Guests - Ava Chen, Betsy Smith
Watch China Watch on YouTube
Ava Chen: Gas Prices, Refinery Capacity and What She Calls Political Warfare
Ava Chen of the New Federal State of China opened China Watch Wednesday by arguing that Americans should look beyond the price displayed at the gas pump and ask what is driving it. Her starting point was basic supply and demand: when supply contracts while demand remains strong, prices rise. What concerns Chen is the extent to which she believes government policy is deliberately constraining energy supply.
She pointed specifically to California, where refinery closures have reduced the state’s processing capacity while leaving it increasingly dependent on imported petroleum. Chen said two refinery closures alone represented roughly 280,000 barrels per day in lost capacity and argued that shutting down domestic infrastructure while national refinery utilization is already extremely high creates an obvious bottleneck.
For Chen, the timing matters as much as the economics. With the midterm election approaching, she argued that higher gasoline prices and broader inflation create political pain that can ultimately be blamed on President Donald Trump and Republican candidates.
“This is no longer economic,” Chen said. “This is political.”
Kathleen Winn agreed with that framing, calling it “political warfare.” Her argument was that voters experience energy policy not as an abstract debate about refineries or environmental regulation but as a weekly bill. If families are paying substantially more to fill their cars, that frustration can quickly become electoral dissatisfaction.
Chen also tied domestic refinery constraints to instability abroad. The Russia-Ukraine war has affected Russian energy infrastructure, while tensions involving Iran and other producers add pressure to a global market already navigating political uncertainty. Her broader warning was that adversaries do not need to defeat the United States militarily if they can exhaust Americans economically and psychologically.
“They wanted to exhaust you,” Chen said. “They wanted to dissolve your resolve.”
China’s Energy Strategy—and Why Economic Pain Works Differently Under Communism
Chen said China has spent years reducing its vulnerability to imported oil through massive investments in solar power, hydroelectric projects and nuclear energy. Those alternatives do not eliminate Beijing’s dependence on foreign energy overnight, but she argued they give the Chinese Communist Party more flexibility as geopolitical pressure increases.
The deeper difference, she said, is political rather than technological.
When an economic crisis hurts the United States, the pain spreads across society. Workers, employers, corporations, retirees and wealthy investors all feel the consequences. In a communist dictatorship, Chen argued, ordinary citizens bear most of the suffering while the ruling elite protects itself.
“When you say hurting China, who is hurting?” Chen asked. “Not the kleptocrats.”
She described a ruling class that has access to privileged food, water, wealth and international resources while average citizens absorb inflation, shortages and unemployment. In her view, that makes economic deterrence more complicated because CCP leaders are willing to tolerate suffering that an accountable democratic government could not.
Chen referenced past Communist rhetoric telling the Chinese population to be prepared to “eat grass” during periods of national hardship. Her point was that the Party views the population as a resource to be used rather than citizens whose wellbeing ultimately determines whether leaders remain in power.
Winn contrasted that model with the American system, where political leaders eventually answer to voters. For her, that distinction is also why Americans should take socialism and communism seriously rather than treating them as merely alternative economic philosophies.
Xi Jinping, Trump and a CCP Strategy Chen Says Plays Both Sides
With Xi Jinping expected in Washington, Winn asked Chen what Americans should expect from the meeting and whether Trump could realistically negotiate with a government whose long-term goals are so different from America’s.
Chen said waiting out an American administration is only part of Beijing’s strategy. The CCP, she argued, “plays both hands”: it negotiates with the people in power while simultaneously cultivating people and institutions that may become useful later.
She pointed back to 2016 and claims previously made by exiled Chinese businessman Miles Guo. According to Chen, Guo said senior CCP-linked figures originally viewed Trump as potentially advantageous because they expected him to focus primarily on trade and deal-making rather than human rights, religion and the ideological nature of the Chinese Communist Party.
Chen said that calculation eventually backfired.
“They never dreamt President Trump would become the biggest nightmare the CCP ever had,” she said.
A central figure in Chen’s explanation is former Chinese Vice President Wang Qishan, whom she and Guo have repeatedly described as a powerful bridge between Chinese political elites and Western finance. Chen alleged that Wang’s network extended deeply into American institutions and said those relationships deserve far more scrutiny.
She also repeated Guo’s past allegations involving former FBI Director Christopher Wray and connections through legal and financial networks associated with Chinese elites. Those are serious accusations, and Chen presented them as part of Guo’s longstanding theory of CCP influence rather than as conclusions established during the discussion.
The broader point, she said, is that Beijing does not need openly declared agents if influential Westerners become financially dependent on relationships and investments connected to China.
How Chen Says the CCP Controls Without Owning
That idea led into one of Chen’s most detailed arguments: control does not always require ownership.
She used Pfizer as an example, recounting comments Guo made during the COVID era. Guo argued that looking only at a corporation’s formal shareholders can miss the deeper web of financial relationships surrounding it.
Chen acknowledged the obvious objection. Pfizer is publicly traded, with major institutional investors including firms such as BlackRock and other global investment funds. But she said Guo’s definition of control was not based on holding 100 percent of a company’s stock.
“If I ask you to do something and you have to do it,” Chen said in explaining Guo’s reasoning, “then I control 100 percent.”
She described global finance as a relatively small circle of enormous investment firms, sovereign wealth funds and politically connected families repeatedly participating in the same large-scale projects. According to Chen, CCP political families have spent decades building joint ventures and financial relationships with Western elites.
She used marriage as the analogy.
Western financial elites and CCP-connected families entered a marriage decades ago. Their investments became the “children” of that marriage. Once both sides have billions of dollars tied up together, the CCP can threaten those shared investments to create leverage over the Western partner.
Chen said that leverage becomes even more powerful when combined with what Guo has called BGY—the use of money, sex, surveillance and compromising information to influence powerful individuals.
The problem, she argued, begins with Western greed.
Wall Street and other financial institutions wanted access to China’s enormous market. Chinese political elites wanted access to Western capital and legitimacy. After decades of interlocking investments, Chen said separating the two has become far more difficult than simply imposing a tariff or sanction.
“You only need one hijacker on the plane to hijack a plane that has 320 people,” she said.
Hong Kong, COVID and the Overseas Wealth of CCP Elites
Chen closed her portion of the discussion by identifying three areas where she believes the Trump administration could exert maximum pressure on Beijing.
The first is Hong Kong.
Chen described Hong Kong as a critical channel through which international capital still reaches China. If Washington were to significantly downgrade Hong Kong’s status as an Asian financial center, she argued, the CCP could lose one of its most important financial lifelines.
The second is the origin of COVID-19. Chen said she believes a serious international investigation would ultimately place responsibility on the CCP and senior Chinese leadership. She urged the United States to continue pursuing accountability rather than allowing the issue to disappear with time.
The third is the foreign wealth of senior Chinese Communist Party officials and their families.
“Identify and publicly expose the overseas assets of these kleptocrats,” Chen said.
She argued that many of those assets are located in Western countries. If ordinary Chinese citizens could see the scale of wealth accumulated by leaders who publicly champion communism and sacrifice, she believes the political consequences inside China could be enormous.
For Chen, these pressure points are ultimately about breaking the financial and political relationships that allow the CCP to exercise influence well beyond China’s borders.
Betsy Brantner Smith: Arizona’s Fentanyl Crisis Is Still Driving Crime
The second half turned from international influence to the consequences of crime much closer to home.
Betsy Brantner Smith, spokesperson for the National Police Association and a former police officer, said Arizona continues to play a significant role in the fentanyl pipeline feeding the rest of the country.
The danger is not limited to habitual drug users.
Smith cited a recent celebrity overdose story involving what was described as a fentanyl-laced counterfeit prescription pill. Her point was that people can believe they are buying one drug and instead ingest a lethal amount of fentanyl.
“One fentanyl-laced pill killed her,” Smith said of the example she discussed.
Smith said the same danger is playing out among ordinary young Americans every day. Tucson’s visible addiction crisis is part of a much larger supply chain that begins with chemical components, moves through criminal trafficking networks and ultimately reaches American streets.
Winn connected that discussion back to China, noting that precursor chemicals used in fentanyl production have frequently been linked in public debate to Chinese suppliers before narcotics move north through Mexican trafficking organizations.
Neither Winn nor Smith blamed ordinary Mexican citizens. Their criticism was directed toward criminal organizations and political systems that have failed to prevent the drugs from moving into American communities.
Tucson Crime, Proposition 425 and the Cost of Failed Local Leadership
For Winn and Smith, drug addiction cannot be separated from property crime, homelessness, violence and the broader deterioration of public order.
Winn argued that Pima County leaders should not be asking voters for expanded spending authority through Proposition 425 while residents are watching basic public-safety problems go unresolved.
The discussion repeatedly returned to Supervisor District 5, where Winn said a series of high-profile crimes has occurred in recent months. She and Smith criticized appointed Supervisor Andres Cano for what they view as an inadequate public response to those incidents.
Among the cases discussed was a murder-suicide involving two gay victims outside a Tucson establishment. Winn said authorities had referred to the incident as a hate crime but questioned why the political discussion surrounding it seemed to disappear quickly.
That case joined several other violent incidents Winn has been tracking in District 5, including shootings and the death of a woman who was assaulted in an apartment parking lot.
Smith’s argument was that the underlying political problem is accountability. Local officials ask for more money, but taxpayers should first ask what existing resources have accomplished.
“Punishment works. Consequences work,” Smith said.
Most residents are not criminals, she emphasized. A relatively small population of repeat offenders can create enormous damage when they conclude that arrest is unlikely to lead to meaningful prosecution or punishment.
Cano, Nanos and Conover: Smith Says the System Rewards Failure
Smith and Winn were particularly critical of three Pima County officials: Supervisor Andres Cano, Sheriff Chris Nanos and County Attorney Laura Conover.
Their criticism of Cano centered on his record and the fact that voters have never elected him to the supervisor’s seat. He was appointed after Adelita Grijalva left the board to run for Congress and is now seeking to retain the seat through an election.
Smith argued that Cano has spent much of his career as an activist and politician rather than demonstrating the kind of practical governing experience she believes Pima County needs.
She also contrasted today’s Board of Supervisors with an earlier era when Republican supervisors such as Ally Miller and Steve Christy could occasionally work with Democrat Sharon Bronson on issues where local interests crossed party lines.
That kind of coalition-building, Smith argued, is largely missing today.
Winn and Smith were equally harsh toward Sheriff Nanos, pointing to controversies surrounding his administration and questioning why county leadership has not demanded stronger accountability. They also criticized Conover, arguing that weak prosecution removes the deterrent police officers are supposed to provide through arrests.
The result, in their view, is a system in which police can repeatedly encounter the same offenders because the consequences never match the conduct.
Adelita Grijalva, Deportation and Who Government Is Supposed to Represent
The conversation also turned to Rep. Adelita Grijalva and her advocacy involving an Egyptian national whom Smith described as having lost his legal status after a DUI crash.
According to Smith’s account, the man served time and was scheduled for deportation, but a judge blocked his return to Egypt because he argued that he could face danger there as a gay man. He was later sent to Equatorial Guinea through the administration’s third-country deportation policy.
Smith said the case illustrates what she sees as a recurring pattern among progressive politicians: intense advocacy for people facing immigration enforcement while the concerns of American citizens receive less attention.
Winn agreed, saying Grijalva’s priorities often appear disconnected from the day-to-day concerns of Southern Arizona residents dealing with crime, taxes and deteriorating public services.
That criticism extended to a broader political point. Congressional District 7 does not belong to a political family, Winn said. It belongs to the voters.
She again praised Republican challenger Daniel Butierez as someone she believes brings business experience and direct community involvement rather than a lifetime inside a political organization.
Mental Health, Hormones and Personal Responsibility
Winn and Smith also returned to a murder case involving a mother who killed her three children while reportedly suffering from severe postpartum mental illness.
Both acknowledged the reality and seriousness of postpartum psychosis and hormonal changes. Their disagreement was with what they see as a growing cultural tendency to transform mental illness from an explanation into complete absolution.
Smith argued that the public conversation has expanded beyond postpartum depression into broader claims about menopause and perimenopause, with some activists portraying women as less responsible for destructive behavior during periods of hormonal change.
She viewed that argument as deeply counterproductive to women.
For generations, Smith said, women fought to be treated as fully responsible adults capable of holding the highest positions in government, business and law enforcement. Suggesting that women periodically cannot be trusted because of their hormones undermines that progress.
The pair treated the subject with humor, joking about motherhood, teenage daughters and their own experiences with hormonal changes. But beneath the jokes was a serious point: compassion for mental illness and personal accountability do not have to be mutually exclusive.
District 5 Could Change the Balance of Pima County Government
The November election gives District 5 voters an unusual opportunity because Cano’s appointment must now be ratified—or rejected—at the ballot box.
Winn and Smith urged voters to support Republican Jeff Rhodes.
The significance extends beyond one district. Republican Supervisor Steve Christy currently operates with little ability to force action against a Democratic majority. Adding another conservative voice, Winn argued, could create debate where proposals now die without serious consideration.
Smith said even voters who identify as independents or traditional Democrats should consider the race through a local rather than national lens.
County supervisors do not determine federal abortion policy. They do not control the Supreme Court. They do control county spending, public safety priorities and the way taxpayer resources are used.
That distinction is why both women believe local voters should resist treating every election as a simple party-line referendum.
“We are free-thinking people,” Smith said. “You don’t want to all think in lockstep.”
Winn argued that Pima County conservatives demonstrated in the primary that higher turnout is possible. The challenge now is carrying that participation into the general election.
A Non-Citizen Voting Case Renews the Election Integrity Debate
Smith closed the political discussion with what she described as breaking news from Homeland Security Investigations.
According to Smith, federal authorities had arrested a Nigerian national with lawful permanent-resident status who allegedly admitted voting illegally in multiple American elections, including the 2022 midterms and the 2024 presidential election.
The case, Smith argued, undercuts claims that non-citizen voting simply does not happen.
Her point was not that one arrest establishes widespread fraud. It was that the existence of documented cases makes election safeguards legitimate rather than inherently discriminatory.
For Winn, the timing reinforces the importance of turnout and election administration going into November. The pair said they intend to return after the election to broader discussions involving the county recorder, prosecutors and the mechanics of election integrity.
Common Sense Versus Political Lockstep
The recurring theme through Smith’s appearance was that Arizona voters should not have to accept ideological extremes simply because one political party has dominated local government for years.
Smith said Republicans themselves frequently disagree with one another, and she views that as healthy.
The founders did not create the Constitution by sitting in a room and agreeing about everything. They argued intensely, negotiated and eventually built a structure designed to survive disagreement.
For Smith, that tradition of independent thought offers conservatives an opening with independents and more traditional Democrats who may disagree with Republicans on some national issues but share concerns about crime, taxes, government spending and political corruption.
Winn put the contrast more simply.
“There’s communism and there’s common sense,” she said. “We’re the common-sense team.”
Their appeal was less about universal ideological agreement than about forcing local government to answer basic questions: Is the community safer? Are taxes producing better services? Are criminals facing consequences? Are elected officials serving residents rather than political causes?
If the answer is no, Winn argued, voters should stop rewarding the same leadership.
A Personal Loss—and a Family Legacy
Winn ended on a personal note, announcing that her mother, Jane Marie Barrett, had died early that morning at age 88.
Her mother had lived with Winn and her family for the previous three years and would have turned 89 in November. Winn said her parents had been together since they were teenagers, and her mother continued to miss her husband deeply after his death 14 years earlier.
In her final days, Winn said, her mother had the opportunity to speak with family members and tell her grandchildren what a privilege it had been to be their grandmother. She also learned that another great-granddaughter was on the way.
“She loved our kids,” Winn said. “And it was our privilege.”
The announcement gave an unexpectedly personal ending to a discussion that had spent much of the day talking about political systems, governments and institutions. Beneath all of those debates is ultimately the same question that animated both hours: what kind of country, community and legacy one generation leaves to the next.