currency. the social network is facing heavy criticism for not doing third-party fact-checks for political ads and not taking down ads with false statements. also there are 37 facing questions. it could result ins by changes to business practices for the tech giant. china s foreign ministry slammed peter knnavarro. during a press conference a spokesperson said certain people in the u.s. can do whatever they think of to contain and smear china without skruple. it is absurd and extremely dangerous to make lies, spread lies, and even formulate policies based on lies. a longtime china hawk, navarro has repeatedly defended trump s tafs. last week he admitted he made up
saying it is around the world. julie: he said he would be tough on trade and china. as anyone watched me i m the ultimate china hawk. what this president is doing to move the country and both parties really the foreign policy establishment toward a more aggressive stance toward china is the most important thing he will do in these four years and the important thing is it s not just republicans he has moved on china. among the democrats and foreign policy establishment i talk to there has been a clear reckoning that we have grossly mishandled the relationship both sides over the past 20 years. we had the theory if we open up economically to china they would slowly reform and become more democratic. that hasn t happened. we re in a complete cyber war with them and they are attacking our companies and government on a daily basis and we ve had our hand in this collectively. the criticism is bipartisan. we have had our head in the
pouring in from do nors and we will start a small do nor program. i have never had a problem getting resources. you know, whether it was with breitbart or doing other things. you re also very rich and you know a lot of rich people. i have had a pretty good run and i know some high net worth individuals. who is funding this group? private do nnorsdonors. why not tell people who they are? the law allows you to go public or private. if do nnors want to come forward, they can. i think you would say that we are very much focussed on we re the china hawk, c4. i m very up front on what the situation is with china and there are people that back this
film. i have a 25 person staff. we run a war room every day. we do talking points. $5 million? over $5 million, yes. over $10 million. i don t want to put a specific number on it. is it fair to say between $5 million and $10 million. we have enough resources pouring in from do nors and we will start a small do nor program. i have never had a problem getting resources. you know, whether it was with breitbart or doing other things. you re also very rich and you know a lot of rich people. i have had a pretty good run and i know some high net worth individuals. who is funding this group? private donorsdonors. why not tell people who they are? the law allows you to go public or private. if donors want to come forward, they can. i think you would say that we are very much focussed on we re the china hawk, c4.
would totally believe he was doing this to send a signal, but the parts of it that go beyond what bannon would ever say on the record are the bits where he does sound like he s the president, where he s talking about personally moving stuff around and particularly the bit where he undercuts the president on north korea, which is the bit that really caught his colleagues attention. you said he actually called the author and praised him? he saw an ally on china. he thought the author and him were of the same view on china. bannon s a china hawk. he thinks that america is in an economic war with china. he sees this as the most important issue. i could actually see bannon almost not thinking of this guy as a reporter but rather an ideological ally, even though ironically he s at a far left publication. i know that sounds crazy but honestly, it my honest reading of what happened here. jonathan, there s another