Hunter Biden’s CEFC Deals: Did They Cost Westinghouse Billions and Shield China from Accountability?

By Juan Fermin, NoSocialism.com June 5, 2025  

The media loves to vilify Donald Trump, painting him as a self-serving profiteer while ignoring the real players cashing in on America’s adversaries. As I’ve argued in my articles on Trump’s trade policies (“How Trump’s Tariffs Are Winning Trade” and “Why China Needs USA More Than USA Needs China”), Trump took a $1.2 billion hit during his presidency to prioritize American industries. Meanwhile, the establishment—think Clintons and Bidens—raked in millions from nations like Russia and China, often at America’s expense. A bombshell claim now circulating suggests Hunter Biden’s deals with CEFC China Energy, a CCP-linked firm, cost Westinghouse, a premier U.S. nuclear company, billions by enabling China to steal its reactor designs. Worse, the Bidens’ coziness allegedly kept Westinghouse from fighting back legally, fearing blowback from then-Vice President Joe Biden. Is this another case of the swamp profiting while Trump gets the blame? Let’s dig into the evidence.

Hunter Biden and CEFC: A Plan to Hand China Nuclear Power

Hunter Biden’s ties to CEFC China Energy, a Shanghai-based conglomerate with deep CCP and People’s Liberation Army (PLA) connections, are no secret. From 2017 to 2018, CEFC paid entities controlled by Hunter and his uncle James Biden $4.8 million over 14 months, per The Washington Post, including $3.8 million in consulting fees and a $1 million retainer for representing CEFC official Patrick Ho, later convicted for bribing African leaders. Hunter also got an $80,000 diamond from CEFC chairman Ye Jianming in 2017, a “gift” he claimed was for a nonprofit but smells like a payoff.

The real kicker? In 2016, while Joe Biden was still Vice President, Hunter and his partners, James Gilliar and Rob Walker, tried to help CEFC buy Westinghouse, America’s top nuclear reactor maker, known for its advanced AP1000 reactor. A strategy memo obtained by Congress reveals their goal: let CEFC “control” the global nuclear market by acquiring Westinghouse, using Hunter’s “interesting last name” to open doors in Washington and Beijing. Gilliar wrote, “Utilising the U.S. face of Westinghouse, combined with the economic power of CEFC (China) is the perfect solution to control this global sector.” The plan was to hide the Chinese purchase behind intermediaries to avoid scrutiny, exploiting Westinghouse’s “significant lobbying power in Congress” to smooth the deal.

Why Westinghouse? Its AP1000 reactor was a game-changer—smaller, safer, and cutting-edge. But by 2016, Westinghouse, owned by Japan’s Toshiba, was struggling, with $13 billion in cost overruns on AP1000 plants in Georgia and South Carolina, leading to its 2017 bankruptcy. This made it a ripe target for CEFC, which saw a chance to dominate nuclear energy, a key CCP goal for technological independence.

Did China Steal Westinghouse’s Designs?

Here’s where it gets murky. The claim that CEFC, with Hunter’s help, stole Westinghouse’s AP1000 designs to build Chinese reactors hinges on prior Chinese actions. In 2010, a PLA operative hacked Westinghouse’s systems, stealing “proprietary and confidential technical and design specifications” for the AP1000’s pipes and routing systems, per a 2014 DOJ indictment. This theft could let a competitor “build a plant similar to the AP1000 without incurring significant research and development costs.” In 2016, another Chinese firm, China General Nuclear Power Corp., was charged with trying to steal U.S. nuclear tech for its Hualong One reactor.

Did CEFC use Westinghouse’s designs? Westinghouse had been working with Chinese partners since 2006, building four AP1000 reactors in China under technology transfer agreements. These deals, legal at the time, gave China access to AP1000 tech, but safeguards were supposed to prevent unauthorized use. However, China’s history of intellectual property theft—evidenced by the 2010 hack—raises suspicions that CEFC or other Chinese firms could have exploited these designs for additional reactors, like the Hualong One, without Westinghouse’s consent. No direct evidence ties Hunter’s 2016 CEFC deal to specific design theft, but the hacking preceded his involvement, and CEFC’s acquisition attempt could have aimed to further exploit Westinghouse’s tech.

The financial impact? Hard to pin down. Westinghouse’s $13 billion overrun and 2017 bankruptcy were tied to U.S. projects, not direct Chinese theft. If China built unauthorized reactors using stolen AP1000 designs, it could have cost Westinghouse billions in lost licensing fees or market share, but no public data quantifies this. The claim of “billions” in losses remains speculative, though China’s nuclear expansion (e.g., 22 reactors under construction by 2020) suggests a massive market Westinghouse was sidelined from, partly due to its financial woes and Chinese ambitions.

Did the Bidens Block Legal Action?

The idea that the Bidens’ influence stopped Westinghouse from pursuing legal action is the weakest link. No evidence shows Westinghouse considered suing CEFC or Chinese firms over design theft, let alone that Joe Biden’s position as Vice President deterred them. Westinghouse’s bankruptcy and Toshiba’s “market weakness” made it vulnerable, but legal inaction likely stemmed from practical issues: proving theft in Chinese courts is notoriously hard, and Westinghouse’s prior tech transfers to China complicated claims. The 2014 DOJ indictment against PLA hackers shows the U.S. pursued justice, but no records link Biden to stifling Westinghouse’s response.

Still, the optics are damning. Hunter’s $4.8 million from CEFC, his push for a Westinghouse deal, and Joe Biden’s role as Vice President create a perception of conflict, much like the Clintons’ Uranium One scandal my earlier point about Bill’s $500,000 Russian speech. Hunter’s emails, calling CEFC’s Patrick Ho the “f---ing spy chief” of China, and James Biden’s belief that Ye Jianming was tied to China’s leadership, suggest they knew CEFC was no ordinary firm. Former Trump advisor Victoria Coates called Hunter’s involvement “beyond outrageous,” given the national security risks. Why would Westinghouse risk antagonizing a Vice President whose son was cozy with a CCP-linked buyer?

Trump vs. the Swamp: A Stark Contrast

This brings us back to Trump. As I’ve shown “The Rise and Fall of Steel Prices”, Trump’s tariffs fought Chinese overreach, protecting U.S. industries while his wealth dropped $1.2 billion during his term. Unlike the Bidens, who pocketed millions from CEFC, or the Clintons, who cashed in on Russian uranium deals, Trump avoided foreign payouts from adversaries. His post-presidency gains came from Truth Social, a U.S.-based platform, not CCP-linked firms. Yet the media, as I’ve detailed (“Media Bias Exposed: J6 Rioters Vilified” and “Lawfare Against Trump”), hammers Trump while giving the Bidens a pass. Why? Because Trump’s America-first policies, like tariffs “Trump’s Tariffs Are Winning—Don’t Believe the Hype”, threaten the globalist elite who profit from China’s rise.

The Bidens’ CEFC saga isn’t just about Hunter’s cash grab. It’s about a pattern—career politicians and their families leveraging influence with nations like China, who’ve been fleecing U.S. tech for decades “Why China Needs USA More Than USA Needs China”. The media ignores this, hyping J6 or Trump’s legal battles “The 2020 Election Debate” while downplaying how Hunter’s deals could’ve handed China a nuclear edge. No wonder Westinghouse stayed quiet—crossing the Vice President’s family isn’t a smart move.

The Bottom Line

Did Hunter Biden’s CEFC deals cost Westinghouse billions? Maybe. China’s 2010 hack of AP1000 designs, followed by Hunter’s 2016 push to sell Westinghouse to CEFC, suggests a pattern of Chinese tech theft that could’ve robbed Westinghouse of market share. But the $13 billion hit was from U.S. project overruns, and no hard evidence quantifies losses from stolen designs. Did the Bidens block legal action? No proof, but the optics—$4.8 million in CEFC cash, a diamond gift, and Hunter’s “big guy” emails—scream conflict of interest. Compare that to Trump, who lost billions fighting for American industries, yet gets vilified by a media that shrugs at the Bidens’ Chinese payoffs. It’s time to call out the swamp’s double standards. Share this at NoSocialism.com and demand the truth!

The Great Shift: A Tale of Globalism’s Reckoning and the Triumph of American Resilience

Story by Juan Fermin, NoSocialism.com

For over four decades, Donald J. Trump has stood as a relentless champion for American workers, sounding the alarm against the scourge of unfettered globalism that has gutted U.S. manufacturing and left entire communities in ruins. Since the 1980s, when he first took to platforms like The Oprah Winfrey Show to decry Japan’s currency manipulation and predatory trade practices, Trump has called for tariffs to level the playing field. He saw what others ignored: countries like China, India, and Japan were using cheap labor, environmental destruction, and outright theft of American intellectual property to drive U.S. companies out of markets. The cost? Millions of good-paying middle-class jobs vanished as factories relocated overseas, leaving behind a trail of shattered communities, ghost towns, and entire states hollowed out by globalist greed.

Look at Detroit, once the wealthiest city in the world in the 1950s, reduced to filing for bankruptcy by 2013. The Rust Belt—stretching from Ohio to Michigan to Pennsylvania—became a graveyard of forgotten dreams, with cities like Youngstown, Flint, and Gary, Indiana, fading into shadows of their former selves. This wasn’t a natural decline; it was a deliberate betrayal. Trade deals like NAFTA and China’s entry into the WTO opened the floodgates for foreign goods, while Chinese companies stole U.S. designs and patents, flooding markets with knockoff products that undercut American innovators. The result was a gutted middle class, abandoned factories, and communities left to rot—all while globalist elites and complicit politicians preached the virtues of “free trade.”

Yet, the naysayers who claim “manufacturing will never come back” are dead wrong. Even today, in 2025, over 570,000 Americans work in auto parts manufacturing, and nearly 1,200 auto parts companies still call Detroit home. These are not relics—they are proof of an industry that refuses to die. And now, Donald Trump is their defender, wielding the tool he’s championed since the Reagan era: tariffs.

Trump’s Tariff Crusade: A Vision Vindicated

From his 1988 critiques of Japan to his 2000 book The America We Deserve, Trump has argued that tariffs are the antidote to unfair trade. By 2016, he made tariffs a cornerstone of his campaign, proposing 45% duties on Chinese goods and 35% on Mexican imports to bring jobs home. In his first term (2017–2021), he delivered: 25% tariffs on steel, 10% on aluminum, and up to 25% on Chinese imports reshaped global supply chains, forcing companies to rethink offshoring. Now, in his second term as the 47th President, Trump’s vision is bearing fruit. Since January 20, 2025, he’s claimed over $5–10 trillion in new U.S. investments—Apple’s $500 billion in manufacturing and training, TSMC’s $100 billion in Arizona semiconductor plants, Saudi Arabia’s $600 billion pledge, and countless others. Skeptics quibble, claiming some investments were pre-existing or speculative, but even at the low end—say, $3 trillion—it’s a staggering leap beyond the paltry sums secured under Joe Biden, whose globalist policies left America’s heartland to wither.

These investments aren’t random; they’re the legacy of Trump’s first-term tariffs, which raised the cost of imports and incentivized domestic production. Apple’s shift to U.S. manufacturing began in response to 2018 tariffs on Chinese components. Hyundai and Posco Holdings, which recently announced U.S. investments, considered steel mills during Trump’s first term, only to shelve them amid pandemic uncertainty and Biden’s weak trade stance. Now, with Trump back and threatening universal tariffs of 10–20%—or 60% on China—companies are racing to build in America, from NVIDIA’s $500 billion AI infrastructure to Pratt Industries’ $5 billion for 5,000 Rust Belt jobs. Even Biden kept Trump’s tariffs, a silent admission of their power. Trump’s vision, forged over 35 years, is proving unstoppable: tariffs work.

The Media’s Inflation Lie: Markets, Not Tariffs, Set Prices

The media, however, refuses to celebrate this revival. Instead, outlets like MSN churn out hit pieces like “China Responds to Trump’s Trade Pressure with Countermeasures,” amplifying Beijing’s complaints while ignoring America’s gains. Their favorite scare tactic? Claiming Trump’s tariffs will ignite inflation, driving up costs for consumers. But this narrative crumbles under scrutiny. As I detailed in my article, “The Rise and Fall of Steel Prices” (nosocialism.com, April 2025), the market—not tariffs—ultimately determines prices. When Trump imposed 25% steel tariffs in 2018, prices spiked briefly as markets adjusted, but by 2019, steel prices began to fall, dropping below pre-tariff levels in many cases. Why? Because markets adapt. If consumers and businesses won’t pay inflated prices, producers lower costs or innovate to compete—exactly what happened with steel.

Far from fueling inflation, Trump’s first term saw lower overall inflation than the Obama or Biden administrations. Under Obama, inflation averaged 1.8% annually (2009–2017); under Biden, it surged to 5.7% at its peak in 2022, driven by supply chain chaos and energy costs. Trump’s first term? Inflation averaged just 1.9% (2017–2021), despite tariffs. The media’s silence on this is deafening. They’ll scream about tariffs but won’t mention the real inflation driver under Biden: the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline. In 2021, Biden’s decision to halt the pipeline sent oil prices soaring from $30 to $130 per barrel by 2022. Since everything in America—food, goods, you name it—moves by diesel, this fivefold spike rippled through the economy, jacking up costs for every consumer. Yet, MSN and their ilk never uttered a word about this inflationary disaster. Why? Because it doesn’t fit their globalist agenda.

The Real Betrayal: Why Were Our Communities Abandoned?

The media’s obsession with inflation myths and China’s talking points distracts from the real question: why were America’s communities allowed to die? The Rust Belt’s decline wasn’t inevitable—it was engineered. NAFTA, signed in 1994, opened the door for companies to flee to Mexico. China’s 2001 WTO entry unleashed a flood of cheap goods, backed by stolen U.S. designs and subsidized production. Currency manipulation and lax environmental rules gave foreign firms an unfair edge, while American workers paid the price. Entire towns—schools, businesses, families—were wiped out. Detroit went from the world’s richest city to a bankrupt shell. Gary, Indiana, once a steel powerhouse, became a symbol of decay. This was economic warfare, and our leaders did nothing.

Now, Trump is fighting back. His tariffs are a direct challenge to the globalist system that enriched corporations and foreign regimes at America’s expense. They’re a signal to companies: build here, hire here, or pay the price. And the world is responding. From Saudi Arabia’s $600 billion to France’s $20 billion in logistics to South Korea’s steel investments, foreign firms are pouring money into U.S. factories, data centers, and jobs. Domestic giants like Apple, NVIDIA, and IBM are doubling down, driven by tariffs, tax incentives, and the undeniable momentum of Trump’s vision.

A New Dawn for America’s Heartland

The naysayers can keep shouting that manufacturing is dead, that the Rust Belt is gone, that America can’t compete. But the truth is in the numbers: 570,000 Americans still work in auto parts manufacturing. Nearly 1,200 auto parts companies thrive in Detroit. These are the seeds of a revival, and Trump is their champion. Instead of parroting China’s complaints or peddling inflation scare stories, the media should be asking why our leaders let places like Detroit collapse. They should be investigating how globalist policies—NAFTA, WTO, unchecked IP theft—stripped away the middle class and left entire states to wither.

This is the great shift—a reckoning for globalism and a rebirth for American manufacturing. Trump’s tariffs, rooted in decades of conviction, are bringing jobs back, rebuilding communities, and restoring hope. Forget the media’s quibbling over whether it’s $5 trillion or $10 trillion in new investments; the number doesn’t matter as much as the reality. Factories are reopening. Jobs are returning. Towns are stirring. The era of globalism’s free ride is over, and America is building again. The Rust Belt is rising, and Trump is leading the charge—not just for Detroit, but for every forgotten corner of this great nation.