Chris DiLapi (Big Twelve Conference Supporter)

New reporting from the New York Times today should alarm anyone concerned about America's technological and strategic advantage over China. Or American national security more broadly. You can roll your eyes at the NYT, but this story is already being picked up by National Review, Fox, Breitbart, the Washington Examiner, the New York Post. To name a few. According to the Times, U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that Alice Huang (Huang Le), an executive associated with Singapore-based Megaspeed, was a Chinese intelligence asset providing information to Beijing. Megaspeed was already under investigation for potentially helping China circumvent American restrictions on advanced AI chips. Surveillance reportedly revealed that Alice Huang had developed a close relationship with Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang. Trump was briefed on the intelligence roughly a year ago but reportedly chose not to act on the information. Jensen Huang was never given a defensive briefing, and while officials initially believed he was unaware of any intelligence activity, some have since questioned that assessment. I strongly encourage everyone to read the NYT investigation in full. Nvidia denies wrongdoing, and there is no established evidence that Jensen Huang knowingly assisted Chinese intelligence. But this is where it gets a tad more troubling: Jensen Huang has developed extraordinary influence within the Trump administration. Prior to 2025, he was rarely involved in Washington politics. But he has quickly become one of the most influential voices arguing against tougher export controls. He personally lobbied Trump & has traveled to Mar-a-Lago to do so. Nvidia later donated at least $20 million to Trump's White House ballroom project. And last month, Huang was seated at the head table during the White House state dinner for Xi Jinping. The administration subsequently: - Permitted sales of certain previously restricted Nvidia AI chips to China. - Approved sales of Nvidia's 2nd-most powerful H200 chips to China, with the U.S. government taking 25% of the proceeds. (why????) - Rolled back Biden-era export restrictions designed, in part, to limit China's access to advanced American computing technology through third countries. Perhaps most concerning, current & former U.S. officials told the NYT that Trump's close relationship with Huang impeded enforcement efforts, with some investigations & proposed sanctions involving China or Nvidia apparently stalling inside the Commerce Department. These decisions drew criticism from prominent Republicans (John Moolenaar, Josh Hawley, Dave McCormick, Lindsey Graham, and former Trump national security adviser Matt Pottinger) who warned about strengthening China's military & technological capabilities. So... The NYT investigation alone raises serious questions. But I encourage everyone to revisit the Wall Street Journal investigation from January 2026. The WSJ reported that just FOUR DAYS before Trump's inauguration, an investment vehicle backed by Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the UAE's national security adviser, secretly agreed to purchase a 49% stake in World Liberty Financial, the Trump/Witkoff family cryptocurrency venture, for $500 MILLION. Of the initial $250 million payment, $187 million was directed to Trump family-controlled entities and another $31 million to Witkoff family-affiliated entities. Why does this matter? Well, Tahnoon also oversees G42, the UAE AI company that had previously drawn national security scrutiny over its relationships with Chinese firms. The UAE had been seeking access to advanced American AI chips that the Biden administration had restricted because of concerns they could ultimately benefit China. Months after the investment, the Trump administration dismantled the previous administration's AI chip-export framework and announced an agreement contemplating UAE access to approximately 500,000 advanced American AI chips ANNUALLY, including roughly 100,000 proposed for G42. (Those figures represent the announced framework, not confirmed deliveries. But the scale of the proposed policy change was enormous.) Now put these investigations together. In one, U.S. intelligence reportedly identified a Chinese intelligence asset with access to Nvidia's CEO. Trump was briefed, Nvidia's CEO continued lobbying for fewer restrictions, and officials say some enforcement efforts stalled. In the other, a foreign national security official seeking advanced American technology backed a $500 million investment in a Trump-family business. Months later, his country secured an agreement contemplating dramatically expanded access to that technology. Neither investigation proves a conspiracy or quid pro quo. The parties involved deny wrongdoing. But the documented financial relationships, intelligence warnings, and reported enforcement delays raise serious questions about whether private interests are influencing American national security policy. AI chips are not ordinary commercial products. They are critical to our military capabilities, intelligence operations, and strategic advantage over China. There are legitimate debates about export controls, but those debates cannot excuse a lack of transparency or accountability. The question I keep coming back to whenever reporting like this emerges: Are decisions about America's most strategically important technologies being driven by national security? Or by corporate lobbying, personal relationships, and foreign financial interests connected to the president's family? This is not a question I have ever had to ask in my lifetime, of any President we've ever had. Congress needs to investigate, thoroughly and publicly. We cannot afford to gamble away America's technological advantage over China. And we cannot allow private financial interests to dictate American national security policy.