Author Archives: sterlingcooper

GAY MEN RUN SILICON VALLEY-THE OPEN SECRET EXPOSED

Inside the Gay Tech Mafia

Gay men have long been rumored to run Silicon Valley. WIRED investigates.
Beefy man posing with the Salesforce tower
ILLUSTRATION: SAM WHITNEY; GETTY IMAGES
No one can say exactly when, or if, gay men started running Silicon Valley. They seem to have dominated its upper ranks at least the past five years, maybe more.
On platforms like X, the clues are there: whispers of private-island retreats, tech executives going “gay for clout,” and the suggestion that a “seed round” is not, strictly speaking, a financial term. It is an idea so taken for granted, in fact, that when I call up a well-connected hedge fund manager to ask his thoughts about what is sometimes referred to in industry circles as the “gay tech mafia,” he audibly yawns. “Of course,” he says. “This has always been the case.”
It had been the case, the hedge funder says, back in 2012, when he was raising money from a venture capitalist whose office was staffed with dozens of “attractive, strong young men,” all of whom were “under 30” and looked as though they had freshly decamped from “the high school debate club.” “They were all sleeping with each other and starting companies,” he says. And it is absolutely the case now, he adds, when gay men are running influential companies in Silicon Valley and maintain entire social calendars with scarcely a straight man, much less a woman, in sight. “Of course the gay tech mafia exists,” he continues. “This is not some Illuminati conspiracy theory. And you do not have to be gay to join. They like straight guys who sleep with them even more.”
Ever since I started covering Silicon Valley in 2017, I’ve heard variations of this rumor—that “gays,” as an AI founder named Emmett Chen-Ran has quipped, “run this joint.” On its face, a gay tech mafia seemed too dumb to warrant actual investigative inquiry. Sure, there were gay men in high places: Peter Thiel, Tim Cook, Sam Altman, Keith Rabois, the list went on. But the idea that they were operating some kind of shadowy cabal seemed born entirely of homophobia, the indulgence of which might play into the hands of conspiracy-minded conservatives like Laura Loomer, who, in 2024, tweeted that the “high tech VC world just seems to be one big, exploitative gay mafia.”
Image may contain Advertisement Poster Body Part Hand Person Adult and Publication
Over time, though, the rumor refused to die, eventually curdling into something closer to conventional wisdom. Last spring, at a venture capitalist’s party in Southern California, a middle-aged investor complained to me at length about how he was struggling to raise his new fund. The problem, he explained, boiled down to discrimination.
I took him in as he spoke. He had the uniform down cold: a white man with a crew cut, wearing a tasteless button-down stretched over mild prosperity, and a fluent conviction that AI was, thank god, the next big thing. He looked exactly like the sort of man Silicon Valley has been built to reward. And yet here he was, insisting that the system was rigged against him. “If I were gay, I wouldn’t be having any trouble,” he said. “That’s the whole thing with Silicon Valley these days. The only way to catch a break,” he claimed, “is if you’re gay.”
Over the course of 2025, similar sentiments bubbled up on X, where Silicon Valley tech workers joked about offering “fractional vizier services to the gay elite.” Anonymous accounts hinted at an underworld of gay Silicon Valley power brokers who influenced and courted—“groomed”—aspiring entrepreneurs. At an AI conference in Los Angeles, an engineer casually referred to a top AI firm’s offices, more than once, as “twink town.”
By the fall, speculation intensified, and then a photo appeared on X of a group of Y Combinator–backed founders crowded near a sauna with Garry Tan, the incubator’s president. The image seemed innocuous enough: a few young, nerdy men in swim trunks, squinting into the camera.
But almost instantly, it set off a round of viral gossip about the peculiar intimacies of venture capital culture. Not long after, a founder from Germany, Joschua Sutee, posted a photo of himself and his male cofounders—apparently naked, swaddled in bedsheets—submitted as part of what seemed to be a Y Combinator application, a move that appeared designed to court a knowingly erotic male audience. “Here I come, @ycombinator,” the caption read.
The notion that Y Combinator was grooming male entrepreneurs makes little sense—for lots of reasons, and for one in particular. “Garry is straight straight straight straight,” says a person who knows Tan. “But he believes in the benefits of the sauna.” When I ask Tan for a comment, he is blunt—some founders were over for dinner and asked to use his recently installed sauna and cold plunge. From there, Tan says, “rejects” of Y Combinator “manufactured this meme that it was somehow more than that.”
And yet, similar rumors persisted and compounded, originating as often from outsiders (sometimes with dubious political motivations) as from insiders. When I call up my longtime industry sources to get their thoughts on the gay tech mafia, not only have they heard of it—they have highly specific notions of how it works.
These are credible people who believe seemingly incredible things. One San Francisco investor tells me that he believes the Thiel Fellowship is a training ground for gay industry leaders.
(When I run this notion past a couple of former Thiel Fellows, they tell me they met Thiel one time at a dinner, where he appeared “slightly bored,” says one of the fellows, a straight man. “I mean, I wish Peter tried to groom me.”) Meanwhile, people’s gaydars are practically overheating. I hear, more than once, that anyone in Silicon Valley who has achieved outsize success is probably gay.
Isn’t it strange, one San Francisco–based venture capitalist muses, how a certain defense-tech executive achieved so much success at a relatively young age? “Isn’t he gay?” the VC asks. “He must be.” I tell him he is mistaken—the executive is married to a woman. “Sure,” he replies. “But have you ever seen them together?” Another entrepreneur who raised capital from two well-known gay investors tells me that he’s accustomed to fielding scrutiny about his sexual orientation. “People say I’m gay,” he says. “There’s always jokes. Like, ‘How’d you get the money, bro?’”
Then there are the anonymous X accounts amplifying allegations of misconduct. Their posts are calibrated for attention: detailed enough to suggest insider knowledge of the Valley, vague enough to invite darker interpretations. I take the bait and, one afternoon in late November, spend nearly an hour texting one such account owner over Signal who agrees to speak to me only if I keep his handle secret.
This person describes the Valley as a place known for “ecstasy, psychedelic fueled gay sex stuff.” Has he experienced any of it himself? No. But he knows people who have—people who are “pretty afraid” and “young af.” He won’t name names, won’t connect me to anyone, but he swears that any negative rumor I’ve heard about gay men in Silicon Valley is true. He suggests a conspiracy so sprawling it rivals QAnon and implicates the entire US government. He gives me vague reporting advice: “It should be easy to find. 2nd page of Google type thing.”
Finally, frustrated by his evasiveness, I ask what he thinks will happen if he tells me what he knows. “I truly believe,” he says, “killed.” Then he offers a suggestion. The only way to expose this blockbuster of a tale is “project veritas style: Take a 20 year old dude, make an X acc[ount]. Send him to the right places in SF and you’ll break the story if you go deep enough.”
Men sitting in an office hot tub
ILLUSTRATION: SAM WHITNEY; GETTY IMAGES
The problem with conspiracy theories, even offensive ones, is that they are rarely wholly invented. They almost always arise from some fragment of truth, which imagination then contorts.
The difficulty with this particular rumor is that, while I was unable to substantiate darker allegations, parts of the story still resonate. In conversations with 51 people—31 of them gay men, many of them influential investors and entrepreneurs—a portrait emerged of gay influence in Silicon Valley that is intricate, layered, and often contradictory. It is a world in which power, desire, and ambition interweave in ways both visible and unseen, a world that is, in some ways, far richer—and more complicated—than the rumors themselves suggest.
Most of the people who speak to me for this story do so on the condition that their names be kept confidential. Some of it is just garden-variety caution. “It may not be wise for me to be talking to a reporter describing all these parties,” says one, “because people would be like, Geez, why would we invite you?” Other excuses are murkier: “It’s not so safe to speak about this in too much detail,” says a founder who works in AI. “Anyone involved is an operator or a VC, and it might lead people to wonder about who is getting advantages.” Amid the deflections and whispers, though, there seems to be an unmistakable truth: Gay men are rising.
“The gays who work in tech are succeeding vastly,” an angel investor, who is a gay man, tells me. “There’s the founder group of gays who all hang out with each other, because the gays always cluster together. By virtue of that, they become friends and vacation together.” Even more importantly: “They support each other, whether that’s to hire someone or angel invest in their companies or lead their funding rounds.”
Some of these networks have begun to spill into public view. There is a Substack called Friend Of, written by Jack Randall, who formerly worked in communications at Robinhood, that chronicles gay ascendence into the centers of power. “We run the tech mafia (see Apple, OpenAI),” Randall writes. “We hold top government posts (see the Treasury Secretary). We anchor primetime news and the NYE Ball Drop. Our dating app’s stock outperforms its straight peers. And in the US, gay men are, on average, better educated and wealthier than the general population.”
A new company called Sector aims to formalize this network. Founded by Brian Tran, a former designer in residence at Kleiner Perkins, Sector has a website that features photos of handsome men on beaches and at dimly lit dinners. One member describes it to me as a curated network where introductions unfold between well-heeled gay men with shared interests. “It’s up to you to decide,” the member tells me. “Is this professional, is it platonic, or is it something romantic?” In an interview with Randall, Tran said, “I think we could displace Grindr in the coming years.”
On any given week in San Francisco, Partiful invites float around the community. If there is a “regular Halloween party, the gays will have their own Halloween party, and Sam Altman will be there,” says Jayden Clark, a straight podcaster who hosts a tech culture podcast and was not invited to the gay Halloween party. (Altman attended dressed as Spider-Man, a nod to Andrew Garfield, who played the superhero and has since been cast as Altman in an upcoming film.) I hear of not one but two White Lotus–themed gay tech parties, both equally extravagant. “Girls are not present,” says that same angel investor. “They are just not there.”
There is also a “Gay VC Mafia” group chat that is, as one member describes it, “60 percent business” and “40 percent hee hee ha ha” about “classically gay topics.” With a steady churn of tech events aimed at gay men, the social incentives stack up fast. Connections blur—“professional, physical, or sometimes romantic,” as an AI founder puts it. The pull of this bubble is so strong, he continues, that it’s “an uphill battle to socialize with straight people.”
None of this is necessarily unfamiliar in the clubby world of Silicon Valley, where the smart, successful, and wildly rich have always formed in-groups. There’s the so-called OpenAI mafia and the Airbnb mafia, and before those the PayPal mafia—alumni of moonshot companies who bankroll the next wave of startups. So some of what reads as advantage is, on closer inspection, structural and unremarkable. San Francisco combines two things in unusual density: one of the country’s largest gay populations and a tech industry that has reshaped global power.
“For sure, gay men are overrepresented and have had an unbelievable run in the Bay Area,” says Mark, another gay entrepreneur who runs an AI startup. “In a city that has the most venture capital in the world, it isn’t surprising that this money is going directly to gay men.” (This perception, for what it’s worth, runs counter to statistics: Between 2000 and 2022, the years for which data is available, only 0.5 percent of startup venture funding went to LGBTQ+ founders.) “It’s not that there is some kind of gay mafia,” Mark continues.
“But if I told you who are my friends that I want to invest in, they happen to be gays. Who are the people without kids who can grind away on the weekends? It’s the gays.” (Sources identified in this story by a first name only, like Mark, preferred the use of pseudonyms.)
Imagine this, Mark says: You are a young, nerdy, closeted gay man. You grow up never quite fitting in. Your parents start asking questions. Why don’t you have a girlfriend? You tell them you’re too busy for a relationship. Eventually, you move to San Francisco, a city that, as one person puts it, is like “Disneyland for gay men.
” Your world opens up. You meet other people like you—men who are openly out, many for the first time in their lives. These men happen to be working at influential companies. They are building technology that is astonishing. And slowly it dawns on you: Maybe you, too—a person who has spent a lifetime overlooked and underestimated—can build something extraordinary. “Gays feel,” Mark says, “that they have something to prove.”
This is, more or less, the nature of how power and money have moved throughout networks since the dawn of time. And gay networks seem naturally aligned to the dynamics of venture funding, where established wealth meets emerging talent. “One of the key things to realize is that gays are different than straights in many different ways,” says a longtime gay venture capitalist.
“Gays are cross-generational.” While straight people tend to spend more time with people their own age, “that is not true with gay men. I can hang out with someone at an event who is 18 years old, and Peter [Thiel] might also be there.”
Just because you are gay and work in tech does not necessarily mean you are part of the so-called gay tech mafia. Much of the queer spectrum is conspicuously absent from events geared toward gay founders. “There are barriers within the community,” says Danny Gray, a leader at Out Professionals, a networking organization for LGBTQ+ businesspeople.
“Cis gay men are the biggest gay group within the acronym, and it is much harder for other letters.” Lesbians tend to be sidelined; when I ask the hyperconnected tech journalist Kara Swisher about the gay tech mafia, she says she wasn’t aware there was one. And even if you are a gay man, inclusion is not necessarily guaranteed. “I’ve found it hard to break into this group myself,” one gay investor tells me. “I probably need to lose 20 pounds.”
It may be that what outsiders perceive as the gay tech mafia is not gay people working in tech, or even, broadly speaking, gay men, but a small, self-selecting group with shared politics and sensibilities.
They are assumed to prize aesthetics and the masculine physique, scorn identity politics, reject DEI in favor of MEI—“merit, excellence, and intelligence”—and lean right-wing, if not MAGA. I’ve heard straight entrepreneurs describe them as “the Greco-Roman gays,” part of “an insular, hypermasculine culture” in which “women are seen as totally redundant and completely unnecessary.” (A woman who once worked for a gay Republican startup founder describes it like this: “You get about the same amount of misogyny, but not the sexual harassment. So that’s nice.”)
Where, then, might these almighty power gays be observed in their natural habitat? This is one of the guiding questions in my research, the answer to which perpetually evades me. When I ask a gay investor if perhaps I can attend one of these parties as a fly-on-the-wall observer, he tells me no, because it would be weird, given that I am—unfortunately for the purposes of this story—a woman.
“People will be like, ‘Is that your sister?’” he says. I float an idea past my editor that I attend a party disguised as a man. Perhaps, I suggest, we should discuss the budget for my makeover? While not entirely disinterested in the idea, my editor offers another suggestion, that he—a gay man—come along as a kind of chaperone, “for safety” purposes. Neither of us revisits the idea.
Image may contain Body Part Hand Person Wrist Baby and Wristwatch
ILLUSTRATION: SAM WHITNEY
There is one place, though, that is mentioned again and again: Barry’s, the fitness bootcamp, which has become a gay mecca, thanks in part to the high-profile investor Keith Rabois, who has long been one of its most avid devotees, to the point of teaching occasional classes. And one Barry’s in particular keeps coming up: “The Barry’s in the Castro is ranked supreme,” says that same gay angel investor. “It is all guys, all gays, and everyone has abs.” (“From what I’ve learned working here, gay men do love to work out,” confirms a female employee at the Castro Barry’s.)
The fact is, most people seem eager to talk about this, no deceptions on my part necessary. Many of them reply almost immediately to my vague inquiries. Even more surprising is their willingness to talk at length. Calls often run for hours, blending measured observations about life in a masculine-dominated culture with tours through the most salacious industry intrigue of my entire career.
There can be an edge to the gossip, though—an implication that one of the most reliable paths to power in Silicon Valley may run through the bedroom. Some men are eager to hop on a call to ask what I may or may not have already heard about them. One gay founder tells me how a rumor has been circulating (a version of which I have, in fact, heard) that he and his husband slept with a gay investor in exchange for a down payment on their home. “Do people really think,” he wonders, “that we can’t afford a condo?”
Many have, at some point or another, been suspected of romantic involvement, even if they’ve never been in the same room together. When I call up Ben Ling, an investor and early Google employee, to ask about long-standing speculation that he might be a good match for Tim Cook—a pairing intriguing enough to be referenced in The Atlantic—he laughs. “People make up these rumors because they have nothing better to do,” he says. “Tim Cook does not know who I am.”
And while it is true that at least some of these men know and see each other socially, these meetups do not reliably lead to romance. A friend of Rabois tells me that Rabois likes to tell a story of the time, years earlier, when he invited Sam Altman as his plus-one to an event. “He said that Sam brought two phones and was texting on both of them the entire time,” the friend says. “Keith says it was the worst date he ever went on.” (Use of the word “date” has, by relevant parties, been disputed.)
For rising figures who have formed genuine friendships with powerful gay industry leaders, success sometimes comes with a penalty: the assumption that it is borrowed, not earned. Brad, a gay industry leader, has long lived with rumors about his friendship with Peter Thiel—rumors that followed him even as his career advanced.
“When I started working with Peter so long ago, people would be like, Oh, did you sleep with him? Blah blah blah.” The answer, he says, is no. And yet, “for some reason everyone felt perfectly comfortable asking me about it. Straight people were interested in it generally, but the people who were really fucking fascinated were other gay guys. Guys would be like: What does he have that I don’t have? So then they assume, Well, Peter must have thought you were cute.” (Thiel did not respond to requests for comment.)
Still, it’s naive to insist that intimacy with power is without its advantages. When Altman’s former boyfriend, early Stripe employee Lachy Groom, raised a $250 million solo venture fund while still in his twenties, some observers read the achievement less as an anomaly of talent, I’m told, than as an artifact of access. This interpretation, according to a gay investor close to both Groom and Altman, is not entirely fair:
“When Lachy and Sam were dating, Sam was kind of famous, but not nearly as famous as he is now, and Lachy was a person in his own right,” the investor says. “I did give a reference to [an investor in Groom’s fund] saying, ‘Yes, he’s unproven as an investor, yes, he’s young.
But he is in the network, and he is Sam’s ex-boyfriend.’ But Lachy didn’t date Sam to get these things.” (Groom declined to comment on the record, as did a representative for Altman.)
Meanwhile, when straight men attempt to tap into the gay network, the gay investors chat amongst themselves. Mark, who hosts dinner parties and events for the gay tech community in San Francisco, says that he noticed one man constantly RSVPing to his events. “We don’t have a purity test,” he says, “but someone said that guy is definitely not gay, he just goes to the gay man events because he wants deal flow.” It isn’t like straight men are excluded per se, but they are not exactly a welcome addition to the world of gay capital.
The joke, if a straight founder does show up, is: Just don’t tell anyone you’re straight.
“I have seen straight men do untoward things,” says a gay investor. “There is a straight guy who is not important enough to be named who would pitch all the gay investors, and in one meeting at the VC partnership he was talking to a gay general partner who I know. And in the meeting, this guy put his hand on the GP’s leg under the table. It is so inappropriate. It became a running joke, like, not this guy again.”
One person in particular has helped fuel the notion that being gay can benefit one’s career: Delian Asparouhov, the mischievous, 31-year-old cofounder of Varda Space Industries, who was once hired as Rabois’ chief of staff. Rabois, who helped Thiel start PayPal and was later a partner at Thiel’s venture firm, Founders Fund, was a subject of corporate scrutiny years earlier.
While at Square, Rabois was accused of sexual harassment by a male colleague, an episode that ultimately ended with Rabois’ departure from the company. (After an internal investigation, the company backed Rabois.)
In 2018, about 100 people attended Rabois’ wedding to Jacob Helberg, a former adviser at Palantir who currently serves as the US undersecretary of state for economic growth. The wedding was a multiday affair with a guest list that included many of the most important people in tech and culminated in a beachside wedding ceremony officiated by Sam Altman. (Rabois’ bad “date” with Altman resulted, apparently, in close friendship.)
During the wedding, Asparouhov gave a toast, which was later recalled by Fred, a longtime gay tech leader who was in attendance. “Delian said something like, ‘I’m the intern that Keith hired, and I would wear short shorts and tank tops at Square.’” Fred says he was sitting at a table with two famous tech executives. “We just raised our eyebrows,” Fred continues. “It was so embarrassing that Delian would say that at someone’s wedding. I mean, here was Keith getting married to Jacob.” (Other wedding attendees claim not to remember the contents of the speech but say it sounds like Asparouhov.)
Rumors of Asparouhov and Rabois’ dating lives have long traveled in industry circles, thanks in part to Asparouhov, who has fanned the flames online. (“Delian is like Gretchen Wieners,” explains Fred.) In 2022, a popular anonymous tech insider X account, Roon, tweeted that it was “crazy how venture capitalists have reinvented the Roman system of pederasty.” Asparouhov responded to the tweet almost immediately: “It only took a little gay and now I get to work on space factories,” he wrote. “Pretty reasonable trade.” Asparouhov, who is married to a woman, now says the tweet was “obviously a joke.”
But as Fred recounted, Asparouhov was known for wearing neon tank tops, short shorts, and mismatched shoes when he joined Square in 2012. “He would jump a lot—it was very odd,” says someone who worked at the company at that time. Others have similar recollections. OpenStore, the Miami-based company Rabois cofounded in 2021, which mostly shut down last year, seemed to be, according to John, who says he visited its offices, “almost like a harem, filled with jacked white men, all of them handsome and good-looking, straight and gay.
People were wearing kind of inappropriate clothing: really short shorts and tight shirts even though the AC was blasting.” Rabois, when I ask him for a comment, denies this categorically. “Attire was quite standard for Florida,” he says. “And I doubt more than two of the 100-plus employees could be reasonably described as ‘jacked.’”
Rabois has been known to take extravagant vacations—helicopter trips to Icelandic volcanoes, white-water rafting in Costa Rica. Exclusion can stir serious envy, as it did with one young gay tech consultant I speak with who says he has begun a kind of “micro-journalism” project to track the appearances of a couple of guys on Rabois’ Instagram. These are “low-level” workers, he says, who nonetheless are “always posting photos in St. Barts.” “Here I am doomscrolling on the A train, and I’m like, ‘How are these guys on a private jet?’”
But how far back do these rumors really go? Has Silicon Valley always been semi-secretly, kinda-sorta gay? More than once, I’m told to connect with Joel, a gay man who works in tech and who spent a lot of time among the older in-group of powerful gay men in Silicon Valley, more than a decade ago. “So,” I say when he answers my call, “are you a member of the gay tech mafia?” He laughs. “Maybe someone thinks I’m in it, which is why you’re calling me.”
When I ask Joel to explain how the gay tech mafia works, he tells me that it’s similar to people who “went to the same college or came from a similar background or a similar town.” And it indeed started, he says, with people like Rabois and Thiel, who, after they rose to power, “brought a lot of people along. Keith hired gays at Square, and Peter hired Mike [Solana] at Founders Fund. Then there was a cohort of Google gays that Marissa Mayer ran in 2010. And there is Sam, who is friends with Keith, and Sam was running in parallel, assembling other gays around him.”
Joel tells me about the parties at the time—the exact specifics of which remain off the record. But they were, in summary, what you might expect. “There was lots of drinking that would turn into weird situations. Random people hooking up. Generally, there was a sexual tone.” But this was years ago. These types of parties, at least from what I’ve heard, have either disappeared or moved entirely underground. (“Once you get to the end of your reporting, you will find that the real story is much less explosive,” says Mark. “Like all these wild orgies: If you do find out where they are, please tell me, because I’d like to go.”)
I tell Joel that I’ve heard from some young men in the tech industry who feel pressured to sleep around to get ahead. Was that true in his experience? “Mmmmm,” he says, and pauses. Then he bursts out laughing. “I mean, in all of this, there are weird gray areas. It can be very sexual. It is not all professional. A lot of people have dated or slept with each other.” He had experienced a kind of coercion firsthand. “I definitely felt pressured to do—not overtly illegal things. But they walked the line.” Joel is older now, and while he can see how someone might describe this as an abuse of power, he resists the framing.
The exchange of sex and status may not be the reason these men rose so quickly, but it can be a factor—if only because sex, as he puts it, “makes people become closer rapidly.”
As Silicon Valley has matured into the power center of the world, it has grown sharply cutthroat. Leverage is scarce, and ambition is often laced with a kind of ruthless opportunism. In gay circles, some feel the Valley resembles the old Hollywood casting couch. Many of the critics are rising gay entrepreneurs and investors themselves, for whom parts of the gay community seem steeped in the attitudes and values of the 1970s and ’80s. “There’s this feeling,” one observes, “that because there were years of historical oppressions only recently recognized, certain people think, ‘I can do this, or I deserve this, because no one will cancel me for it.’”
Image may contain Person Skin and Baby
ILLUSTRATION: SAM WHITNEY; GETTY IMAGES
This is a community that, as one young gay investor describes it, is “power-hungry, network-driven, and, at times, very horny.” The arrangement, he suggests, is tacitly understood by everyone involved: “Both sides know they are in the game and want something from each other. Which is fine, I guess, if you’re into that.” This is not, in his telling, the whole of the gay tech scene, most of which is a “lovely, amazing community that supports its people and their career progress
.” But alongside that exists a sexual undercurrent—one that, he insists, is impossible to deny and especially pronounced in AI circles. “It’s like a gay nepo thing,” he says. “While it’s not explicitly for sexual favors, there is an element at work in the background. Like, you’re young and you’re hot and I’m down to hook up.”
One gay man, Dean, describes moving through a professional world in which sexual suggestion flowed freely. Early on, it came from limited partners curious about his prospective fund; after he raised the fund, it came from founders seeking capital. In one instance, a potential limited partner proposed a meeting at his home. “He was like, ‘We don’t need to wear clothes, we can just sit around and talk about your fund in my hot tub.’” Dean frames these encounters as an irritation—ambient, expected, and largely inconsequential. “Sex is devalued in gay male culture,” he says. “Often, it’s just another piece of currency.”
After Dean raised his fund, he was occasionally approached by young men, “founders looking for money who indicated they were open to whatever it takes to raise it.” At events geared toward LGBT founders, young men would ask to grab drinks one on one. Sometimes, they’d send nudes on Instagram. “Like ‘Hey …’ with a winky face. And ‘Do you like that?’ And I’d be like, ‘No, that’s actually inappropriate,’” he says. It’s not confined to Silicon Valley, he adds. Having left tech for a different industry, Dean has come to see the entanglement of sex, power, and ambition as a recurring feature of certain pockets of gay professional life.
Another man who works in the queer tech space puts it this way: “There is an aspect of being queer and in business and in life and having relationships that can be frankly sexual and not sexual at the same time. You can turn off and do business with someone you were hooking up with yesterday.” Plus, he continues, there is the inescapable fact that much of gay male culture tends to be sexually charged. “Straight guys have the golf course. Gay guys have the orgy,” he says. “It doesn’t mean it’s problematic. It’s consensual, but it is a way we bond and connect.”
Of the 31 gay men I spoke to for this story, nine tell me they experienced unwanted advances from other gay men in the industry. Some of these advances were mild but annoying: repeated invitations to soak in hot tubs or explore wine cellars. Others involved unwanted touches. One person, an up-and-coming gay investor, tells me that he believes that turning down a sexual advance from a senior colleague cost him a job. Multiple sources speak of “sex pests” who send unsolicited dick pics and make overt come-ons.
“What demoralizes me in the conversations around the gays in tech in San Francisco is that none of this is entirely a secret,” says one gay investor who experienced an unwanted sexual advance. “People are aware this is an issue.” Another gay man who works in tech adds: “There is an element to this story that is a cautionary tale. You take a brilliant entrepreneur who has a great idea trying to make it in the world of venture capital. And then they have to put up with someone sending them dick pics and asking for an investment meeting. It shouldn’t be normalized. And right now, everything is so gray. Like, it’s our little thing, our little world. But it has a massive impact.”
Again and again, gay men working in tech ask me: Why has this story never been written? The question somewhat answers itself. Unfair stereotypes about gay men persist, and why else would sources insist on pseudonyms? I am warned, more than once, to be careful, that figures in Silicon Valley are “vindictive.” Even as many consider this culture of sexual pressure a feature of Silicon Valley life, it is, as someone else tells me, “a true minefield” to write about.
.
Gerald knows the feeling. He’s a young gay man in San Francisco, described by acquaintances as a “quirky individual” and a “social puppeteer.” Over a call, Gerald lays out the reasons he has hesitated to talk about his time in tech. “This is a complex subject,” he says, “and I don’t think readers can draw the distinction between some bad men being gay and all gay men being bad. It can be a slippery slope into homophobia.”
He won’t give his story to me.
Not yet. But he does tell me he suspects that other stories, in the coming months, will surface. “People have a difficult time articulating power with nuance,” he says. “This is not just one story. There will be many.” From what he’s told me so far, and from everything else I’ve heard—the heartfelt, late-night confessions over the phone; the insights shared quietly and kept off the record; the admissions of dozens of funny, brilliant, young gay men competing for, yes, power and money and recognition, but also for love, romance, and a place to belong in the heart of San Francisco—I believe him.

HOW MUCH DO OLYMPIC ATHLETES GET PAID?

How Much Do Olympians Get Paid When They Medal? All About the Cash Prizes for Winners

Gold medalists Ellie Kam and Danny O'Shea of Team United States on day two of the Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympic games on February 08, 2026 in Milan, Italy ; Breezy Johnson of Team United States competes on day four of the Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics on February 10, 2026 in Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy. Elsa/Getty ; Christophe Pallot/Agence Zoom/Gett
Gold medalists Ellie Kam and Danny O’Shea of Team United States on day two of the Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympic games on February 08, 2026 in Milan, Italy ; Breezy Johnson of Team United States competes on day four of the Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics on February 10, 2026 in Cortina d’Ampezzo, Italy. Elsa/Getty ; Christophe Pallot/Agence Zoom/Gett

NEED TO KNOW

  • Olympic athletes are not paid to compete in the games

  • However, some athletes are paid if they medal

  • A new $100 million donation will change the way Team USA Olympians are paid

It’s not just medals that Olympic athletes can walk away with — for some, there’s a tidy pile of cash involved.

While qualifying for the Olympics is an accomplishment of a lifetime, topping the podium and earning a medal is undoubtedly the ultimate goal for the thousands of athletes competing.

During the 1904 Olympic Games in St. Louis, the tradition of handing out medals — gold for first place, silver for second and bronze for third — was first introduced. The prize distribution continued through the years, though the medals’ designs differ depending on the Olympic host city.

The medals don’t just attract the eyes of the competitors, however, as their nearly unattainable allure attracts the public watching the Games from all over the world. While many are curious about their worth, questions are also asked about athlete payout in addition to receiving medals.

Whether athletes get paid to compete in the Olympics has been a commonly discussed topic over the years, with many Olympians opening up about their experiences trying to make ends meet while training to be the best in the world at their sport.

However, the compensation model will be changing a bit for the 2026 Winter Olympics after financier Ross Stevens donated $100 million to the U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee (USOPC), promising $200,000 to each U.S. athlete who competes. The first half of the money will pay out 20 years after the first Olympic games they competed in, or when they’re 45, with the second half being a “guaranteed benefit for their families after they pass away.”

Read on to learn more about whether Olympic athletes get paid, how much medals are worth and the other prizes awarded on the podium.

Do Olympic athletes get paid?

Team USA's Katie Ledecky poses with her gold medal after winning the women's 1,500m freestyle final at the 2024 Paris Olympics. Mustafa Yalcin/Anadolu via Getty 
Team USA’s Katie Ledecky poses with her gold medal after winning the women’s 1,500m freestyle final at the 2024 Paris Olympics. Mustafa Yalcin/Anadolu via Getty

In short, Olympic athletes are not paid to compete. The International Olympic Committee explained in a statement to NBC Insider why a “for-profit business model” was never a goal for the Games.

If that was the case, the IOC hypothesized: “The event would be limited to those sports that generate the most significant revenues, and it would not involve athletes representing teams from 206 NOCs… It would not be Olympic Games as we know them.”

Still, athletes can profit in other ways. In fact, NBC reports that “Olympians are compensated directly from their country’s respective Olympic competition committee.”

This isn’t true for all athletes competing in the Olympics, however, as they’re primarily paid only if they medal. “Team USA athletes who medal will be paid by the country’s Olympic committee,” according to Forbes, “but a majority of American athletes aren’t paid to compete.”

According to USA Today, the U.S. payment process is deemed “Operation Gold” by the USOPC. Athletes earn $37,500 for gold, $22,500 for silver and $15,000 for bronze, which is the same as their earnings in the 2022 and 2024 Olympics.

In comparison to other countries, the payout for American athletes is on the lower end of the spectrum.

Singapore pays its athletes much more, offering their athletes $788,907 for what would be their first gold medal in the Olympic Games, per USA Today. Meanwhile, Hong Kong is offering $767,747 for gold, and Italy is celebrating those who place in their home country with $209,804 for gold medalists.

What do first-place athletes win at the Olympics?

Team USA's Simone Biles poses with the Olympic Rings and a goat charm on her necklace during the Artistic Gymnastics Women's All-Around Final medal ceremony at the 2024 Paris Olympics. Jamie Squire/Getty
Team USA’s Simone Biles poses with the Olympic Rings and a goat charm on her necklace during the Artistic Gymnastics Women’s All-Around Final medal ceremony at the 2024 Paris Olympics. Jamie Squire/Getty

Athletes are awarded a gold medal for winning first place at the Olympics, a tradition that began at the St. Louis Games in 1904. The medals are customized year to year — and according to the official Olympics website, the design “is the responsibility of the host city’s organizing committee.”

The 2024 Paris Olympics made history with its medals, which were designed by expert French jeweler Chaumet. For the first time ever in the history of the Games, the medals were adorned with the original iron used in the construction of the Eiffel Tower.

How much is an Olympic gold medal worth?

Gold medalist Kristen Faulkner of Team United States bites her medal on the podium during the Women's Road Race Tim de Waele/Getty 
Gold medalist Kristen Faulkner of Team United States bites her medal on the podium during the Women’s Road Race Tim de Waele/Getty

The medals handed out at the 2026 Winter Olympics are worth more than ever, according to CTV News, due to the rising costs of the material itself.

Gold medals have doubled in value since the Paris Olympics, with a cost of about $2,300 — even though the medals are not pure gold. Only six grams of the medal’s 506 grams are made of gold, the rest are silver.

How much are Olympic silver and bronze medals worth?

Team USA's Sha`carri Richardson poses with her silver medal during the 100 meter medal ceremony at the 2024 Paris Olympics Harry Langer/DeFodi Images via Getty
Team USA’s Sha`carri Richardson poses with her silver medal during the 100 meter medal ceremony at the 2024 Paris Olympics Harry Langer/DeFodi Images via Getty

Similar to the gold medals, silver and bronze medals aren’t 100% pure. The silver medal weighs around 500 grams, while the bronze medal weighs 420 grams.

Silver medals have almost tripled in value, coming in at $1,400. However, bronze medals, which are made of copper, are only worth about $5.60 each.

RANKING THE MOST AND LEAST EDUCATED STATE SIN THE USA…SOME SURPRISES?

The United States may be a democracy, but if knowledge is power, some states clearly have a stronger claim to the crown than others. Higher education is a privilege not everyone gets, yet those who do often gain access to higher incomes, greater job security, and more career mobility.

That opportunity gap isn’t evenly distributed. From high school graduation rates to graduate degrees, education levels vary widely across the country, shaping local economies and long-term quality of life. So which states are the most educated, and which are still playing catch-up?

The Smartest States

To rank the most and least educated states in America, WalletHub analyzed all 50 states using 18 metrics tied to both educational achievement and access. The analysis considers how educated a state’s population is, how strong its schools are, and how evenly opportunities are shared across gender and race. Higher scores point to states where education is both effective and widely accessible, while lower scores highlight deeper, more persistent gaps-shown on the map below.

WalletHub© WalletHub

Topping the list is Massachusetts, home to world-renowned colleges like MIT and Harvard. Nearly half of adults hold a bachelor’s degree, and a significant share have graduate or professional degrees. But the Bay State isn’t just about the Ivies-its public schools rank among the best in the country, and some state-sponsored programs even help make college more affordable.

A little further up the East Coast is Vermont, the second-most educated state in America. Small but mighty, the Green Mountain State boasts nearly universal high school graduation and a large share of adults with bachelor’s degrees. Top-ranked colleges and broad access to postsecondary education give residents plenty of opportunities to keep learning, making lifelong education feel like a community tradition.

Heading down south, Maryland rounds out the top three most educated states. The Old Line State boasts strong high schools that prepare students to become highly educated adults, many of whom hold bachelor’s or graduate degrees. Free community college programs open doors for scholars, while the state’s universities rank among the nation’s best. Maryland also keeps things fair, with one of the smallest gender gaps in bachelor’s degree attainment and policies that encourage learning year-round.

Quality vs. Quantity

Education isn’t just about how many diplomas are hanging on the wall: it’s also about how strong the system is behind them. This study evaluates states across two dimensions: quantity (the number of degrees residents earn) and quality (school performance and overall system strength).

Here are the top 10 most educated states in America, along with their educational attainment and quality of education rankings:

Overall Rank State Educational Attainment Rank Quality of Education Rank
1 Massachusetts 1 4
2 Vermont 3 9
3 Maryland 4 3
4 Connecticut 7 6
5 Colorado 2 38
6 New Jersey 10 1
7 Virginia 6 11
8 New Hampshire 5 14
9 Minnesota 8 20
10 Washington 9 21

The most educated states tend to strike a balance, pairing high levels of college completion with strong public schools, colleges, and universities. But the two don’t always move in lockstep. Some states, like Colorado, turn out plenty of graduates despite a more middle-of-the-pack system quality. In contrast, others, such as New Jersey, boast top-tier schools that haven’t fully translated into the highest levels of adult degree attainment.

More Education, More Money?

WalletHub© WalletHub

At a glance, the pattern is hard to ignore: states with higher education rankings tend to land higher in median household income as well. The green dots-states that rank highly in both education and income-cluster toward the top left of the chart, reinforcing the idea that strong schools and a well-educated population often go hand in hand with economic prosperity.

But the story isn’t perfectly linear. The blue states rank highly in education but lag in income, suggesting that degrees don’t always translate immediately into higher household earnings. On the flip side, the gray states post stronger income rankings despite lower education standings-likely benefiting from industry mix, natural resources, or other economic advantages.

Meanwhile, the red cluster shows the toughest reality: states that rank lower in education often also lag in income, underscoring how deeply intertwined opportunity and earning power can be.

In the end, education isn’t the only factor shaping a state’s wealth, but the overall upward trend makes one thing clear: more education generally means more money.

USA DECLINING BIRTHRATES CALL FOR BOOT-CAMPS TO BOLSTER THE DECLINE

Social media users are denouncing the idea of “marriage bootcamps” as “ridiculous” and “demographic control” online after an unadopted policy plan from the conservative think tank that helped create Project 2025 proposed the camps as a way to boost birthrates.

The online report, titled “Saving America by Saving the Family: A Foundation for the Next 250 Years,” published Jan. 8 by The Heritage Foundation, lays out ways the group says the United States can “restore the family home,” including through monetarily incentivizing couples to have children and stay married, among other efforts.

The report has since drawn some criticism online, much of it aimed at the “marriage bootcamps” outlined in the plan that would end with people who participated in the program taking part in a communal wedding.

What’s in the Heritage Foundation report? Call for more marriage, babies.

In its report, the Heritage Foundation calls on the Trump administration and Congress to consider a plethora of proposed actions that they say would help reverse the declining birth rate in the United States, which they call “America’s family crisis.”

Overall population growth has slowed “significantly,” with an increase of just 1.8 million people between July 1, 2024, and July 1, 2025, according to U.S. census estimates released on Jan. 27.

There were about 519,000 more births than deaths in the United States between July 2024 and July 2025, representing similar growth as the year before, the Census Bureau said. The birth rate is higher than during the pandemic, but it still “represents a significant decline from prior decades,” according to the agency.

The report outlines The Heritage Foundation’s plan to combat this, including reforming current programs related to welfare, higher education, surrogacy and more, while placing family building and marriage at the focus of both American lives and politics.

Some of the other major suggestions in the report include:

  • Reviewing grants, policies, and regulations that the federal government is involved with to “measure how it helps or harms marriage and family.”
  • Financially incentivizing marriage and childbearing by placing $2,500 into investment accounts for newlyweds.
  • Rerouting the current $17,670 adoption tax credit to married parents for each of their own newborns, as long as one parent is employed.
  • Reforming educational curriculum to teach life skills like relationship management, parenting basics, and financial literacy.
  • Revising higher education subsidies to allow Americans to “avoid pointless debt, start their careers earlier, and form families sooner.”

‘Marriage bootcamps’ and a communal wedding

The report also floated the idea of “marriage bootcamps” that aim to cover topics like communication, money management and conflict resolution for “cohabiting couples with children.”

The successful completion of the program would conclude with couples “ready to walk down the aisle at a communal wedding,” the report states, and a potential $5,000 monetary incentive − funded by foundations or private donors − for couples to get married. Additionally, newlyweds would leave with a mentor couple to guide them through marriage following the wedding.

Delano Squires, director of The Heritage Foundation’s Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Human Flourishing, told USA TODAY that programs supporting marriage like this already exist, and federal funding has in the past been designated for marriage education, including by the Administration for Children & Families. Ideally, he added, the program would create and support a culture of marriage in what he called “marriage deserts,” or places where people want to get married but aren’t.

“We know that in some of these neighborhoods, particularly low-income, working-class neighborhoods, people are not getting married before having children. But you can find a critical mass of cohabiting couples, right? So, they have kids together, they live together. Oftentimes, their finances are mixed up together,” Squires said. “How about we … work with them to move them from, as old folks would say, shacking up to settling down.”

Paul Eastwick, relationship psychology expert and author of “Bonded by Evolution: The New Science of Love and Connection,” said that while he views the mentor couple idea as potentially beneficial for newlyweds, he is unsure how successful the overall bootcamps would be based on the usefulness of similar past programs, like former President George W. Bush’s Healthy Marriage Initiative.

“It’s kind of based on a broken idea about what makes for good relationships, or at least what prevents bad relationships. Because the assumption was, if we just give people the skills, they’ll like do coupledom better,” Eastwick said.

However, there’s a risk that the delivery of these skills and marriage tips, such as in a classroom format, might not resonate with people trying to manage their marriage or be beneficial in the end, he added.

“There’s good evidence that therapy can work, but a lot of ways that therapy works, it’s not like teaching skills in the abstract. It’s not like you take a class and you get an ‘A’ and now you’re ready to be married,” Eastwick said. “That’s not where most of the goodness or the badness of a relationship comes from.”

Alternatively, Eastwick said he is more concerned with loneliness than marriage when it comes to a lack of socialization and relationships in the U.S. Getting people to spend time together and form connections in person would be his first step to reduce that loneliness that could eventually result in more relationships, he added.

“We don’t want to go back to where we were stigmatizing people for wanting to be single,” Eastwick said. “But if you’re single and looking, if there are creative ways of helping these people to find each other that aren’t swiping, I think that’d be great.”

Social media users react to ‘Saving the Family’ plan

The Heritage Foundation’s plan is a recommendation to the Trump administration that has not been adopted. The camp is also designated as being for cohabiting couples with children.

But the report is still receiving mixed responses from some social media users who view the plan as a potential way for the government to control aspects of their personal lives.

“It’s every bride’s dream,” says user @wiscocowboy sarcastically in a TikTok video. “A forced communal wedding.”

 

COSTCO HAS FIGURED OUT HOW TO STOP RETAIL THEFT!

As rampant shoplifting across the US has forced store closures and inflicted billions of dollars in losses on retailers, one industry giant appears to have cracked the problem.

Costco has largely defied the retail theft surge that has plagued chains such as Walmart and Target – because it runs its stores differently.

S

In its most recent annual report, Costco explained how its business model keeps losses low.

‘By strictly controlling the entrances and exits and using a membership format, we believe our inventory losses are well below those of typical retail operations,’ the report for 2025 said.

Unlike Walmart or Target, Costco doesn’t let just anyone wander in off the street.

Shoppers must show a paid membership – often with photo ID – before they’re allowed through the door. Once inside, there’s usually just one way in and one way out, and every purchase is checked against a receipt before customers leave.

These all add up. Fewer entrances mean fewer blind spots. Receipt checks make it much harder to walk out with unpaid items. And because everyone inside has already paid to be there, there’s far fewer anonymous shoppers  – a key driver of retail theft.

The contrast comes as US retailers are estimated to have lost more than $47 billion to shoplifting in 2025.

A Costco worker checks a receipt at the store exit in Teterboro, New Jersey, on February 28, 2024 – a small step that makes walking out with unpaid items harder

According to the National Retail Federation, the average number of shoplifting incidents rose 93 percent in 2023 compared with 2019, while dollar losses increased by 90 percent over the same period.

Companies including Target, Walgreens, Whole Foods, and Nordstrom have previously cited retail crime as a factor behind store closures.

Costco has long said shoplifting has been a much smaller problem for them than for competitors. During an earnings call in 2023, then chief financial officer Richard Galanti told investors: ‘Thankfully, it’s not a big issue for us.’

Speaking to Daily Mail after the call, Galanti said Costco’s theft rate sat between 0.1 and 0.2 percent – roughly ten times lower than the retail industry average.

‘Our shrinkage has historically been low,’ he said. ‘And we’ve gotten better with time.’ Shrinkage is an industry term for stock losses, including theft.

While theft has never been a major problem for Costco, losses were more than twice today’s level roughly 30 years ago, showing how the company’s approach has steadily tightened.

Beyond store design, he said Costco’s bulk-buying model also helps. Large items like multi-packs of groceries or household goods are far harder to steal than small, high-value products that are often targeted in other stores.

In the US, Costco membership costs $65 per year for a standard Gold Star or Business membership, or $130 for an Executive one.

Executive members also get 2 percent cashback on most purchases- paid yearly – and can also start shopping an hour earlier.

Bulk items stacked high on both sides of a Costco aisle reflect the retailer’s simple design – fewer frills, fewer blind spots

A shopper packs a car with purchases outside Costco, whose focus on large, high-volume items reduces the risk of unpaid goods leaving the store 

Those membership fees allow Costco to operate on thin margins while keeping prices low – and investing in security without locking up everyday items.

While Costco experiences low levels of in-store theft, it has not been immune to crime altogether.

In late 2025, the company suffered a high-profile cargo theft involving a hijacked $400,000 shipment of live lobsters.

Financially, the retailer remains on solid footing. In early 2026, Costco shares are up more than 13 percent year to date, rebounding from a dip in 2025 and buoyed by strong January sales growth of 7.1 percent.

 

BITCOIN BOMBS…HOW SAFE AND SECURE IS IT…IT HAS NO VALUE ANYWAY, ALL BASED ON GULLIBILITY OF “INVESTING PUBLIC”

OOPS: Crypto Company Accidentally Sent $40B in Bitcoin to Users PLEASE SEND ME SOME TOO!

South Korean exchange Bithumb just delivered a masterclass in operational disaster. On Friday, what started as a routine promotional giveaway spiraled into one of the industry’s most embarrassing mishaps: the accidental crediting of over 620,000 Bitcoins—valued at more than $40 billion—to hundreds of users. This wasn’t a generous windfall but a ledger error that triggered a flash crash on the platform, exposing the fragility of centralized exchanges and igniting debates about their true reserves.

The incident unfolded during a promotional event intended to reward users with small cash prizes of around 2,000 Korean won, roughly $1.50. Instead, due to what Bithumb described as a staff input error—mistakenly entering “BTC” instead of “KRW”—select users saw their accounts balloon with phantom balances of up to 2,000 Bitcoins each.

Reports vary on the exact number of affected users, with some sources citing 695 and others 249, but the total credited amount consistently lands at 620,000 BTC, representing nearly 3% of Bitcoin’s entire supply. These weren’t actual transfers of real coins; they were “ghost balances” created in the exchange’s internal system, allowing users to attempt trades as if the funds were legitimate.

Chaos ensued almost immediately. Recipients, spotting the massive windfalls, rushed to sell, flooding the order books and driving Bitcoin’s price on Bithumb down by as much as 17% to about 81 million won, equivalent to $55,000—well below the global market rate of around $68,000 to $70,000. The exchange acted swiftly, halting trading and withdrawals for the affected accounts within 35 minutes, and claimed to have stabilized the situation in just five minutes after the price volatility began. Bithumb emphasized that no external hack or security breach was involved, pinning the blame squarely on internal human error.

Today, Bithumb issued a public apology: “We sincerely apologise for the inconvenience caused to our customers due to the confusion that occurred during the distribution process of this (promotional) event.”

The company reported recovering 99.7% of the erroneously credited Bitcoins, pledging to cover the remaining 0.3%—likely from small sales that slipped through before the freeze—using its own assets. This quick response mitigated immediate financial losses, but the damage to user trust and market stability was already done.

Social media erupted with a mix of amusement and alarm. One X user quipped about the “dream drop” turned nightmare, noting how a staff member’s typo turned $1.50 prizes into $133 million illusions. Others highlighted the operational risks, with posts warning that such errors underscore the perils of relying on centralized platforms. The incident even prompted discussions about market liquidity and the potential for similar glitches to cause broader disruptions.

Digging deeper, this blunder raises uncomfortable questions about Bithumb’s reserves. As of the third quarter of 2024, the exchange held only 42,619 BTC—far less than the 620,000 it “allocated” in error. How could a system allow for such massive over-crediting without safeguards? Critics in the crypto community are now debating whether this exposes fractional reserve practices, where exchanges might not hold full backing for user balances, echoing concerns from past scandals like FTX. South Korean regulators have launched an investigation, which could lead to stricter oversight on exchange operations.

This comes at a precarious time for Bitcoin, which has been reeling from a recent dip that erased much of the gains following President Donald Trump’s election victory in November 2024. Trump’s pro-crypto stance had initially buoyed the market, but ongoing volatility reminds investors of the asset’s inherent risks. Bithumb’s mishap amplifies those dangers, showing how even established players can falter spectacularly.

While Bithumb insists it was a simple mistake, some observers speculate it could reveal systemic flaws. There’s no concrete evidence of foul play, but history teaches us that dismissed “conspiracies” in finance—like hidden leverage or insider manipulations—sometimes prove true. For now, the facts point to incompetence rather than malice, but the episode demands accountability.

Users affected by the freeze and volatility deserve more than apologies; they need assurances that such errors won’t recur. Bithumb’s promise to self-fund losses is a start, but rebuilding confidence will require transparency about internal controls and reserves.

In the end, this $40 billion fiasco serves as a stark reminder: In crypto, where decentralization is the ideal, centralized exchanges remain a weak link. Investors should weigh the convenience against the risks, and regulators must step up to prevent the next blunder from becoming a catastrophe.

YOUR SHAW AND MOHAWK CARPETING MAY BE POISONING YOUR HOME AND FAMILY LIFE! BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY SUBSIDIARY COULD FACE BILLIONS IN FUTURE CLAIMS

Inside America’s carpet capital: an empire and its toxic legacy

Covering the world in carpet came with a cost no one wants to pay

Bob Shaw glared at the executives from the chemical giant 3M across the table from him. He held up a carpet sample and pointed at the logo for Scotchgard on the back.

“That’s not a logo,” fumed Shaw, CEO of the world’s largest carpet company, one attendee later recalled. “That’s a target.”

SHAW IS A BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY, INC., WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY.

gGREG ABEL, CEO BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY, INC.

GREG ABEL, CEO OF BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY, INC.

Weeks earlier, 3M Company announced it would reformulate its signature stain-resistance brand under pressure from the Environmental Protection Agency because of human health and environmental concerns.

Mills like Shaw’s had been using Scotchgard in carpet production, releasing its chemical ingredients into the environment for decades. And on a massive scale: The shrewd CEO built Shaw Industries from a family firm in Dalton, Georgia, into a globally dominant carpet maker worth billions.

“I got 15 million of these out in the marketplace,” Shaw told his 3M visitors. “What am I supposed to do about that?”

AGING CHAIRMAN WARREN BUFFETT OF BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY, INC.

Shaw Industries is indeed facing major PFAS‑related litigation tied to land and water contamination around Dalton, Georgia — but whether liabilities reach “billions” is not yet established in court. The city of Dalton has already filed a federal lawsuit directly against Shaw Industries over PFAS contamination.

Below is a clear, structured breakdown of what is known from current reporting and litigation.

 

What We Know About Shaw Industries’ Potential Liability

1. Shaw Industries is directly named in PFAS contamination lawsuits

  • The City of Dalton, Georgia filed a federal lawsuit against Shaw Industries on December 10, 2024, alleging widespread PFAS contamination in municipal wastewater systems.
  • PFAS (“forever chemicals”) were used for decades in the carpet industry for stain‑resistant treatments (e.g., Scotchgard).

2. The contamination is well‑documented across Northwest Georgia

Investigations by AP, PBS Frontline, and Georgia Public Broadcasting show:

  • PFAS from carpet manufacturing wastewater entered the Conasauga River, soil, and drinking water systems downstream of Dalton.
  • University of Georgia testing found some of the highest PFAS levels in surface water in the region.
  • PFAS contamination has been ongoing since the 1970s, tied to carpet mills including Shaw.

3. Are the potential liabilities “in the billions”?

There is no public court finding yet assigning a dollar figure to Shaw’s liability. However:

  • PFAS litigation nationwide (e.g., 3M, DuPont) has resulted in multi‑billion‑dollar settlements.
  • Dalton’s lawsuit is still in early stages, but the scope of contamination (municipal systems, rivers, soil, and potentially human exposure) suggests theoretical exposure could be very large.
  • Reporting describes the region’s PFAS legacy as “decades of contamination,” which often leads to long‑tail health and environmental claims.

Conclusion:
While no court has yet determined that Shaw owes “billions,” the scale of contamination and the precedent from other PFAS cases make major financial exposure plausible, depending on how litigation evolves.

 

4. Is Berkshire Hathaway (as parent) responsible?

Shaw Industries is a wholly owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway.
Parent‑company liability depends on:

  • Corporate structure
  • Degree of operational control
  • Whether plaintiffs attempt to pierce the corporate veil
  • Environmental statutes that may impose direct or derivative liability

As of now, lawsuits target Shaw Industries directly, not Berkshire Hathaway. No public filings indicate Berkshire itself has been named as a defendant.

 

5. Health Claims: What’s Alleged?

PFAS exposure is associated with:

  • Increased cancer risk
  • Thyroid disease
  • Immune system effects
  • Developmental issues

The lawsuits and investigations allege:

  • PFAS from carpet manufacturing entered drinking water systems
  • Residents and workers may have elevated PFAS levels in blood

These claims are still being litigated and not yet adjudicated.

A 3M executive replied that he didn’t know. Shaw threw the sample at him and left the room.

The answer to Shaw’s Scotchgard question from that moment in 2000 would be the same as that of the broader industry. Carpet makers kept using closely related chemical alternatives for years, even after scientific studies and regulators warned of their accumulation in human blood and possible health effects. Customers expected stain resistance; nothing worked better than the family of chemicals known as PFAS.

A lack of state and federal regulations allowed carpet companies and their suppliers to legally switch among different versions of these stain-and-soil resistant products. Meanwhile, the local public utility in Dalton responsible for ensuring safe drinking water coordinated with carpet executives in private meetings that would effectively shield their companies from oversight.

Year after year, the chemicals traveled in water discarded during manufacturing from mills across northwest Georgia, eventually reaching a river system that provides drinking water to hundreds of thousands of people in Georgia and eastern Alabama.

The pollution is so bad some researchers have identified the region as one of the nation’s PFAS hot spots. Today, the consequences can be found everywhere. PFAS, often called forever chemicals because they can take decades or more to break down, are in the water and the soil.

They’re in the dust on floors where children crawl, the local fish and wildlife, and as ongoing research has shown, the people.

Doctors have few answers for those like Dolly Baker who live downriver from Dalton’s carpet plants. She recently learned her blood has extraordinarily high PFAS levels.

“I feel like, I don’t know, almost like there’s a blanket over me, smothering me that I can’t get out from under,” she said. “It’s just, you’re trapped.”

An investigation by newsrooms including The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Associated Press and FRONTLINE (PBS) has revealed how the economic engine that sustained northwest Georgia contaminated the area and neighboring states, too. Downriver from Dalton, AL.com found cities in Alabama are struggling to remove PFAS from drinking water. And in South Carolina, The Post and Courier traced a local watchdog’s discovery of forever chemicals to a river by a Shaw factory.

The full story of Georgia’s power structures prioritizing a prized industry over public health is only now emerging through dozens of interviews and thousands of pages of court records from lawsuits against the industry and its chemical suppliers. Those records, including testimony from key executives, emails and other internal documents, detail how carpet companies benefited from chemistry and regulatory inaction to keep using forever chemicals.

All the while, the mills still hummed.

Pointing fingers in a company town

A sign welcomes Dalton’s visitors to the “Carpet Capital of the World.”

Fleets of semitrucks stamped with company logos rumble out of behemoth warehouses. Textiles have employed generations here, propelling the city from 19th-century cotton mills into a manufacturing hub — and the region into a supplier of carpet to the globe.

The durability that makes PFAS so good at protecting carpets from spilled tomato sauce and muddy boots lets them survive in the environment. It also makes them dangerous for humans. Because they bind to a protein in human blood and absorb into some organs, PFAS linger.

A welcome sign reading “Carpet Capital of the World” is displayed in Dalton, Ga., about 80 miles northwest of Atlanta, on Wednesday, Nov. 26, 2025. (Hyosub Shin/Atlanta Journal-Constitution via AP)

The blood of nearly all Americans has some amount of the chemicals, which have been used in a variety of consumer products: nonstick cookware, waterproof sunscreen, dental floss, microwave popcorn bags.

Few industries used them as much as carpet did in northwest Georgia. While huge amounts were needed for stain resistance on an industrial scale, minuscule amounts — the equivalent of less than a drop in an Olympic-sized swimming pool — can make drinking water a health risk. For certain PFAS, U.S. regulators now say no level is safe to drink.

More than a year before the Scotchgard announcement in 2000, 3M informed Shaw Industries and its biggest competitor, Mohawk Industries Inc., that it was finding Scotchgard’s chemical in human blood and that it stayed in the environment, 3M records show.

Carpet executives have long insisted they are not to blame. They point out that 3M and fellow chemical manufacturer DuPont assured them their products were safe, for decades hiding internal studies that were finding harm to the environment, animals and people.

Shaw and Mohawk both said they relied on and complied with regulators and stopped using PFAS in U.S. carpet production in 2019.

In an interview, a Shaw executive said the company acted in good faith as it worked hard to exit PFAS as quickly as suitable substitutes could be found.

“Hindsight is 20/20,” said Kellie Ballew, Shaw’s vice president of environmental affairs. “I don’t think that we can call into question our intentions. I think Shaw had every good intention along the way.”

Shaw in a follow-up statement said it complied with its wastewater permits and took guidance from chemical companies, some of which “instructed Shaw to put spills of product into the public sewer system.”

Mohawk declined an interview request, instead referring to a 2024 filing in its lawsuit against chemical companies: “For decades, DuPont and 3M sold their carpet treatment products to Mohawk without disclosing the actual or potential presence of PFAS in their products.”

Later, in response to detailed questions, Mohawk attorney Jason Rottner wrote that, “Any PFAS contamination issues in northwest Georgia are a problem of the chemical manufacturers’ making.”

Shaw Industries, based in Dalton, and Mohawk Industries Inc., based in Calhoun, dominate the carpet manufacturing business in northwest Georgia. (Hyosub Shin/AJC)

Now, uncertainty and feelings of betrayal are boiling across the region. Communities fear their drinking water is unsafe and local governments say the problem is too vast for them to fix alone.

In Washington, Republicans and Democrats alike have been slow to act. Under President Joe Biden, the Environmental Protection Agency in 2024 established the first PFAS drinking water protections. The Trump administration has announced plans to roll back some and delay enforcement of others.

The agency declined interview requests but in a statement said it is committed to combating PFAS contamination to protect human health and the environment, without causing undue burden to industry.

Georgia’s regulatory system has done little to scrutinize PFAS and depends mostly on industry to self-report chemical spills, imposing modest penalties when companies do. The Georgia Environmental Protection Division, which declined an interview request, said it “relies on the expertise of” the EPA.

Meanwhile, carpet makers still can’t seem to shake PFAS. Just last year, EPA concluded “PFAS have been and continue to be used” by the industry, based on wastewater testing. The agency did not name companies and said it’s unclear whether the chemicals were from current or prior use.

The mess in northwest Georgia has led to a series of lawsuits over the past decade with hundreds of millions of dollars at stake.

Buried in this avalanche of litigation, finger-pointing and politics are the people who live here. They have been forced to navigate a public health and economic crisis of a magnitude still not fully understood.

“They ought to have to clean this land up,” Faye Jackson said, referring to carpet companies. A former industry worker, she raised her family in a house next to a polluted river and has elevated PFAS levels in her blood. “They ought to have to pay for it.”

The creek ran blood red

Lisa Martin watched the creek beside the Mohawk Industries mill run red with carpet dye.

It was one of her first days as a planning manager at Mohawk in 2005, and she tried to hide her unease as the dye runoff turned the water into what looked like blood.

The red she saw in Drowning Bear Creek had come from the nearby dyehouse, where carpets got their colors. There, machines whirred as workers sloshed around in rubber boots in ankle-deep dyewater, reminding Martin of fishermen. The acrid odor made her eyes tear up.

A recent California transplant at the time, Martin recalled her initial culture shock.

“At a gut level, you know it’s not right. And unfortunately, when you try to raise the flag and everybody’s like, ‘Well, that’s just the way it is,’” Martin said in an interview.

“I became complacent.”

Like Shaw, Mohawk is based in northwest Georgia and is among the largest carpet companies in the world. The industry supported the entire community, employing someone in what seems like every family. Martin realized carpet was in the region’s DNA.

Martin said the chemical runoff was routine during her 20 years at Mohawk, which ended with her 2024 retirement. Sometimes, when the company dyed carpets blue, the water in the creek would be blue, too. One spill that turned the creek purple for a mile downstream killed thousands of fish, records show.

Mohawk’s attorney called such spills “rare instances” that were promptly reported and said there is no evidence any spills directly discharged PFAS.

In the dyehouse, what neither Martin nor the workers could detect were the colorless, odorless compounds also included in the wastewater: forever chemicals. Machines bathed the carpets in these soil-and-stain blockers, and what didn’t stick washed away.

For decades, Mohawk’s and Shaw’s mills sent PFAS-polluted wastewater through sewer pipes to the local Dalton Utilities plants for treatment that did not remove the chemicals. Much of the tainted water ended up in the Conasauga River.

Both Shaw and Mohawk said they operated in accordance with permits issued by Dalton Utilities. The utility said it takes direction from federal and state regulators, who have not prohibited PFAS in industrial wastewater.

The Conasauga watershed is filled with lush green pastures, creeks and tributaries that help fuel the water-hungry industry. The river’s waters emerge out of Georgia’s Blue Ridge Mountains and eventually flow southwest, past Dalton, Calhoun and Rome, and then into Alabama.

his northwest Georgia city is known as the Carpet Capital of the World.

Carpet industry facilities like these are prominent fixtures here.

After decades of PFAS being disposed in wastewater, the chemicals have made their way into the Conasauga River.

Which transports PFAS into the environment and other communities downstream.

Residents downriver from the mills didn’t know about the chemicals running through their towns. But the industry’s top leaders did.

PFAS is a catchall term for a group of thousands of related synthetic compounds also known as fluorochemicals. They have been fundamental to the carpet business since the 1970s, as market demand for stain resistance transformed the industry, and carpet makers began buying millions of pounds. In the mid-1980s, the introduction of DuPont’s Stainmaster, accompanied by a successful marketing blitz, further established these products as essential.

Neither DuPont nor its related chemical companies that supplied PFAS provided comment for this story.

The carpet industry used so much PFAS that Dalton’s mills became the largest combined emitters of the chemicals among 3M’s U.S. customers, according to a 1999 internal 3M study that looked at 38 industrial locations.

Before 3M had pulled Scotchgard, leading to Bob Shaw’s showdown in the spring of 2000, both Shaw Industries and Mohawk had been privy to inside information that PFAS were accumulating in human blood. Bob Shaw did not respond to requests for comment.

In late 1998 and early 1999, 3M held a series of meetings with carpet executives to disclose its blood-study research, according to 3M’s internal meeting notes from court records.

“When we started finding the chemical in everybody’s blood, one of the biggest worries was Dalton, because we knew how sloppy they were,” Rich Purdy, a 3M toxicologist who alerted the EPA to his company’s hiding of PFAS’ dangers, said in an interview.

Notes by a 3M employee from a January 1999 meeting said Mohawk executives did not express grave concerns about the revelations. “No real sense of Mohawk problem/responsibility,” 3M noted. “If it’s good enough for 3M, it’s good enough for Mohawk.” Mohawk’s attorney said of the meetings over two decades ago that 3M assured the company its chemicals were safe.

At another meeting that January, Shaw executives were “concerned but quiet,” with one executive expressing he “felt plaintiffs’ attorneys would be involved immediately,” according to 3M’s notes. Shaw Industries maintains it learned of the concerns about Scotchgard at the same time everyone else did.

In follow-up letters to top executives with Shaw and Mohawk later that month, 3M noted the company’s efforts were guided by the idea that reducing exposure “to a persistent chemical is the prudent and responsible thing to do” while emphasizing current evidence did not show human health effects.

“We trust that you appreciate the delicate nature of this information and its potential for misuse,” the letters said. “We ask that you treat it accordingly.”

3M then asked for access to Shaw and Mohawk mills to see if they were handling the chemicals safely, records show. Those internal reports, produced in 1999, would fault how carpet companies handled PFAS products, exposing workers and the environment, according to court records.

The next year, 3M and EPA announced concerns about Scotchgard.

The day of the announcement, the director of EPA’s Chemical Control Division sent an email to his colleagues and counterparts in other countries calling the key ingredient in Scotchgard an “unacceptable technology” and a “toxic chemical.” The email said the compound should be eliminated “to protect human health and the environment from potentially severe long-term consequences.”

3M declined an interview request. In a statement, the company said it has stopped all PFAS manufacturing and has invested $1 billion in water treatment at its facilities. “3M has taken, and will continue to take, actions to address PFAS manufactured prior to the phase out,” the company said.

In 2000, the year 3M announced it was pulling Scotchgard, Mohawk logged more than $3.4 billion in net sales. Shaw Industries reported $4.2 billion.

EPA would not issue its first provisional health advisories for nearly another decade. Absent federal guidance, the carpet industry could legally continue to use these products.

Despite accumulating health and environmental concerns, federal law at the time did not let EPA ban any chemical without “enormous evidence” of harm, said Betsy Southerland, a former director of the agency’s water protection division who spent over three decades there.

“So we were really hamstrung at the time,” said Southerland, who has become a critic of EPA.

At Mohawk, Lisa Martin was not an executive making decisions about PFAS, she said, but her time at the company weighs on her still.

“Unfortunately, I later learned that there are more people that I worked with that were aware of it,” she said. “They were aware of it and didn’t do the things they should have done.”

Years into her tenure, the athletic and inquisitive Martin began getting sick and feeling lethargic. Her doctor said she’d grown nodules on her thyroid, a gland that is a key part of the immune system and which studies have shown forever chemicals can harm.

She had no family history of thyroid issues. It was a mystery to her.

Cozy relationship

Inside the Dalton headquarters of the Carpet and Rug Institute, industry executives and the local water utility conferred in 2004 about EPA’s growing scrutiny.

For several months, EPA representatives had negotiated with Dalton Utilities and the carpet industry through the institute, its influential trade group, over gaining access to their facilities to test the water. Mohawk and Shaw were using DuPont’s Stainmaster and other products, which also contained forever chemicals akin to Scotchgard’s older formulation.

Still, federal regulators worried these compounds were exhibiting similar harmful properties. Dalton Utilities and the carpet industry were uneasy about welcoming in government officials. Companies could not be guaranteed confidentiality and feared test results could lead to “inaccurate public perceptions and inappropriate media coverage,” records show.

The public utility and the carpet industry chose to resist.

Their close ties went back years. Carpet executives have long sat on Dalton Utilities’ board, appointed by the city’s mayor and city council. Fueled by the growth of the carpet industry, Dalton Utilities’ fortunes rose with the industry’s success.

At the carpet institute’s 2004 annual meeting, officials with carpet and chemical companies convened to discuss the EPA’s increasingly aggressive posture. Shaw’s director of technical services, Carey Mitchell, addressed his colleagues. He was blunt. No company would allow testing.

“Dalton Utilities has said not no, but hell no,” Mitchell said, according to notes made by a 3M attendee. Mitchell did not respond to requests for comment.

In response to questions for this story, Dalton Utilities declined an interview request but said it and the carpet industry “have always operated independently of one another” and that the EPA testing request was informal.

The carpet institute declined an interview request, sending a written statement instead.

“The CRI’s conduct was and continues to be appropriate, lawful, and focused on our customers, communities, and the millions of people who rely on our products every day,” institute President Russ DeLozier said, adding: “Today’s carpet products reflect decades of progress, and The CRI members remain committed to moving forward responsibly.”

The EPA stiff-arm was the latest run-in between Dalton Utilities and federal regulators.

A public water utility’s obligation, above all else, is to ensure clean drinking water. Dalton’s utility had previously gone to criminal lengths to deceive regulators.

In the early 1990s, Dalton Utilities’ staff traced a drop in oxygen levels in its wastewater treatment to stain-resistant chemicals from carpet mills, the utility’s top engineer at the time, Richard Belanger, said in an interview. While the utility didn’t know about PFAS then, something in these chemicals was impacting its ability to process the wastewater, he said. Rather than clamping down on industry, according to Belanger, his bosses ordered him to manipulate pollution figures the utility reported to government regulators.

“I was told, OK, make this work,” Belanger, now retired, said.

In June 1995, EPA investigators interviewed Belanger. He told them Dalton Utilities’ program to clean industrial pollutants was “a sham.” The treatment was so poor, the smell of carpet chemicals carried throughout the utility’s plant, and local creeks were often “purple and foamy,” according to investigators’ notes from the interview.

Two months later, agents with the FBI and EPA raided Dalton Utilities’ offices.

Federal prosecutors charged the utility with violating the Clean Water Act by falsifying wastewater reports, which concealed the full extent of the carpet industry’s pollution. The case did not address PFAS specifically, which was not yet a pollutant of concern for EPA. Dalton Utilities pleaded guilty in 1999 and was fined $1 million. Its CEO was removed.

The utility was also put under federal monitoring in 2001 to ensure it was making key changes to protect the water supply and agreed to pay a $6 million penalty.

The era of legal troubles with the federal government was pivotal, the utility said, adding it “has remained committed to avoiding the issues that led to those proceedings” and is transparent with regulators.

Around the same time, emerging data showed the fluorochemicals used in carpets caused cancer in rats.

The carpet institute’s then-president, Werner Braun, forwarded the rat study to several carpet and chemical executives in a 2002 email, calling the findings a “troubling issue,” records show. Braun, now in his 90s, was unable to comment for this story due to his health, his wife said.

In preparing to respond to Braun, a 2002 email shows DuPont officials planned to explain that Stainmaster didn’t contain the type of PFAS that was then EPA’s focus. The next year, DuPont would tell carpet companies the opposite, acknowledging the chemical was indeed in Stainmaster. DuPont maintained in later legal proceedings it wasn’t aware until 2003 that Stainmaster contained the chemical.

Despite its success in fending off EPA testing, the industry faced a mounting challenge, and the carpet institute focused on shoring up its influence and image.

At a meeting in the spring of 2004 attended by top executives, the carpet institute decided to solicit donations from company employees for its political action committee “in an effort to submit friendships, gain access, and say thank you to legislators,” according to meeting notes.

Later that year, PFAS made news in a high-profile legal case involving DuPont. The class-action lawsuit brought by residents in West Virginia claimed their water had been contaminated by a nearby chemical plant that used PFAS. Although DuPont said the settlement did not imply legal liability, it agreed to pay $70 million and to establish a health monitoring panel. Some two decades later, Braun was shown the rat study email during a legal deposition.

“I wouldn’t necessarily call it a red flag but a flag, you know, that you might want to be aware of,” he said.

Only years later did people downstream begin to learn the toll.

The river brought the poison

When Marie Jackson’s goats started dying about a year ago, nobody could explain why. Jackson saw it as just another sign something was wrong with her land.

Marie and her mother, Faye Jackson, have lived on their 12 acres near Calhoun for decades. Today they keep mostly to themselves, inseparable, equal parts bickering and loving.

Most days, Marie makes the short drive down a gravel road, Jackson Drive, to her mother’s house to check on her. She tends to Faye’s chickens, mows her grass and drives her to doctor’s appointments. Behind their homes is a rolling stretch of grassy pasture where their cattle graze — and the goats did as well, she said, until they all died.

Past a curtain of trees on the far end of the pasture lies the Conasauga.

Marie, 50, spent her childhood playing and swimming in the muddy river with rocks on the banks that made a good fishing spot. The Jacksons now know the water that sustains their homestead, about 15 miles downstream from Dalton, is contaminated.

Tests of the river by the AJC found levels of what was once a key ingredient in Scotchgard at more than 30 times the proposed EPA limits for drinking water. Tests of Faye’s drinking water well by the AJC and the city of Calhoun found PFAS just under these federal health limits.

Calhoun city officials used that health standard to guide a program designed to address contaminated wells. A 2024 legal settlement between the city and the Southern Environmental Law Center included a condition to test local water. As of August, 30% of private wells tested had levels above the health limit.

Because Faye’s test was just below the cutoff, she does not qualify to receive a filtration system.

Uncertainty about the chemicals continues to permeate every aspect of the Jacksons’ lives. They fear PFAS are behind their declining health. They fear their drinking water. They fear for the health of the cattle and chickens they raise; and for the health of those who may eat them.

“I know they’ve got it in their systems,” Faye said.

Even Marie’s memories are filled with second-guessing. Idyllic scenes of her childhood are now overshadowed by recollections of foam on the river and dead fish. She blames the mills.

The Jacksons, like generations of northwest Georgians, relied on the carpet industry. Both of Marie’s parents worked in the mills: Faye with yarn machines and her dad in the dyehouse. Marie would end up working in carpet, too.

Everyone suspected the work was dangerous. Faye said she’d get headaches from the strong chemical smells. The hours were long. But with the risk came a steady wage.

“Around here, you have to understand the people, that’s all we know, right? That’s all we’ve ever been around,” Marie said, fidgeting with her plastic water bottle. “It’s like you don’t think. It’s routine. You go in, you know your job, you do your job, you go home.”

Faye’s failing health eventually forced her to stop working. Today she drinks water she buys from the store.

In 2022, Faye’s husband, Robert, died after struggling with several illnesses. She now wonders whether decades of PFAS exposure was to blame. And Marie has nodules growing on her thyroid.

The Jacksons long suspected they had forever chemicals in their blood. With their consent, the AJC commissioned testing last fall and the mother and daughter finally learned the truth. Their PFAS levels were above the safety threshold outlined by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.

“They’ve poisoned us,” Faye said.

The forever chemicals found in their blood

PFAS blood levels higher than 2 ng/mL have a potential for adverse health effects, according to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.  Studies have connected PFAS exposure to increased risks of thyroid  disease, immune system disorders and certain cancers.

Marie Jackson

PFAS BLOOD LEVEL

6 ng/mL

Faye Jackson

PFAS BLOOD LEVEL

6.5 ng/mL

Lisa Martin

PFAS BLOOD LEVEL

19.6 ng/mL

Dolly Baker

PFAS BLOOD LEVEL

1336.5 ng/mL

Among the highest ever recorded

In 2006, the carpet industry and Dalton Utilities faced a new dilemma.

University of Georgia researchers were testing the Conasauga for PFAS, and early results seen by carpet companies showed high levels. Shaw Industries began conducting its own tests, which confirmed UGA’s results: PFAS coursed through the river.

As Georgia’s scientists worked on their PFAS study, the majority of outside experts on an EPA advisory panel determined the PFAS associated with DuPont’s Stainmaster was “likely to be carcinogenic.” In 2005, the year prior, EPA and DuPont settled a claim that the chemical company failed to report for decades what it knew about the risks. At $10.25 million, it was then the largest penalty ever obtained under a federal environmental law. DuPont did not admit liability.

The university’s study, eventually published in 2008, made headlines. The UGA researchers reported PFAS levels in the Conasauga were “among the highest ever recorded in surface water” like a river or a lake. Not just in the United States, but worldwide.

Journalists from a local newspaper also began asking questions about the study and the earlier decision by the utility and the industry to deny regulators access for testing.

A Chattanooga Times Free Press reporter was “hot on the trail” of a story, wrote Denise Wood, at the time a Mohawk environmental executive and Dalton City Council member, in a February 2008 email to Dalton Utilities CEO Don Cope.

One of the university researchers told the paper that UGA’s test results were “staggeringly high.” Cope did not respond to requests by the AJC and AP for an interview, and Wood declined to comment.

At the carpet institute, officials rushed to create a crisis management team, internal records and emails show. The industry downplayed the UGA study and broader concerns about PFAS.

“In our society today, it is absolutely known that you report the presence of some chemical and everybody gets all up and arms,” the institute’s head, Braun, told reporters.

UGA’s study had an impact. The EPA returned in 2009. Unlike before, the agency now had provisional health advisory limits for certain PFAS compounds, offering regulators some enforcement authority.

This new scrutiny would uncover a major source of pollution along the Conasauga.

On the edge of Dalton, the Loopers Bend “land application system” occupies more than 9,600 acres on the river’s banks. The public utility had long hosted hunts for wildlife at the forested site, which is crisscrossed by a network of 19,000 sprinklers that sprayed PFAS-laden wastewater for decades.

The Dalton Utilities’ land application system in Chatsworth, Ga., on the banks of the Conasauga River, is used to dispose of industrial wastewater from the carpet industry, seen on Tuesday, Aug. 23, 2022. (Hyosub Shin/Atlanta Journal-Constitution via AP)

For years, the site’s design allowed runoff to leak into the river, according to EPA’s former water programs enforcement chief. The wastewater was so poorly filtered the ground felt like walking on “shag carpet” due to all the fibers, the EPA official, Scott Gordon, said in an interview. He noted gullies cut by wastewater led directly to creeks and the river.

Because Dalton Utilities distributed the treated wastewater over land instead of discharging it into the river directly, it didn’t need a federal Clean Water Act permit. After EPA inspected and saw the conditions, the agency ordered the local utility to apply for one. The state, however, had approval power in Georgia and rejected the application, saying the permit wasn’t necessary.

For 40 years, Dalton Utilities has operated a massive land application system in a forested area outside the city.

Most PFAS discarded by the carpet industry wound up here, sprayed onto the land via a vast sprinkler system.

Millions of gallons of PFAS-laden wastewater were sprayed on the site. The pollutants seeped into the soil and spread to the Conasuaga River.

Upstream from the sprayfields, federal testing in 2019 found that levels of PFAS were safe or nonexistant (below 4 parts per trillion).

Downstream, levels were measured above 200 parts per trillion, well above what the EPA considers safe.

Over decades, the industry’s forever chemicals have kept flowing further downstream, threatening drinking water for hundreds of thousands of people.

Today, Loopers Bend remains a significant source of PFAS in the Conasauga.

The EPA worked with Dalton Utilities to upgrade the site starting in 1999, but it would be years before the agency would require testing of the Conasauga’s water.

In 2009, testing reports submitted by Dalton Utilities to EPA confirmed what the UGA research had already shown: Forever chemicals had infiltrated the region. In addition to river and well water, deer and turkey taken from Loopers Bend had PFAS in their muscles and organs.

Dalton Utilities said that levels of PFAS in its wastewater and the compost it provided to enrich soil for farmers and homeowners were not a health risk. PFAS were everywhere and a “societal problem,” and not one Dalton Utilities could solve, the utility’s lawyer wrote the EPA in 2010.

Nonetheless, the utility agreed to restrict its compost distribution and test wastewater from a quarter of its industrial customers annually.

As later testing showed, the chemicals would persist for years.

A health reckoning

Why is the doctor calling? Dolly Baker wondered as she rinsed the hair of a client at her salon “Dolled Up” in Calhoun. Dr. Dana Barr’s number had popped up on her cellphone.

Baker had taken part in a 2025 Emory University study of northwest Georgia, where she was one of 177 people who had their blood tested. Now one of the study’s lead scientists was on the phone.

Barr, an analytical chemist with epidemiological experience, had been mailing study participants about the results. When she saw Baker’s test data, she dialed her phone.

Baker, a lifelong Calhoun resident now in her 40s, had PFAS levels hundreds of times above the U.S. average.

“I don’t want to alarm you, but we’re just trying to figure out what can be causing this,” Barr told her, Baker later recalled. “I suggest you talk to your doctor and let them know that there are certain cancers that can come into play later.”

Baker was speechless.

She walked back to her wash station and slowly started rinsing her client’s hair again, quietly processing what this all meant. How did she have such high levels? Her mind raced.

What was she supposed to do about the forever chemicals in her body?

unfortunately, there is no easy answer,” Baker said Barr told her.

Emory tested Baker’s water and hair products, but the tests came back low. Almost a year after learning her blood test results, Baker is no closer to knowing why her levels are so high.

She said she’s frustrated by the lack of action and leadership, especially after years of testing and community meetings to discuss the problem.

“You know, people go in other countries to help them get clean water,” Baker said, “and do we have clean water?”

Barr, who spent years at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studying environmental toxicants, realized there was too little data to grasp the problem in northwest Georgia. She helped launch Emory’s study to understand the extent of contamination in human blood.

Three out of four residents tested by Emory had PFAS levels that warrant medical screening, according to clinical guidelines from the National Academy of Sciences.

“People in Rome and in Calhoun tended to have higher levels of PFAS than most of the people in the U.S. population,” Barr said.

Mohawk and Shaw say they stopped using older fluorochemicals around 2008. These were known by chemists as “long-chain” or C8 because each had eight or more carbon atoms on their molecular chains. Scotchgard, Stainmaster and Daikin’s Unidyne have since been reformulated without these C8 compounds.

Chemical manufacturers made new “short-chain” or C6 versions with six carbon atoms. Daikin U.S. Corp. said in a statement it “is committed, as it always has been, to regulatory compliance, evolving PFAS science, and global standards.”

Despite the chemical variations, short-chain PFAS had the stain-busting and water-repellant traits of the older chemicals. Scientists in the 2010s also expressed concerns that the newer formulations might carry similar environmental and health risks. Some began calling them “regrettable substitutes.”

After saying it got out of PFAS completely in 2019, Shaw has struggled to remove the chemicals from its facilities. The company said the compounds have so many applications they appear elsewhere in the machines and processes it takes to produce carpet.

“You can’t just say you stopped using them and you’re done,” said Ballew, Shaw’s vice president for environmental affairs.

She said the company installed filters at some mills and sleuthed out PFAS sources from its supply chain to remove them. Shaw developed a testing technology and shared it with suppliers so they could do the same, offering it as an example of strong corporate citizenry from a company with roots in the region.

“Shaw didn’t quit looking, and that’s what I’m really proud of,” Ballew said. “That’s the story. It’s not how long it took us to get here.”

Worries, but few answers

Down the road from Baker’s hair salon, Dr. Katherine Naymick operates a private medical practice. She’s practiced in Calhoun since moving there in 1996.

Naymick’s office sits in a small strip mall off Calhoun’s main road — a tidy, white-walled office decorated with retro medical equipment. She’s been mystified that many of her young patients’ thyroid glands had just “quit on them.” Similarly, she said her patients also had higher rates of endocrine cancers than the national average.

Doctors have few tools to address patient concerns, as the understanding of these chemicals’ links to health effects is still evolving. One resource is guidance the National Academy published in 2022 for physicians, which cites the “alarming” pervasiveness of PFAS contamination.

That guidance recommended doctors offer blood testing to patients who live in high exposure areas. The panel also cautioned the results could raise questions about links to possible health effects that cannot be easily answered.

People like Dolly Baker are at higher risk of kidney or other cancers, and thyroid problems, research shows.

When Naymick started in Calhoun, chemical manufacturers knew about the potential dangers of forever chemicals, but the public did not. The doctor said she did her best to treat her patients while feeling powerless to understand why they were so sick.

Then studies began to emerge in the 2000s showing high levels of forever chemicals in the Conasauga. In the 2010s, the first large health studies tied PFAS to issues with childhood development and the immune system.

Naymick enrolled in environmental medicine training, which focuses on patients’ exposure to contaminants, among other factors. Through study, Naymick gained tools to investigate the area’s heavy industrial footprint she long suspected. She started looking for clues, including blood tests, that might help explain her patients’ problems. Soon she zeroed in on forever chemicals.

In 2025, Dr. Barr’s group at Emory used Dr. Naymick’s clinic to draw blood. Naymick now thinks all her patients should get tested because of their high chance of exposure. But insurers rarely cover PFAS tests, and many of her clients can’t afford the hundreds of dollars they cost.

As they wait, the full extent of the human toll in northwest Georgia remains unknown.

CRYPTO CURRENCIES HAVE NO VALUE, AND FINALLY DUMMY INVESTORS ARE FINDING OUT THE HARD WAY

Bitcoin drops below $67,000 as sell-off intensifies and pessimism grows about crypto’s function

WE WERE INTRIGUED HOW MANY “INVESTORS” thought that buying and paying for AIR was a great deal!
  • It’s the first time bitcoin has fallen below $67,000 since November 2024.
  • Some analysts said $70,000 was the key level to watch and a convincing break below there could lead the token to suffer even greater losses.
  • The latest downturn comes as investor confidence in bitcoin’s utility as a store of value, inflation hedge and digital currency falters.
  • “If we fail to hold it, a move toward” the $60,000 to $65,000 range “becomes quite likely,” said James Butterfill, head of research at Coinshares.
CHONGQING, CHINA  NOVEMBER 21: In this photo illustration, two gold-colored Bitcoin tokens are placed on a screen displaying a declining cryptocurrency price chart on November 21, 2025, in Chongqing, China. Bitcoin has recently dropped below the mid-US$80,000 level, extending a multi-day sell-off driven by rising interest-rate expectations, weakening market structure, and renewed movement of long-dormant supply. (Photo illustration by Cheng Xin/Getty Images)
Cheng Xin | Getty Images

Bitcoin sank below $67,000 on Thursday as investor confidence continued to falter in the asset once hailed as “digital gold” and a unique store of value. —

Digital assets, including bitcoin, have fallen deeper into the red as investors re-assess the practical utility of a token that has been championed not only as a hedge against inflation and macroeconomic uncertainties but also as an alternative to fiat currencies and traditional safe-havens such as gold.

That hasn’t panned out lately, since bitcoin peaked just north of $126,000 in early October.

On Thursday, bitcoin was last down to $67,675, its lowest since since November 2024. The cryptocurrency broke below $70,000 earlier in the session Thursday and then the selling increased. The cryptocurrency is down 20% this week alone.

This steady selling in our view signals that traditional investors are losing interest, and overall pessimism about crypto is growing,” Deutsche Bank analyst Marion Laboure said Wednesday in a note to clients.

Growing investor caution comes as many of the sensationalized claims about bitcoin have failed to materialize. The token has largely traded in the same direction as other risk-on assets, such as stocks, particularly during recent geopolitical and macroeconomic flare ups in Venezuela, the Middle East and Europe, and its adoption as a form of payment for goods and services has been minimal.

Bitcoin underperforming gold

Bitcoin is down nearly 30% over the past year, while gold has surged 68% in the same period..WHY IS IT NOW DOWN TO ZERO!!!?????

Other cryptocurrencies are cratering too. Ether has pulled back 23% this week, on track for its worst week since November 2022, when it slumped 24%. Solana hit $88.42 on Thursday, about a two-year low and off 24% on the week.

Some traders have suggested $70,000 is a key level to watch and a break below that could trigger further declines for bitcoin.

James Butterfill, head of research at Coinshares, said $70,000 is shaping up as a “key psychological level,” adding that “if we fail to hold it, a move toward” the $60,000 to $65,000 range “becomes quite likely.”

The price of bitcoin over the last year.

The latest move in bitcoin comes amid a worsening sell-off in U.S. tech stocks. The State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF dropped 2.8% Wednesday, one day after losing 2.2%.

Meanwhile, precious metals continue to be volatile too, with silver plunging again on Thursday and gold under pressure.

Forced liquidations — when traders’ positions are automatically sold as bitcoin hits a set price — continue to weigh on markets. As of Thursday, more than $2 billion in long and short positions in cryptocurrencies have been liquidated this week, according to data from Coinglass.

Bitcoin has been on a steady decline for more than three months, and is now more than 45% below its October high. Other cryptocurrencies, including ether and XRP, have fallen even more.

”[The] straight line bull run that a lot of people expected hasn’t really materialized yet. Bitcoin isn’t trading on hype anymore, the story has lost a bit of that plot, it is trading on pure liquidity and capital flows,” Maja Vujinovic, CEO of digital assets at FG Nexus, told CNBC’s “Worldwide Exchange.”

Downside crypto volatility will persist as liquidations, falling equities hit sector: Citi's Saunders

VIDEO03:22
Downside crypto volatility will persist as liquidations, falling equities hit sector: Citi’s Saunders

Institutional demand reverses

While many in the crypto market have previously credited large institutional investors with supporting the price of bitcoin, now it is those same participants who appear to be selling.

“Institutional demand has reversed materially,” CryptoQuant said in a report on Wednesday.

U.S. exchange-traded funds, which purchased 46,000 bitcoin this time last year, are net sellers in 2026, CryptoQuant said.

The report notes other worrying signs. “Bitcoin has broken below its 365-day moving average for the first time since March 2022 and has declined 23% in the 83 days since the breakdown — worse than the early 2022 bear phase,” CryptoQuant analysts said.

A moving average tracks the price of an asset over a set number of periods, smoothing out short-term price fluctuations to identify trends.

The latest leg lower in bitcoin suggests “potential downside toward the $70K–$60K range,” CryptoQuant said.

AUTOMAKERS LOSE OVER $100 BILLION ON EV’s DUE TO CRAZY GOVERNMENT MANDATES TO MANUFACTURE ELECTRIC CARS

EV Bloodbath: Carmakers Suffer Face-Melting Losses as Buyers Flee, Credits End

(Zero Hedge)—The push into electric vehicles was always bullshit, sold by the left as the move that would future-proof America’s and Europe’s legacy automakers and save the planet – and anyone not buying it was subject to a guilt trip from smug, private-jet-owning elitists. Instead, EVs are now looking like one of the costliest strategic blunders in modern automotive history. Major U.S. and European brands – including Ford, General Motors, Stellantis, Mercedes-Benz, and Volkswagen – have collectively burned through nearly a staggering $114 billion on EV ventures between 2022 and late 2025, according to an analysis by Robert Bryce in the The New York Post.

Ford, Lucid, and Rivian report EV losses directly in their SEC filings, while GM, Stellantis, Mercedes, and Volkswagen do not break out EV performance, forcing analysts to rely on conservative estimates drawn from earnings results, write-downs, and public guidance. Among traditional automakers, Ford stands alone in providing clear EV-specific financial reporting, Bryce reports.

Between 2022 and the third quarter of 2025, legacy automakers alone are estimated to have lost roughly $83.6 billion on EV programs, including major write-downs at Ford and GM. EV-only startups Lucid and Rivian account for another $30.2 billion in red ink, with total losses across seven automakers approach $114 billionThe newspaper said it excluded Tesla from their analysis because a significant portion of its profits comes from regulatory credit sales and non-auto businesses.

Legacy automakers poured tens of billions into new factories, battery deals, and all-electric lineups, often under intense regulatory pressure and incentive schemes under the Biden administration that were premised on rapid, mass adoption that never fully materialized.

From 2015 through early 2024, automakers announced more than $188 billion in U.S. EV and battery investments, with spending accelerating after passage of the so-called Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, according to an Environmental Defense Fund report. GM pledged $35 billion through 2025, Ford committed $50 billion through 2026, and Volkswagen launched a $131 billion global electrification and digital push over five years.

But consumers didn’t follow Washington’s timetable.

In the U.S., EV sales briefly spiked in Q3 2025 as buyers rushed to capture the $7,500 federal tax credit before it expired on September 30. That incentive-driven surge pushed quarterly sales above 437,000 units and lifted EV market share to 10.5%, according to Cox Automotive. Once the subsidy disappeared, demand collapsed. Q4 sales fell to roughly 234,000 vehicles—a 46% drop from Q3—cutting market share nearly in half. Full-year EV sales for 2025 slipped to about 1.28 million units, marking the first year-over-year decline since 2019, Kelley Blue Book reported at the time.

Meanwhile, high-priced EVs piled up on dealer lots as average transaction prices hovered around $59,000, far above gas-powered alternatives. Range anxiety, uneven charging infrastructure, and cheaper gasoline pushed buyers back toward hybrids, trucks, and SUVs.

European automakers faced a similar reckoning.

Aggressive emissions mandates rammed through by climate-obsessed eurocrats collided with weakening demand and an onslaught of lower-cost Chinese competitors. In 2025, China’s BYD overtook Tesla as the world’s largest EV seller, underscoring how state-backed Chinese firms now dominate global EV volume, BBC reports. As pressure mounted, Volkswagen canceled or delayed multiple EV projects, Mercedes paused or scrapped several U.S.-bound EQ models, and others quietly extended the life of internal-combustion and hybrid platforms while lobbying for regulatory relief.

CHINESE STUDENTS INFILTRATED USA UNIVERSITIES AND POSE SECURITY ISSUES

Chinese students with CCP membership, military links ‘infiltrate’ U.S. universities, watchdog says

Students, or spies? New report warns of “infiltration” of America’s colleges and universities by Chinese students with links to the CCP and blacklisted Chinese companies.

Chinese students and scientists who are members of the Chinese Communist Party, attended schools tied to the Chinese military or worked with companies connected to Beijing’s theft of U.S. technology have “infiltrated” several top American universities, according to a watchdog group report that raises fresh concerns about America’s vulnerabilities to its most fierce adversary.

A conservative non-profit oversight group, the American Accountability Foundation, reported that it found nearly two dozen Chinese academics working at elite U.S. schools and labs “who because of the dual-use threat of their research, close ties to the military research sector in China, and/or clear ties to the Chinese Communist Party should be expelled from the United States or never be re-admitted.”

The research document — titled “Chinese Scientist Infiltration Threat Assessments ” — says that Chinese students working at some of America’s top colleges, often receiving U.S. federal funding (some of it from the Pentagon) to conduct research into advanced technologies have troubling backgrounds which could pose a risk to U.S. national security.

Many Chinese scientists at U.S. institutions have CCP connections

The concerns raised by AAF’s new report include the fact that some of the Chinese scientists ensconced inside American academia and at cutting-edge U.S. labs appear to be members of the CCP and are affiliated with the CCP’s projects aimed at stealing U.S. technological know-how or military secrets, and worked with or for companies which serve the Chinese defense industry.

Some of these Chinese academics have clear links to problematic Chinese firms like Huawei or to China’s notorious Thousand Talents program, of which the FBI said “American businesses, universities, and laboratories should understand the potential risks and illegal conduct incentivized by Chinese talent plans and take steps to safeguard their trade secrets and intellectual property.” At least one of the Chinese scientists appeared to have been employed by the Chinese government while in the U.S.

The schools employing the Chinese scientists named in the AAF report include Harvard University, Carnegie Mellon, Cornell University, Brown University, Purdue University, the University of Wisconsin, Georgia Tech, the University of Florida, the University of Michigan, University of Florida, Penn State University, the Stevens Institute of Technology, Michigan State University, Indiana University, and the University of Southern California, as well as Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

The research areas focused on by these Chinese students — many of whom are receiving U.S. government funding for the lab research they are doing in the U.S. — include unmanned aerial drones, robotics, exoskeletons, artificial intelligence, large language models, viral research into highly-infectious pathogens, advanced materials research, next-gen semiconductors, advanced laser welding, quantum sensing, nuclear materials research, thermal-resilient electronics, electrical grid technologies, pharmaceuticals, applied mathematics, condensed matter physics, and other key areas which could have dual-use military applications.

U.S. is funding research by Chinese students with questionable histories

Funding for many of these Chinese students has come from varied sources such as the Department of Energy, the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, the U.S. Army Research Lab, the Office of Naval Research, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, National Laboratories, and other U.S. federal agencies.

The House Select Committee on the CCP had assessed just last year that “the CCP does not treat overseas study as an apolitical or purely academic exercise” but rather that “under its state-directed technology acquisition strategy, international education is viewed as a key vector for accessing cutting-edge science, engineering, and defense-related knowledge.”

The same House committee also warned about “a pervasive and deeply troubling pattern of U.S. taxpayer-funded research being conducted in collaboration with Chinese entities that are directly tied to China’s defense research and industrial base.”

Thomas Jones, the president of AAF, said in his research firm’s new report that he was warning about the “infiltration of the United States research enterprise by scientists and engineers from the People’s Republic of China.”

Jones argued that “the results are sobering; there are numerous examples of active members of the Chinese Communist Party being appointed to sensitive positions at U.S. universities and Chinese researchers being placed in positions that will allow them to transfer technology and research to the People’s Liberation Army and cultivate relationships with critical defense researchers in the U.S.”

Just the News requested comment from all 21 of the Chinese students named in the AAF report as being potential “threats” to the U.S., with none of the academics responding.

Just the News also requested comment from all the U.S. universities which had most recently employed or currently employ the Chinese scientists.

USC said it would provide a comment, but did not. The University of Florida confirmed one of the Chinese students in question had been at the school but “left UF in 2025 in good standing” without answering further questions. Michigan State said that “any inquiries regarding the employment status of a particular individual at the university must be made through the Freedom of Information Act.” The Stevens Institute said that the Chinese academic in question “was a visiting scholar at Stevens from January 2024 through September 2025” and that “visiting scholars are unpaid and spend their time observing and assisting existing university faculty.”

No other schools responded to a request for comment.

Multiple Chinese students are or have been members of the CCP

The new AAF report revealed that multiple Chinese students now at U.S. universities had been members of the Chinese Communist Party, including holding leadership positions inside the local CCP branches of their Chinese universities. The CCP, a Marxist-Leninist party, won the Chinese civil war under the leadership of Mao Zedong, who ruled the country after establishing the People’s Republic of China in 1949. Some reports say an estimated 65 million Chinese died as a result of Mao’s repeated, merciless attempts to create a new “socialist” China.

Also named in the AAF report was a Chinese scientist who had worked at an American university and who had been a leader within the CCP-controlled China Democratic League (CDL).

The CIA assessed as far back as 1957 that the CDL has “played a leading role under the CCP” in the Chinese government, and argued that “there is little if anything to distinguish between the doctrines of the CDL and CCP.” The CIA said that the CDL “is believed to serve clandestinely the interests of the Chinese Communists in some areas where diplomatic representation is not established and where Communist activities as such would meet with local government opposition.”

The U.S. China Economic and Security Review Commission in 2018 assessed that the CDL was a “United Front-Affiliated Organization.” The House Select Committee on the CCP said that “United Front work is a unique blend of engagement, influence activities, and intelligence operations that the CCP uses to shape its political environment, including to influence other countries’ policy toward the PRC and to gain access to advanced foreign technology.”

The CCP State Council in 2021 praised the CDL, with top CCP officials congratulating the CDL and the State Council, saying that “the CDL has made important contributions to the great cause of China’s revolution, development, and reform, as well as the development of the united front work and the cause of multiparty cooperation.”

The AAF report also highlighted one of the Chinese student’s praise for former CCP leader Deng Xiaoping and current CCP leader Xi Jinping, and pointed out that another Chinese scientist now at a U.S. university underwent a Marxist training program prior to coming to the United States.

Links to the Thousand Talents program aimed at stealing U.S. research

Multiple Chinese students with links to the CCP’s Thousand Talents program also appeared in the AAF report. The DOJ in 2020 stated that “China’s Thousand Talents Plan is one of the most prominent Chinese Talent recruitment plans that are designed to attract, recruit, and cultivate high-level scientific talent in furtherance of China’s scientific development, economic prosperity and national security.”

The DOJ also said that “these talent programs seek to lure Chinese overseas talent and foreign experts to bring their knowledge and experience to China and reward individuals for stealing proprietary information.”

The White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing said in 2018 that “China’s talent recruitment strategically complements China’s efforts to target emerging high technology industries” and that the CCP programs “include the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Hundred Talents Plan.”

The AAF report also showed that a Chinese scientist had links to the CCP’s Hundred Talents program.

The Justice Department in 2020 charged Zhengdong Cheng, a Chinese national, for allegedly seeking to defraud NASA and “leverage NASA grant resources to further the research of Chinese institutions.” The DOJ specifically said the Chinese defendant “participated in the PRC’s Hundred Talents Plan.” Cheng eventually pleaded guilty to lying to Texas A&M University after revealing his working relationship with a Chinese university and at least one business in China. Guangdong, one of the confirmed businesses Cheng was working with, is managed by the People’s Republic of China.

Local outlet KBTX reported that Cheng will not serve any more jail time, as he has already spent 13 months in jail. Cheng was ordered to pay restitution to NASA, in addition to a criminal fine.

The DOJ added: “The Chinese Talent Plans are programs established by the Chinese government to recruit individuals with access to or knowledge of foreign technology or intellectual property. Through these plans, the Chinese government has created a significant financial incentive for foreign, talented individuals to transfer international technology and intellectual property to China, licitly or otherwise.”

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission said in 2020 that “China’s government runs myriad programs to bring Chinese students and scholars living in the United States back to China temporarily to engage in scientific activities relevant to its economic and military modernization” and that “one prominent program” — the Chunhui Program — “targets high-profile Chinese scholars appointed to teaching positions at prominent universities.”

Yet another Chinese scientist working at an American university had been mentored by the now-former director of the Chinese National Office of the Recruitment Program of Global Experts, the AAF report showed.

The Senate Permanent Subcommittee assessed in 2019 that “the Chinese government has refined its centrally organized foreign talent recruitment plans into a strategy to ‘use talent to strengthen the country’ by targeting the specific technology sectors” and said that the “Recruitment Program of Global Experts” was another name for the Thousand Talents program.

“Deep roots in the military and defense industry,” House committee says

The new AAF report also highlighted that numerous Chinese scientists placed in American schools had previously attended Chinese universities with troubling histories, including multiple Chinese schools closely tied to the Chinese military and China’s defense sector.

Some of the Chinese students now in the U.S. had even previously attended Northwestern Polytechnical University and Beihang University — considered to be among the CCP’s so-called “Seven Sons of National Defense.”

The House Select Committee on China assessed in 2024 that the Seven Sons are “leading universities with deep roots in the military and defense industry, subordinate to the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology.” The House committee said the Chinese ministry “drives the Party’s Military-Civil Fusion strategy and the integration of civilian industries and cutting-edge technologies into the PRC’s military and security ecosystems.”

“These universities are ‘defense science, technology, and industry work units’ and play a crucial role in defense research and development,” the House committee added. “As many as half of the PhD graduates from the Seven Sons go on to work in the PRC’s defense sector, and they spend about half of their research budgets on projects with clear military applications.”

A host of the schools previously attended by the Chinese students are also “co-supervised” by China’s State Administration for Science, Technology, and Industry for National Defense (SASTIND). The SASTIND schools attended by the Chinese scientists in the AAF report include Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan University, Xidian University, Dalian University of Technology, Tsinghua University, Peking University, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Sichuan University, and the South China University of Technology.

The House committee said in 2024 that SASTIND is “an arm of the Chinese government whose stated purposes include ‘strengthen[ing] military forces with additional personnel and more advanced equipment’ and which seeks to leverage these universities for defense purposes.”

The Chinese students employed at American universities and highlighted in the AAf report had also attended the Ocean University of China, the Beijing Institute of Nanoenergy and Nanosystems, Nankai University, and the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences. The Ocean University is also on the Pentagon’s blacklist as being among “foreign institutions engaging in problematic activity.”

The House Select Committee on the CCP in 2024 also said the Beijing Institute is a “problematic Chinese institution.”

Nature Magazine assessed that Nankai University was among “the leading collaborators with the People’s Liberation Army” and among the “top five domestic collaborators” with the PLA, with the Chinese Academy of Sciences ranking number one, Peking University as number two, and Nankai coming in at number three.

The University of Chinese Academy of Sciences was added to the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security’s “Unverified List” (UVL) in 2022. The bureau said that “these foreign persons” — including the Chinese university — “are added to the UVL because BIS or federal officials acting on BIS’s behalf were unable to verify their bona fides ( i.e., legitimacy and reliability relating to the end use and end user of items subject to the Export Administration Regulations) through the completion of an end-use check.”

The CCP-led Chinese Academy of Sciences “directly manages” the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, according to Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology. The Bureau of Industry and Security has designated a number of institutes within the Chinese Academy of Sciences, including the Center for Excellence in Quantum Information and Quantum Physics, the Institute of Physics, the Key Laboratory for Quantum Information, the Shanghai Institute of Microsystem and Information Technology, the Institute of Microelectronics, the National Time Service Center, and the Aerospace Information Research Institute.

Blacklisted Huawei operations “contrary to U.S. national security,” Commerce Dep’t says

The new AAF report also pointed out that multiple Chinese students working at American universities had previously collaborated on projects with researchers at the Chinese tech giant Huawei, including working with researchers at the Internal Cybersecurity Lab at Huawei.

The Commerce Department concluded in 2019 that “Huawei is engaged in activities that are contrary to U.S. national security or foreign policy interests and its non-U.S. affiliates pose a significant risk of involvement in activities contrary to the national security of the United States.” The FCC added Huawei to its blacklist as well.

Meng Wanzhou, Huawei’s CFO and daughter of the company’s co-founder, was arrested by Canadian authorities in December 2018 at the request of the U.S., indicted in the Eastern District of New York in January 2019, and charged with bank fraud and wire fraud as well as conspiracy to commit both. She was allowed to walk free by the Biden Administration in 2021.

More students have links to blacklisted Chinese military companies

The AAF report also pointed out that a Chinese scientist now working at an American university had previously worked at the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), a CCP defense conglomerate blacklisted by the U.S. government. The Chinese state-owned military company is considered to be among the largest defense companies in the world.

A key AVIC subsidiary known as the China National Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation, or CATIC, has also been considered a U.S. national security threat since 1990. Then-President George H.W. Bush issued an order in January 1990 that concluded CATIC “might take action that threatens to impair the national security of the United States of America.”

The House select committee on China warned in 1998 about AVIC and its subsidiary CATIC, and the Government Accountability Office in 1996 detailed a scheme by CATIC to get U.S.-based McDonnell Douglas to “co-produce 40 MD-80 and MD-90 aircraft in China for the country’s domestic ‘trunk’ routes.”

CATIC was charged by the Justice Department in 1999 with violating the Export Administration Act (EAA) and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act “regarding details of a 1994 sale of American machining equipment, some of which was diverted to a Chinese military site.”

The Commerce Department said in 2001 that TAL Industries was allegedly part of the “conspiracy” to export machine tools from the U.S. to CATIC.

The State Department said in 2002 that most of the charges related to CATIC were dismissed, but that “TAL Industries Inc., however, was convicted of violating the EAA and was sentenced on May 11, 2001, to five years of corporate probation” and “payment of a $1 million fine.”

Relationships include atomic weapons research

The AVIC website in 2015 made it clear that its business units included “defense” as well as aviation. The “AVIC Evolution” section said the company was the successor to the Chinese government’s Ministry of Aerospace Industry. AVIC has supported Russia during its war with Ukraine. Now-former Chinese defense minister Li Shangfu had previously been a board member of AVIC Avionics Equipment.

AVIC and its subsidiaries were blacklisted by the Pentagon in 2020 for being “Chinese Military Companies Operating in the United States.” AVIC Avionics was also sanctioned by the Treasury Department in 2021 and placed on the “Chinese Military-Industrial Complex Companies List.”

The Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security assessed in 2020 that the Chinese center had been “determined by the U.S. Government to be acting contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States […] on the basis of their procurement of U.S.-origin items for activities contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States.”

The blacklist added that the Chinese center is “operated by, or directly affiliated with, the Chinese Academy of Engineering Physics, which is the technology complex responsible for the research, development and testing of China’s nuclear weapons.”

“AAF’s goal in this research is to take America’s discussion of the threat posed by China academics from somewhat academic macro-level discussions — of which there are plenty — and crystalize it into specific actionable examples of men and women who have infiltrated sensitive parts of the military research infrastructure in the United States and spur policymakers to address the problem,” the AAF report said.