This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

An obstetrician and gynecologist has confirmed in testimony to the U.S. Senate that the figure for the miscarriage deaths following COVID-19 shots, demanded by Biden administration officials for pregnant women, "mirrors the effects of chemical abort drugs."

The stunning news of the threat from the drugs pushed by Joe Biden onto the American public during the China virus pandemic came from Dr. James Thorp, who delivered a "haunting" moment in testimony to the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs.

Thorp explained that women vaccinated during their first trimester suffered an 82% miscarriage rate.

He said, too, that the government knew what it was doing.

He cited an "infamous" Shimabukuro study from the New England Journal of Medicine that claimed a 12.6% miscarriage rate.

"But when you isolate the data for women vaccinated in the first trimester, the miscarriage rate rises to 82%, Dr. Thorp said. This 82% claim remains a topic of debate within the scientific community. If true, 'This figure mirrors the effects of chemical abort drugs,' Dr. Thorp lamented," reports confirmed.

The forced delivery of COVID shots to tens of millions of Americans was never without serious questions and controversy. It was even more so on the concept of requiring pregnant women to take the chemical treatments.

report at the Western Journal explained Thorp's testimony came just weeks ago.

"This deception was institutionalized in the now-infamous Shimabukuro study published on April 21, 2021, in the digital version of the New England Journal of Medicine," a transcript shows he said.

"The authors claimed a miscarriage rate of 12.6%, but the raw data revealed an 82% miscarriage rate in women vaccinated during the first trimester. These figures mirror the effects of chemical abortion drugs such as RU-486."

The RU-486 chemicals, in fact, are the ones intended to destroy an unborn child's life.

Thorp also pinpointed the demands from Rochelle Walensky, who at the time headed Joe Biden's Centers for Disease Control, who wanted to "coerce pregnant women into taking" the chemicals.

"It is difficult to conceive of a more egregious breach of medical ethics by the government-controlled, medical-industrial complex than the systematic promotion of COVID-19 vaccination to pregnant women. This campaign was not accidental. It was calculated," he charged.

The Biden administration targeted pregnant women, he explained, because they are "the primary decision-makers in healthcare across the human lifespan" and also are "the most vulnerable patients."

"If they could be convinced that the vaccination was safe and effective, it would imply that it was safe and effective for everyone," Thorp charged.

Biden administration officials, he said, wanted to be "manipulating public perception through influence, fear, and persuasion" in ways that would provide coercion to the public to take the shots.

"The federal government outsourced much of this psychological operation to NGOs, which disseminated emotionally charged and misleading messaging. These entities falsely assured pregnant women that the vaccines were proven safe and essential for maternal, fetal, and newborn health, even though early evidence indicated quite the opposite."

He said Walensky and others "made statements that were false. They made statements that were fear-mongering, insinuating that pregnant women, if they didn't take the vaccine, would put their lives in harm, their preborn lives in harm, and their newborn lives in harm, when they knew absolutely the opposite was true."

Ironically, following Walensky's assurances that the COVID shots would protect people, she took them and got COVID.

But she was constantly a voice describing the safety and effectiveness of the shots that were so lucrative for their manufacturers at that time.

Walensky assured over and over the American public of the safety of the shots.

She repeatedly advocated that "pregnant people" take the chemicals.

Thorp also cited a separate study that revealed the COVID shots as among the "deadliest and most injurious" ever, with more than 42,000 injuries and 1,223 deaths.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a reorganization plan for the State Department on Thursday that will make many of the changes DOGE suggested there permanent, according to Fox Digital. 

More than 300 of the 700 offices and bureaus housed at the State Department will be eliminated or combined as part of the overhaul, which will be the largest since the Cold War era, an official said.

"We have too many godd--- offices," a senior State Department official told Fox News Digital. "We’re trying to shrink offices rather than create them."

Rubio said in April that the overhaul was coming because the agency was "bloated, bureaucratic, and unable to perform its essential diplomatic mission."

Shift to overseas posts

In addition to cost-cutting, the streamlining plan will make the agency more responsive to threats and help it to respond quicker when those threats do come.

About 3,400 personnel will be cut from the department's rolls, which is a 15-20% overall reduction in head count.

"We are really addressing a significant portion of the department's domestic offices and sort of merging them, combining them, trying to make them more efficient," the senior State Department official said.

An update on the reductions is expected by July 1.

Only domestic offices will be impacted, not embassies abroad, officials said.

"We're really shifting the focus towards our embassies out in the field, our ambassadors out in the field, giving them the tools… so that they can effectively implement the ‘America First’ diplomacy out there in the field," another senior State Department official told Fox News Digital.

An update, not a cut

Restructuring "is not designed to either cripple the department or in any way — it’s not even a cost-savings endeavor," Rubio told the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on foreign affairs on May 20.

Despite Musk's departure last week, many DOGE employees will continue to be part of Trump's administration, press secretary Karoline Leavitt said during a briefing.

"Surely the mission of Doge will continue," Leavitt told reporters Thursday. "Many Doge employees are now political employees."

Musk will also be involved with the Trump administration as an advisor; he was limited to 130 days of employment by DOGE as a temporary figure.

As the old saying asserts, politics makes strange bedfellows, and that proposition was brought into stark relief once again this week when one of the Senate's most liberal voices sided with President Donald Trump on a key issue facing the nation.

As Fox Business reports, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) on Friday acknowledged that she is in agreement with the Republican commander in chief's opinion that the federal debt limit should be eliminated once and for all.

Warren, Trump find common ground

The liberal firebrand from Massachusetts has made her position clear when it comes to the debt limit, a mechanism which places a ceiling on the amount of money the Treasury may owe at any one time to pay the country's obligations.

Warren took to X to outline her stance, boldly revealing that she and Trump are of like minds on the issue, saying, “the debt limit should be scrapped to prevent an economic catastrophe.”

She went on to urge Congress to “pass a bipartisan bill and get rid of it forever.”

The lawmaker then took pains to distance herself from Trump despite their agreement on this one, discrete issue, however, attacking the “big, beautiful bill” he currently supports.

“But jacking up the debt limit by $4 trillion to fund more tax breaks for billionaires is an outrage,” Warren added.

Trump's stance, explained

It was soon after his November 2024 election to a second term in office that Trump made his stance on the debt limit quite clear, as NBC News noted at the time.

Trump declared in a phone interview with the outlet that eliminating the debt ceiling permanently would represent the “smartest thing [Congress] could do. I would support that entirely.”

The then-president-elect also pointed to the ability to garner bipartisan support for such a push, noting, “The Democrats have said they want to get rid of it. If they want to get rid of it, I would lead the charge.”

Trump went on to suggest that the debt ceiling itself has little practical meaning and that the consequences of its breach are nebulous, at best.

“It doesn't mean anything, except psychologically,” Trump mused.

Cooperation in the offing?

While it is a rare thing indeed for the likes of Trump and Warren to see eye-to-eye on just about anything, the president referenced the common ground he shares with the senator on this key issue ahead of a Friday press availability.

Emphasizing that he “always agreed with [Warren]” on the debt limit question, Trump highlighted the highly unusual moment of connection with one of the upper chamber's most left-wing members, but whether that will ever translate into a collaborative effort of any sort, only time will tell.

The Trump administration has made no secret of its plans to pursue and deport illegal immigrants who have committed crimes in the United States, and judging by an announcement on Friday from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), that promise is being kept.

As Breitbart reports, an illegal alien from Colombia, convicted in the 2024 death of Kaitlyn Weaver in Colorado, is now in the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials and will be deported, another win for DHS and Secretary Kristi Noem.

Tragic case, revisited

It was last July in Arapahoe County, Colorado, that 24-year-old Weaver was making her way home from work when her vehicle was struck by a teen driver who was reportedly traveling at 90-mph in a 45-mph zone.

Weaver had stopped her car at a stop sign when the other driver -- unnamed due to age shield laws -- slammed into her while racing a Jeep in a residential neighborhood, as Fox News noted.

Suffering from catastrophic injuries, Weaver remained on life support for two days before donating her organs.

In the aftermath of the crash, the illegal immigrant, an unlicensed Colombian teen, was arrested and was initially charged with vehicular homicide, with Weaver's grieving family receiving assurances that the case would be treated as a “no plea offer” scenario.

However, the shock and outrage of Weaver's family and the broader community, Democrat District Attorney Amy Padden offered the driver a lenient plea agreement involving a mere two years of probation and 100 hours of community service.

ICE takes action

At the time of the plea agreement, John Weaver, the victim's father, lamented not just the district attorney's decision to opt for leniency, but also the Biden administration's open-border policies, but amid news of the perpetrator's arrest, at least some measure of justice may finally be served.

According to the Friday announcement from ICE the driver who killed Weaver was arrested, along with members of his family, was arrested and is now in federal custody.

ICE officials made the news public in a post on X, blasting the prior outcome in Weaver case, declaring that for the local district attorney in Arapahoe County, “justice is no jail time and probation for this criminal alien who killed a young woman while driving more than 90 mph.”

Marking a sharp contrast in approach, the post continued, “For ICE, justice is arrest and removal.”

The agency went on to state that the individual is slated to remain in ICE custody until an immigration hearing can be held, with President Donald Trump taking to Truth Social to declare that the offender and his family will be deported, as CBS News noted.

Small measure of justice

Grieving dad John Weaver told Fox News Digital that he was made aware of the impending action from ICE against his daughter's killer, and he was quick to express his gratitude.

“I appreciate ICE taking enforcement action, and I really appreciate the outpouring of support from everyone,” Weaver said, though there is no remedy -- legal or otherwise -- that can ever erase the pain resulting from the needless, utterly avoidable loss of his daughter.

There have been plenty of folks who have suggested that President Joe Biden might have previously died and replaced with a "clone" version, or multiple clones, which would explain his bizarre changes in behavior,

According to the Daily Mail, President Donald Trump sent shockwaves through Washington D.C. when he suggested in a Truth Social post he shared over the weekend that Biden actually died in 2020 and was since replaced by a clone version, 

The theory unsurprisingly went viral, with plenty of people agreeing and just as many criticizing him for saying it.

It's important to note that the president did not add his own commentary to the post, but sharing it seemed to be enough to send many over the edge.

What happened?

The post simply theorized that Biden had died in 2020 and was replaced by a clone, aided by advanced robotics engineering.

"There is no #JoeBiden - executed in 2020. #Biden clones doubles & robotic engineered soulless mindless entities are what you see,' wrote Truth Social user llijh. "#Democrats dont know the difference."

The Daily Mail noted:

Almost immediately, social media erupted, with supporters and critics alike grappling with the surreal suggestion.

'We all knew something was completely off,' one commenter wrote. 'Although Trump has said repeatedly that Joe Biden was shot.'

Many of the Truth Social users who didn't agree or disagree expressed shock that the president shared the post.

Another user proposed additional theories that tied into that one:

"Thank you, do you know how long I've been saying this? Trump was still our President in his first term and I knew Joe Biden was gone during his run for president. They installed The Biden...an actor (blue eyes & brown eyes),' wrote another, referring to fringe theories that claim noticeable changes in Biden's eye color are evidence of a body double," they wrote.

Social media reacts

Users across social media had plenty to say about Trump's reTruthed post.

"The entire Obama presidency was illegitimate as well," one X user added.

Another X user wrote, "That means all the corrupt judges, policy and implements out there door!"

President Donald Trump is about to trigger Democrats on Capitol Hill once more when he uses his powers to cut back spending previously approved by Congress.

According to The Washington Times, Trump and his White House "will soon send Congress a package of $9.4 billion in cuts to current federal spending, including NPR and PBS and a chunk of foreign aid from the U.S. Agency for International Development."

The maneuver is known as rescissions legislation, and it's sure to cause a stir in Washington D.C. this week.

Many of the cuts in the rescissions legislation were identified by Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

What's going on?

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) would take a massive hit, as the move eliminates all of its programs with the exception of AMBER Alerts and tornado warnings.

Democrats have already pushed back, hard, arguing that cutting CPB is an attack on free speech, and ending other programs would eliminated "valuable" services and "harm" American citizens.

President Trump explained that the rescission cuts were just the first phase of the DOGE cuts becoming permanent.

“We’re totally committed to making the DOGE cuts permanent. … Most of it is going to come later," Trump said during a special ceremony honoring Musk for his service in leading DOGE. Musk is stepping away from the position to focus on his other companies.

The Washington Times noted:

The president said the rescissions package was just the first bite of the DOGE cuts and that more would come in the Big Beautiful Bill Act and other spending measures.

“We’re going to have it codified by Congress,” the president said. “It’s hundreds of billions of dollars.”

Social media reacts

Users across social media reacted to the news of Trump's cuts to Congress.

"Exactly what I voted for!" one X user wrote.

Another X user wrote, "Promises only kept if it passes. Do something. Tired of the talk."

It'll be interesting to see to what extent Democrats freak out when it's sent to Congress.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

The Indian government does not hide its intentions. It does not cloak its agenda in diplomatic vagueness or cultural goodwill. On the contrary, India has made one fact abundantly clear: it views its global diaspora as a state-controlled asset, a tool of national policy, and an instrument of foreign influence.

The Indian government has built one of the most extensive and coordinated diaspora engagement strategies in modern history, one that now plays a central role in India's global rise. Unlike other nations that merely celebrate their emigrant populations, India has institutionalized a system designed to leverage its overseas citizens for strategic national gain.

To put it simply, India has built a state-backed infrastructure specifically designed to mobilize its overseas population as a tool of strategic leverage.

In the process, Indian-origin individuals embedded in American institutions are playing increasingly pivotal roles in influencing U.S. policy, offshoring economic opportunities, and redirecting American resources to support India's geopolitical ambitions.

India Diaspora Impact Report

A state-engineered diaspora strategy

According to The United Indian, the Indian diaspora is viewed as a global force capable of swaying political outcomes in host countries.

The publication boasts that Indian-origin communities have driven India's development through remittances, capital inflows, and transfers of technical knowledge from abroad.

More critically, it calls for this global community to be intentionally positioned in key business, policy, and academic roles, not to integrate into their host nations, but to serve India's broader national interests.

This is not just pride in national identity, it's a blueprint for foreign influence.

India's Ministry of External Affairs openly acknowledges that investments from Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) account for nearly 35% of the country's total foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows.

To deepen its reliance on foreign capital and consolidate control over its global diaspora, the Indian government has constructed a sophisticated system of legal, financial, and emotional loyalty, one deliberately designed to turn overseas Indians into agents of national advancement.

Through initiatives like Pravasi Bharatiya Divas (PBD) and NRI-targeted investment schemes was explicitly designed to turn diaspora wealth into a national development engine, not just for economic growth, but for India's geopolitical rise.

While India explicitly prohibits dual citizenship, it has created a legal workaround: the Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) program, though not true citizenship, OCI status grants foreign nationals of Indian origin lifetime visa-free entry, unrestricted access to India's economy, educational institutions and property markets (excluding agricultural land) and rights nearly identical to those of NRIs. This structure allows millions of Indian-origin U.S. citizens and green card holders to operate across borders, fully integrated into India's economic system while retaining the legal protections and privileges of their host countries.

Under India's Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) framework, many prominent Indian-origin Americans, including those in politics, business, and technology, are eligible for OCI status based on Indian parentage, ancestry, or prior Indian citizenship. For example, Vivek Ramaswamy, now running for governor of Ohio after a presidential bid, qualifies as the child of an Indian citizen. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella qualifies as a former Indian citizen. Despite holding U.S. citizenship, individuals like Ramaswamy and Nadella can legally obtain OCI status, which allows them to live, work, invest, and exercise significant influence in India without relinquishing their American nationality. This dual access positions them as powerful cross-border actors who can simultaneously shape U.S. and Indian interests, making them instrumental to India's broader geopolitical and economic strategy.

But the design goes deeper. Many of these individuals, despite holding U.S. citizenship or even government security clearances, remain closely embedded in India's strategic and policy ecosystem.

A blueprint for global leverage

India openly admits that its relationship with the diaspora is not incidental or symbolic, but strategic. This means all engagement, whether financial, educational, or political, is aimed at securing tangible benefits for India, including influence operations, foreign lobbying, and economic leverage.

India not only uses the diaspora to bring resources into India, but also seeks to embed and expand Indian labor into foreign economies, particularly through workforce pipelines (H-1B, L-1, OPT), often facilitated by state partnerships and corporate MoUs.

India is actively designing incentive structures and policy tools tailored to different segments of the diaspora. These "customized solutions" include visa rights, investment opportunities, and educational access in India, all meant to bind the diaspora more tightly to India's economic system.

India refers to its diaspora as "investible," confirming that it views them as resources to be deployed for national gain. This includes their:

  • Intellectual capital (tech CEOs, academics, scientists)
  • Political influence (elected officials, donors)
  • Financial assets (remittances, venture capital)

India's diaspora incentive structure, powered through the OCI framework, creates the conditions for state-enabled insider trading. This system functions as a form of state-enabled economic espionage. OCI holders are encouraged to influence foreign policy and investment toward India and then personally benefit from those policies and deals using their exclusive access and legal status in India. This isn't just soft power, it's economic manipulation backed by legal infrastructure.

This dual-access framework is not available to average Americans or other foreign nationals, it creates an elite class of cross-border actors who can align their political power in one country (e.g., the U.S.) with financial returns engineered through policy alignment with another (India). By embedding Indian-origin individuals in powerful U.S. institutions and simultaneously offering them privileged access to India's economic and legal system, India has created a global influence apparatus that bypasses traditional oversight, ethics rules, and financial disclosure norms.

India openly acknowledges that it is leveraging the skills, influence, and corporate positions of Indian-origin professionals abroad by offering incentives and privileges, including OCI status, to pull them into its domestic development agenda. This includes knowledge transfers in tech, governance, and education. It confirms that India's diaspora policy is not passive; it is designed to extract intellectual capital from abroad to fuel India's rise. This aligns with the pattern of Indian-origin tech CEOs (e.g., Sundar Pichai, Satya Nadella) driving investment, R&D, and infrastructure into India while offshoring jobs from the U.S.

India views overseas Indians as a pipeline for financial capital, not just through remittances but through structured philanthropy aligned with government goals.

The reference to the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) reveals that India wants to control and centralize foreign-origin funding while maintaining legal command over where that money goes, which means the OCI status is not just about cultural connection; it's a legal mechanism.

India sees its diaspora, especially those in the U.S., as influential agents in global forums. It explicitly seeks to engage diaspora professionals in advocacy, public policy and reputation-building, positioning them as unofficial diplomats. India admits it is deliberately organizing the diaspora to shape international narratives, policy perspectives, and strategic alliances. This directly relates to how U.S.-based politicians, CEOs, and institutional leaders of Indian origin are used to push India-friendly policies, suppress criticism of India, and amplify India's soft power in Western governments and institutions.

"Positioning India as a preferred source country for economic migration…"

This is a direct admission that India is intentionally marketing itself as a labor-exporting superpower, leveraging bilateral and corporate partnerships to flood foreign markets with Indian workers. This matches the U.S. visa manipulation via H-1B, OPT, L-1, and green card pipelines. India is structuring labor migration as a national strategy, not a side effect of globalization.

"Facilitate Overseas Indians and Indian businesses to invest and share learnings…"

This line reveals a long-term plan to embed Indian nationals and companies inside foreign economies, particularly those with strategic importance. The Indian government is encouraging Indian-Origin individuals to invest abroad on India's terms, enabling Indian businesses to gain control and visibility in markets and use diaspora networks to export India's development model into other countries. This reinforces how OCI holders and Indian-origin executives in the U.S. are vehicles of Indian economic influence, spreading India-centric trade practices, tech standards, and labor norms.

Leveraging American positions of power

At the center of this effort are Indian-origin power brokers embedded in global business and technology. Many of today's most powerful global technology companies are led by Indian-origin CEOs, figures who have not only climbed to the top of American corporate ladders but who have also played critical roles in redirecting resources, innovation, and workforce opportunity toward India. These individuals are celebrated in India not just as successful executives, but as strategic assets furthering the country's national agenda.

This strategic alignment has led to a clear pattern under their leadership, U.S. companies have prioritized Indian markets, labor forces, and R&D hubs, while laying off American workers, offshoring critical operations, and re-engineering workforce pipelines to favor India's rise.

Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google, has directed over $10 billion into India through the "Digital India" initiative. Under his leadership, Google established major R&D hubs in Bangalore and Hyderabad and partnered with the Indian government to develop language infrastructure and AI systems. These moves have accelerated India's dominance in digital infrastructure while moving research and innovation jobs out of the United States.

Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft, announced a $3.3 billion investment in India's cloud and AI ecosystem in 2024. This came as Microsoft conducted significant layoffs in the U.S. Nadella has actively expanded India's role in Microsoft's global delivery model, turning India into a backbone for the company's engineering, operations, and customer service arms. His strategic alignment with India's government has made Microsoft a central partner in the country's AI and education initiatives.

Parag Agrawal, former CEO of Twitter, promoted India as a key growth market and increased India-specific staffing and engagement with the Indian government. During his tenure, Twitter became more compliant with India's regulatory frameworks, expanding its domestic political utility while softening its global stance on free speech.

Shantanu Narayen, CEO of Adobe, has scaled Adobe's India operations into a global R&D hub and has openly praised India's tech talent and infrastructure. He continues to grow Adobe's footprint in India while supporting government-aligned initiatives related to digital creativity, education, and data frameworks.

Arvind Krishna, CEO of IBM, has overseen the company's transformation into a consulting-heavy enterprise with a massive presence in India. Today, IBM employs more people in India than anywhere else in the world. Krishna has shifted core business operations and product development to India, enabling a long-term offshoring model that has reduced American IT and engineering headcount.

Raghu Raghuram, CEO of VMware, has expanded VMware's engineering and DevOps operations in India. The company's India teams have become central to cloud product development and global customer support functions.

Anjali Sud, former CEO of Vimeo, advocated a remote-first workforce strategy that allowed Vimeo to scale its engineering presence in India. Her leadership coincided with Vimeo's partnerships across India's media and technology ecosystem.

Nikesh Arora, CEO of Palo Alto Networks, has overseen the launch of major cybersecurity engineering hubs in India. His strategy positioned India as a global center for cyber talent, driving product development from Indian campuses while reducing reliance on U.S.-based teams.

Revathi Advaithi, CEO of Flex, shifted manufacturing and logistics operations to India as part of the company's realignment under global supply chain pressures. She has actively supported India's "Make in India" industrial policies, strengthening the country's manufacturing base.

George Kurian, CEO of NetApp, has positioned the company's India arm as a global technology and engineering hub. NetApp India handles core storage product innovation and services, deepening the country's role in high-tech infrastructure.

Sanjay Mehrotra, CEO of Micron, has played a leading role in developing India's semiconductor industry. He led Micron's $2.75 billion investment in a semiconductor assembly and testing facility in Gujarat, an initiative heavily subsidized by the Indian government. While India benefits from new chip capabilities, U.S. semiconductor expansion efforts have faced cuts and delays.

These aren't isolated cases, they are coordinated outcomes. India's immigration strategy, in tandem with its diaspora engagement playbook, has used the U.S. work visa system as a delivery vehicle, flooding American companies with Indian nationals while displacing U.S. workers at scale.

According to The United Indian, the global economic footprint of Indian diaspora-led businesses now exceeds $3 trillion annually. This is not merely success, it is state-backed leverage.

In summary, these Indian-origin CEOs are not merely individual success stories. They are key actors in India's global strategy, channeling American capital, jobs and technologies to strengthen India's economic, digital, and geopolitical position, often while U.S. workers and industries suffer the consequences. Their positions at the helm of U.S. corporations have made them ideal conduits for India's long-term national ambitions.

Indian Multinational Corporations: The corporate engine of India's foreign agenda

While Indian-origin CEOs embedded in U.S. corporations have become symbols of influence and strategic alignment, it is Indian multinational enterprises (MNEs), notably Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), Infosys, Wipro, Cognizant, Tech Mahindra and HCL Technologies, that serve as the operational arms of India's economic expansion and workforce export strategy. These companies have played a central role in advancing India's national agenda by systematically exploiting the U.S. immigration system, displacing American labor, offshoring sensitive contracts, and influencing U.S. policy under the guise of globalization.

These MNEs are not neutral market actors. They operate in lockstep with Indian government ministries, educational institutions, and trade bodies to implement India's global workforce and innovation agenda. Their executives regularly participate in diaspora events like Pravasi Bharatiya Divas and leverage India's Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) program to maintain influence over Indian-origin professionals embedded in U.S. companies and agencies.

The offshoring playbook used by these firms, perfected through state incentives and policy coordination, has enabled the transfer of U.S. contracts, research, and intellectual property to India-based facilities. TCS and Infosys pioneered this model with 24/7 development centers in Bangalore and Hyderabad. Cognizant, Wipro, and Tech Mahindra expanded it by winning U.S. government and corporate deals, then quietly shifting execution to India. Many of these contracts include sensitive data and services once intended exclusively for American use, some even involving defense and healthcare systems.

The damage to American workers is staggering. These firms collectively file tens of thousands of H-1B, L-1, and OPT visa applications every year, undercutting U.S. wages and excluding qualified American applicants. Several have been sued for discrimination, including TCS, Infosys, Cognizant, and Tech Mahindra. In one of the most notable cases, Infosys paid a $34 million settlement to the DOJ for abusing B-1 visas to sneak in Indian workers under false pretenses. Others have faced similar accusations of misusing the visa system to sidestep U.S. labor protections and import low-wage labor.

Beyond workforce displacement, these MNEs shape U.S. policy. As members of lobbying bodies like the U.S.-India Business Council (USIBC), they push for expanded visa quotas, intellectual property concessions, and trade agreements that benefit India. They also fund diaspora-linked advocacy groups like Indiaspora and USINPAC to influence American lawmakers and normalize India-first workforce policies under the banner of globalization.

These corporations are not simply participants in the global economy, they are tools of India's national strategy. They have embedded themselves inside America's digital infrastructure, redirected taxpayer-funded innovation to India, and engineered a labor market shift that benefits one nation at the expense of another. Their success represents not just corporate growth, but the successful execution of a geopolitical and economic conquest, one contract, one job, and one visa at a time.

Indian-Origin U.S. political power: Indian Government political access and policy influence in America through diaspora

India has not only exported labor and technology, but it has also cultivated political influence in the United States through a growing number of Indian-origin elected officials and civil servants. These individuals, often celebrated by Indian media and government officials as "diaspora success stories," are increasingly positioned in critical roles across U.S. policymaking, diplomacy, trade, and law.

Their prominence is not just a reflection of personal achievement, it's a strategic asset for India's foreign policy. The Indian government maintains regular engagement with Indian-origin U.S. lawmakers and public officials. Congress members such as Ro Khanna and Pramila Jayapal have participated in Indian diaspora events and advocated for increased U.S.-India cooperation. U.S. policy changes related to immigration, trade, and technology transfer often receive vocal support from diaspora-linked organizations, including the U.S.-India Business Council (USIBC) and Indian-American lobbying groups.

India Diaspora Impact Report

FEDERAL ELECTED OFFICIALS

Kamala Harris, Former Vice President of the United States, is the daughter of Indian-born scientist Shyamala Gopalan. Although Harris identifies more with her African-American heritage publicly, Indian officials and media claim her as a symbol of diaspora power, frequently referencing her as a point of national pride and using her image in Pravasi Bharatiya Divas and India-based political narratives.

Ami Bera, U.S. Representative from California's 6th District, is the longest-serving Indian-American in Congress. He sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and has consistently supported pro-India policy positions, including increased defense and health cooperation. Bera frequently appears at Indian consulate events and receives backing from Indian-American lobbying groups.

Raja Krishnamoorthi, U.S. Representative from Illinois's 8th District, is known for his vocal support of U.S.-India relations. He regularly engages with Indian consulates, diaspora coalitions, and public forums promoting bilateral economic and educational ties. He has endorsed expanding H-1B visas and supports India-centric trade initiatives.

Ro Khanna, U.S. Representative from California's 17th District (Silicon Valley), is perhaps the most active Indian-origin lawmaker when it comes to coordinating with the Indian government. He has spoken at Indian diaspora forums, participated in trade delegations, and met directly with Indian officials to discuss shared tech and labor interests. Khanna plays a central role in maintaining India's foothold in U.S. tech policy.

Pramila Jayapal, U.S. Representative from Washington's 7th District, is of Indian origin and chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus. While she has occasionally criticized India's human rights record, she remains deeply embedded in India-focused diaspora circles and continues to advocate for South Asian-American representation and visa-related reforms that disproportionately benefit Indian nationals.

Shri Thanedar, U.S. Representative from Michigan's 13th District, is an immigrant from India and a former entrepreneur. He has positioned himself as a "self-made success story," drawing significant attention from Indian media outlets that celebrate his electoral victory as a win for the diaspora.

Suhas Subramanyam, elected in 2024 to represent Virginia's 10th District, became the first Indian-American Congressman from Virginia. His election was hailed by Indian consulates and diaspora PACs as a milestone in expanding Indian-origin political power at the federal level.

STATE & LOCAL OFFICIALS

Aruna Miller, Lieutenant Governor of Maryland, is the first South Asian woman to hold such a high executive office in any U.S. state. Her campaign and inauguration were celebrated in Indian media as a "historic diaspora achievement," and she maintains active relationships with Indian-American groups.

Ravinder Bhalla, Mayor of Hoboken, New Jersey, made headlines as the first Sikh mayor elected in New Jersey. He has spoken at Indian consulate events and is frequently spotlighted by Indian media outlets promoting diaspora visibility.

Niraj Antani, Ohio State Senator, is the first Indian-American Republican elected to the Ohio legislature. He's been involved in India-friendly business delegations and has spoken publicly in support of U.S.-India trade alignment.

Jenifer Rajkumar, a New York State Assembly Member, is the first Indian-American woman elected to New York's Legislature. She's known for her active participation in Indian cultural celebrations and events organized by Indian diplomatic missions.

Kshama Sawant, Seattle City Council member, is a high-profile political figure of Indian origin. While aligned with socialist and anti-capitalist causes, she has nevertheless been cited in Indian state media as evidence of diaspora reach into American political systems.

Manka Dhingra, Washington State Senator and Deputy Majority Leader, regularly advocates for Indian-American communities and serves as a bridge between Indian diplomacy and state-level U.S. politics.

These Indian-origin officials are not just public servants, they are key nodes in a transnational influence network. Whether by promoting India-friendly trade, championing immigration policies that benefit Indian labor exports, or directly engaging with Indian ministries and consulates, they have become instruments of soft power for a foreign government seeking deeper economic and political footholds in the United States.

The foreign enterprise operating inside American gates

From Silicon Valley boardrooms to Capitol Hill, Indian-origin power brokers, whether CEOs, elected officials, or high-ranking bureaucrats, have quietly but decisively advanced India's global ambitions from within American institutions. Trusted to represent American interests, many have made decisions that directly expanded India's economic, technological, and strategic reach, often at the expense of American workers, taxpayers, and national sovereignty.

Their loyalty is not judged by soundbites. It is revealed in their actions. And India has made its intent explicit. These diaspora figures are not just celebrated success stories. They are strategic tools in India's foreign policy. The United States, so far, has allowed it.

This must now be addressed with clarity. What happens when American institutions elevate individuals aligned, by birth, benefit, or ideology, with a foreign government? We are already living the answer. From trade deals and education partnerships to immigration policy and infrastructure, India-aligned influence has structurally reshaped American systems to favor India's rise.

When Indian-origin lawmakers push expanded visa quotas or bilateral tech transfers, when corporate executives move jobs and research to India, when academics and nonprofit leaders advise Indian ministries or appear at diaspora summits like Pravasi Bharatiya Divas, and when U.S. law firms shape domestic policy for Indian interests, this is not about heritage. It is about strategic alignment. And when that alignment undermines American jobs and weakens national competitiveness, it becomes a direct threat.

What other nation would tolerate foreign-aligned actors influencing its laws, investments, and workforce strategy in favor of a rival power? What other government would remain silent as its own institutions are redirected to serve another country's rise?

While Chinese influence has sparked national security investigations and legislative action, India's infiltration has been masked by diplomatic charm and the illusion of shared values. But India's model, built on visa exploitation, diaspora loyalty, intellectual property theft, and policy capture, is no less dangerous.

The question is no longer whether this network exists. The question is how long America will allow foreign-aligned operatives to shape its future. Because when India is prioritized over America, that is not cooperation. That is colonization by strategy. And it ends when we say America First. On our soil. In our jobs. And in our government.

The cost to America

The cost of India's strategy is not hidden in spreadsheets or obscure treaties. It's written across the hollowed-out factories of the Midwest, the layoffs in Silicon Valley and the flood of foreign resumes that replaced American workers through programs never meant to be abused. It's embedded in the tech monopolies that now serve as international outsourcing hubs, in the universities captured by foreign talent pipelines, and in the policies shaped not for America's benefit, but for India's ascendancy.

This isn't a partnership. It's conquest through policy, profit, and persuasion.

India has weaponized its diaspora, its multinational firms, and its manipulated alliances to execute one of the most sophisticated economic invasions in modern history, without a single shot fired. American goodwill, legal loopholes, and corporate greed became the tools of surrender.

And what did we lose? Control over our labor force. Ownership of our technology. Direction of our future.

India's rise has been powered by our decline. Not by accident. By design.

Every job is offshored. Every visa that was exploited. Every trade deal tilted in their favor was a calculated move in a long game we refused to see. And while America slept, India embedded itself inside our institutions, rewrote our rules, and positioned its agents to steer our destiny.

This is no longer just a wake-up call. It is a final warning.

The American republic is being gutted from within, not by tanks or missiles, but by talent pipelines, lobbying arms, and diaspora operatives loyal to a foreign agenda.

We can either confront this truth now, or watch as America is outsourced, reprogrammed, and overwritten … one manipulated visa, one remitted dollar, and one "strategic partnership" at a time.

History will not remember us kindly if we fail to act. This is our line in the sand. America first, or America lost.

This story was originally published by the WND News Center.

Kristi Noem, President Donald Trump's secretary of Homeland Security, says China "wants to destroy" America, and Harvard University "is allowing that to happen" with its large number of foreign students.

Appearing on "Sunday Morning Futures" with Maria Bartiromo on the Fox News Channel, Noem said Harvard has "perpetuated Chinese government priorities."

"They want these students on campus, because it's almost 30 percent of their students. They pay full tuition and they also have ties directly back to China," she explained.

"China hates us, and they have infiltrated our country. They've hacked into our systems, They've proven they can shut down our critical infrastructure."

"They're not just building up their military. They want to destroy us, and Harvard is allowing that to happen on their campus and the Trump administration's gonna stop it."

When asked how much money Harvard has taken from China, Noem replied:

"I don't know specifically. Hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars because these foreign students for years have paid full tuition plus they've gotten grants, special participation in programs that China has financed and brought forward so these ties to China are deeply alarming.

"And they're not just Harvard. There's other universities. We're going through every single one of them. If you come to this country to learn and you're a foreign student and you've recognized the opportunity, that's fantastic. But don't come here and spy on us and take that information back home to an enemy that is working to destroy us every day.

"And China has infiltrated this country. It's my job to protect the homeland, and I've been given that direction by President Trump. They will not participate in this foreign student program until they clean up their ways."

Noem concluded: "It's alarming the danger that our country is in, and it's because we've allowed universities like Harvard to infiltrate our country with Communist Chinese ties and students and spies."

Meanwhile, there are reports the daughter of Chinese president Xi Jinping attended Harvard, and is now living in Massachusetts. Journalist Laura Loomer is reportedly calling for her deportation.

As WorldNetDaily reported, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio began revoking the student visas for Chinese students last week.

"The U.S. will begin revoking visas of Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields," Rubio said on X.

President Donald Trump said Elon Musk is "really not leaving" even as his four-month stint as Department of Government efficiency head is coming to a close, Newsmax reported. Trump made this announcement Friday from the Oval Office.

Trump thanked the Tesla billionaire for his work in slashing government waste and spending. During Musk's tenure, he saved taxpayers billions of dollars while cutting thousands of employees.

Musk looked on as he stood behind Trump, who was seated at the Resolute Desk, when he made the announcement. "Elon is really not leaving. He's going to be back and forth," Trump said.

Smoothing Things Over

There have been reports that the relationship between the president and the SpaceX mogul has been rocky. The press conference seemed to be a way for Trump and Musk to show a united front even amid disagreements.

Musk touted his ability to cut from the budget, though he said the "banal evil of bureaucracy" prevented it from being much more. "This is not the end of DOGE but really the beginning," Musk said.

The positive tone of this news conference was in contrast to earlier in the week when Musk slammed Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" for its bloated price tag and cuts to green energy subsidies, The Hill reported. Musk said he was "disappointed" when it passed the House of Representatives.

"I was, like, disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit … and it undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing," Musk said on CBS Sunday Morning. "I think a bill can be big, or it could be beautiful," Musk said.

"I don’t know if it could be both. My personal opinion," Musk added. Nevertheless, Trump presented Musk with a signed box containing a symbolic golden key, stating that it was reserved for "very special people."

Musk's Baggage

The Daily Beast reported that Trump announced the plan in March for Musk to ease out of his role at DOGE because of Musk's volatility. The announcement came following an alleged blowup between Musk and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Now, former Trump strategist Steve Bannon is saying that Musk "got physical" with Secretary Scott Bessent in another blowup in Apil.  They had a disagreement about the lackluster impact he made at DOGE as Bassent confronted Musk over disappointing results.

"Scott Bessent called him out and said, ‘You promised us a trillion dollars (in cuts), and now you’re at like $100 billion, and nobody can find anything, what are you doing?' And that’s when Elon got physical. It’s a sore subject with him," Bannon explained.

"It wasn’t an argument, it was a physical confrontation. Elon basically shoved him," Bannon clarified. On Friday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed the disagreement existed but didn't elaborate on the physical nature of it.

Perhaps it's best that Musk back away from the administration and just allow Trump to call on him for advice from time to time. What Musk has accomplished was significant and a great start to a more austere Washington, D.C., mindset even if it fell short of his promises.

During a closed-door meeting, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller delivered a scathing critique of senior U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials for what he perceives as inadequate deportation efforts, the Washington Examiner reported.

On May 20, at ICE's Washington headquarters, Miller met with 50 field officials from ICE's Enforcement Removal Operations and Homeland Security Investigations to convey the Trump administration's expectations for increased arrest and deportation numbers.

The pressure from the White House follows President Trump's commitment to enhance immigration enforcement, compelling ICE to significantly boost daily arrest rates.

Internal Discord And Leadership Woes

The atmosphere within ICE has reportedly been tense due to the administration's mounting demands. ICE officials disclosed feelings of demoralization amid concerns of rigorous oversight and leadership pressures.

Stephen Miller's uncompromising stance left ICE officials feeling demoralized, as he criticized their leadership and performance, expressing disappointment at their current achievements.

Morale at ICE is described as low, with one official recounting that the environment feels fearful due to the intense scrutiny of communications and actions by agency leadership.

Leadership Changes At ICE

Changes in ICE's leadership have also contributed to the unrest. The retirement of Ken Genalo and the replacement of Robert Hammer by Derek Gordon reflect a shifting administration strategy.

There is skepticism about the motivations behind these leadership changes, with a former senior DHS official asserting that some resignations were not entirely voluntary.

Critics argue that these shifts may merely be attempts by the administration to put a positive spin on their challenges in boosting deportation figures.

Tension Over Deportation Goals

During the meeting, Miller emphasized the administration's objective of achieving at least 3,000 arrests per day, as part of a broader goal to reverse immigration policies enacted during prior administrations.

Miller's insistence on intensifying efforts has been met with mixed reactions within ICE, especially amid struggles with coordination and resources.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem reportedly conveyed to ICE officials that while their efforts were satisfactory, more aggressive measures were needed.

Resource And Coordination Challenges

Discussions highlighted issues of coordination, with some officials noting that ICE's collaboration pales in comparison to other agencies like the FBI and U.S. Marshals, which may contribute to their challenges.

A new legislative bill to expand ICE's detention capability is being considered, which could alleviate some resource constraints faced by the agency.

Patriot News Alerts delivers timely news and analysis on U.S. politics, government, and current events, helping readers stay informed with clear reporting and principled commentary.
© 2026 - Patriot News Alerts