Karoline Leavitt wrote pro-Guo op-eds while being paid by his allies

In the United States, Karoline Leavitt was involved in writing opinion pieces for various conservative media outlets that closely aligned with the interests of Guo Wengui, an exiled Chinese businessman who faced serious legal troubles. Beginning in 2017, she penned articles that echoed the narratives and specific language provided by representatives of Guo, who was under investigation for a massive fraud scheme. Despite the troubling allegations surrounding Guo, which included defrauding investors from 2020 onwards, Leavitt continued to publicly praise him, branding him as a prominent critic of the Chinese Communist Party. This arrangement raised ethical concerns as Leavitt accepted payment for content that largely served Guo's agenda while masking the true nature of their relationship. Leavitt's articles often mirrored the arguments crafted by Guo's supporters, promoting the notion that various critics of Guo were operating on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party. For example, she was reported to have used prompts and pre-prepared drafts supplied by Guo's allies in her writings. Her work typically presented three businessmen as the main perpetrators of funding for the CCP's campaigns, directly supporting Guo's narrative about his critics and adversaries. In particular, Leavitt identified three individuals as central to the alleged illegitimate funding channels that benefitted the CCP's operations, reinforcing Guo's claims. In 2024, the consequences of Guo's actions culminated in a Manhattan jury convicting him on multiple serious charges, including racketeering conspiracy and securities fraud. These developments drew increased scrutiny on individuals like Leavitt, whose pieces fawned over Guo while dismissing the gravity of the fraud allegations against him. As part of a broader strategy, Leavitt positioned herself as a staunch defender in the face of what she termed a hostile media landscape, mirroring a trend within certain political circles that adopt an adversarial stance towards conventional journalism. The ethical implications of Leavitt's work and her selection by Trump raise important questions about accountability and integrity in political communications. Critics argue that her role as a paid writer for Guo’s supporters blurs the lines between journalism and political propaganda. These events illustrate a concerning intersection of political loyalty, financial interests, and the dissemination of information that may not reflect an objective truth, highlighting ongoing issues related to disinformation in both the media landscape and political spheres.