President Trump is set to declassify intelligence that claims the communist Chinese government funded attacks on US troops in Afghanistan, according to a report.

Senior administration officials have told Axios that Trump was briefed on the intelligence before Christmas by by national security adviser Robert O’Brien.

The report states that the intelligence has not been fully corroborated, but suggests that ‘non-state actors’ were financed by China to carry out ambushes on American soldiers, and that there are “PRC weapons illicitly flowing into Afghanistan.”

A source told Axios  “The U.S. has evidence that the PRC [People’s Republic of China] attempted to finance attacks on American servicemen by Afghan non-state actors by offering financial incentives or ‘bounties'” and said the National Security Council “is coordinating a whole-of-government investigation.”

A senior official told Axios that  “Like all first reports, we react with caution to initial reports” but “any intel reports relating to the safety of our forces we take very seriously.”

The sources also did not disclose if the ‘non state actors’ referred to in the intel were members of the Taliban or not.

There has not yet been any indication of when the suggested attacks occurred or of what scale they were, only that they occurred after late February when theUS made a deal with the Taliban.

The disclosure comes after Trump dismissed intelligence reports in the Summer claiming that Russia and Iran had paid Taliban fighters ‘bounties’ to kill US troops.

Back then, the media ran with the claims, which many saw as a way of attacking Trump.

Reports continue to surface of the Pentagon is refusing to give the Biden team national security briefings, meaning that they may not have detailed knowledge regarding the China intel.

The latest developments will fan flames of projections that China and the US are headed toward conflict.

Reports suggest that Joe Biden is considering appointing former Obama official Samantha Power to lead USAID, the government’s relief agency, prompting critics to charge that she would be in charge of fixing humanitarian crises that she created in the first place.

Axios reported that Power’s appointment would “signal the Biden administration plans to revitalize foreign assistance and use it as an instrument of soft power and to achieve humanitarian goals”.

“Foreign assistance”.

“Soft power”.

A rough translation could read “Interventionism” and “globalist dominance.”

Power, formally on Obama/Biden’s National Security Council and latterly the US envoy to the UN, oversaw the disastrous intervention Libya, working closely with Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice, who were Secretary of State and UN ambassador at the time.

And we all know how that turned out.

Power also strongly supported US intervention in Yemen and Syria under Obama.

Power recently wrote that in her opinion, Biden should “pursue foreign policy initiatives that can quickly highlight the return of American expertise and competence” and do so in a “highly visible” way.

For a translation of “expertise and competence” look up ‘interventionism’, and for an example of “highly visible”, see the afore mentioned meddling in Libya.

In the Foreign Affairs piece, Power wrote that “This means less rhetorical emphasis on the abstract cause of ‘the liberal international order’ and more practical demonstrations of the United States’ distinctive ability to deliver.”

In other words, less talk, more intervention.

The potential appointment follows a trend for Biden, who has so far signalled that he will bring back a military-industrial complex that Trump attempted to wipe away.

Biden’s foreign policy team vehemently supported every single disastrous military intervention over the past two decades:

Rand Paul made a passionate lengthy speech on the Senate Floor Thursday in an effort to hold up a defense bill that could prevent troops from being withdrawn from Afghanistan at President Trump’s behest, accusing Liz Cheney of wanting the war to carry on forever.

“The neoconservative philosophy isn’t so much about a unity executive, isn’t so much about an all-powerful commander-in-chief,” Paul noted during the speech.

“The philosophy of these people is about war and substantiating war and making sure that it becomes and is perpetual war,” the Senator urged.

Watch more:

Paul’s powerful speech was adapted and published here.

Because of Paul’s opposition, the Senate adjourned on Thursday night without a resolution.

Earlier, Paul described it as ‘hypocrisy’ and ‘rank demagoguery’ that neocons such as Cheney want the president to have the power to initiate war without constraint but also want to prevent Trump from drawing down troops simultaneously.

While Paul fought to bring the issue to light and prevent neocons from being able to send US troops to wage more forever wars, and keep them there without authorisation from Congress, Liz Cheney, one of the primary figures pushing such proposals, responded by making fun of Paul’s height:

These people repeatedly laugh in the face of all Americans who oppose death, destruction and endless empire building abroad to the detriment of the nation and in violation of everything the Constitution represents.