary and Chief Medical Officer Vinay Prasad announced in May that the agency would not approve new COVID booster shots for children and healthy non-elderly adults without clinical trials demonstrating the benefit. On Friday, Prasad told his staff at the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research that a review by career staff traced the deaths of 10 children to the COVID vaccine, announced new changes to vaccine regulation, and asked for “introspection.”

Trump’s memo follows a two-day meeting of vaccine advisors to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in which the committee adopted changes to U.S. policy on Hepatitis B vaccination that bring the country’s policy in alignment with 24 peer nations.

Total vaccines in January 2025 before the change in COVID policy. Credit: ACIP

The meeting included a presentation by FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Director Tracy Beth Høeg showing the discordance between the childhood vaccination schedule in the U.S. and those of other developed nations.

“Why are we so different from other developed nations, and is it ethically and scientifically justified?” Høeg asked. “We owe our children science-based recommendations here in the United States.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X