“What’s important for people to know is that the majority of California is actually not to the far left. We’re a very purple state,” says Elaine Culotti, a self-made entrepreneur, star of Discovery’s reality TV series “Undercover Billionaire,” and founder of the Mayors Matter project.

On a mission to understand the root causes of California’s challenges, Culotti recently went on a state-wide tour and talked to 50 out of California’s almost 500 mayors as well as countless regular Californians on the way.

“I’ve talked to people from Humboldt County, which is the very top of California, to Chula Vista, all the way into the Central Valley ... to Santa Monica and Pacific Palisades. ... And it does not matter if you have an R or a D,” Culotti said.

The fifty mayors she spoke to—on both sides of the aisle—have two overarching priorities for their cities: security and economic development, Culotti said.

But no matter how hard they try, they find it difficult to achieve either one. Why? Because of Sacramento, Culotti said.

Most taxpayer money goes to the state government with its over half a million employees, Culotti noted. The cities receive little money but lots of crippling orders from Sacramento, and fraud at the state level is rampant, she said.

When California’s top politicians “are pushing downstream what’s called unfunded mandates onto people, you create war in those city halls. You create war with those mayors because they are saying, ‘No, no, stop oppressing us with your mandates. We don’t want to do it,’” Culotti said.

“We’re all being boiled to death by Sacramento,” she said.

Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

In this episode, I sit down with Grace Jin Drexel, the daughter of detained Pastor Ezra Jin, the founder of one of China’s largest underground house-church networks.

Last October, Pastor Jin was arrested along with 27 other pastors and church leaders from Zion Church. It was one of the largest assaults on independent Christian congregations in China since the Cultural Revolution, said Drexel. She has since become a prominent voice speaking out against religious persecution in China.

State repression of Zion Church began in 2018 amid a broader wave of Communist Party efforts to subjugate faith communities, Drexel said.

“You saw the tearing down of crosses [and] putting portraits of Xi Jinping and Mao Zedong on church buildings,” she said.

Zion Church was deemed an illegal business operation, forcing them to shift to a hybrid online model of worship. Authorities also placed an exit ban on Pastor Jin.

“There’s so many parts of our lives that he has missed out on. He was not able to walk me down the aisle at my wedding. He was not able to attend my baby’s baptism,” Drexel said.

She sees her father’s detention as part of a new wave of persecution targeting not only her father’s church but also many other underground churches and religious groups as well. As in 2018, authorities are again installing pictures of Xi in churches again, sometimes even replacing crosses, to “showcase who is the true leader of the church,” she said.

Another sign of a new wave of suppression is the sentencing of Jimmy Lai, the 78-year-old founder of Apple Daily and a practicing Catholic. He was recently given 20 years in prison, which marks the longest sentence handed down to date under Beijing’s national security law.

Since Pastor Jin’s arrest, he has not been allowed any family visits, phone calls, or even letters from his loved ones. He is also suffering from severe Type 2 diabetes, and Drexel is deeply concerned about his wellbeing.

Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

How polarized are Americans really? Are we really on the “brink of civil war” as some suggest?

That’s what I wanted to find out when I sat down with Jonathan Butcher, author of the recently released book “The Polarization Myth: America’s Surprising Consensus on Race, Schools, and Sex.”

“When we hear the term polarization, it makes us think that there’s 50% on one side and 50% on the other side. But that’s not what’s going on,” says Butcher, who is acting director of The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Education Policy.

Butcher conducted a survey of more than 2,000 Americans and asked participants for their opinions on contentious cultural and political issues.

What did he find? Contrary to what Americans are constantly told on social media and in legacy media, there is no deep divide on the issues that drive the so-called culture wars, he says. His survey found the following:

-Biological sex: A majority of respondents maintain that sex is unchanging -Gender and schools: 61% oppose teaching young children that they can change their “gender”​ -Sexual content in schools: 69% do not support access in schools to books that depict sexual activity -College admissions: 52% oppose the use of racial preferences in college admissions, which are central to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs​

The culture war, Butcher concludes from his survey findings, is a narrative propagated by a small faction of radical activists and amplified by the media to instill fear.

“It’s really like a majority of Americans and … a small minority of activists on the other [side] that just have a very loud voice,” he says.

The survey responses, he told me, also show a surprising degree of consensus among Americans on basic principles and core beliefs.

For example, he found that a large majority of survey respondents want their children to be taught about virtue and character at school. More than half favor increased civics education.

“The important thing to remind Americans is that on the issues, they’re not alone. If [you] think that individuals should be judged, promoted, accepted to school based on their merit instead of their skin color, right, you’re not alone. You’re not alone if you think that we should be protecting women from men accessing their bathrooms or locker rooms,” he says.

Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

“People have misunderstood that [Greenland] is somehow a President Donald Trump issue, and it’s not,” says Alex Gray, who previously served as National Security Council chief of staff and deputy assistant to the president.

So why does Greenland matter? And why has it become such a massive issue?

In fact, Gray explained to me, multiple American presidents have tried to purchase or acquire Greenland over the last 160 years. Andrew Johnson was the first in 1867. Woodrow Wilson tried during the First World War. And Harry Truman tried right after World War II, Gray says.

In my deep-dive interview with Gray, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and co-founder of American Global Strategies, he lays out Greenland’s geostrategic importance to America’s national security and what it would mean if Greenland became dependent on China.

In 1952, the United States signed a treaty with Denmark, still in effect today, that provides America with extensive military access to Greenland. Gray’s overarching concern is what will happen when Greenland is likely to become independent in five or 10 years.

For many years, China has shown great interest in establishing dominance over the Arctic region and is regularly moving its submarines up to the North Pole.

Gray is convinced that after independence, Greenland is likely to fall prey to the Chinese Communist Party’s “well-worn playbook” to gain influence and eventually control the island. He calls it the “Solomon Islands scenario.”

“They start offering Belt and Road projects. They start buying dual-use facilities. They buy ports. They’re taking over airfields. Next thing you know, we’re hearing conversations about potentially having [China’s People’s Liberation Army] naval access to ports in the Solomons. … This is a well-worn Chinese playbook,” Gray says.

Beyond Greenland, we also dive into security threats related to America’s northern neighbor and the implications of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s overtures in Beijing.

Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Xi Van Fleet grew up in China during Mao Zedong’s Cultural Revolution. She was too young to be a real revolutionary Red Guard, but old enough to observe the astonishing scenes of violence and ideological fervor around her during those terrible years.

I sat down with her to discuss her new book, “Made in America: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Enabled Communist China and Created Our Greatest Threat.”

She says she felt compelled to write this book to help Americans understand the true nature of communism. Over the past hundred years or so, the United States has made one grave mistake after another because of this major blind spot, she says.

In our deep-dive interview, Van Fleet takes me on a tour of China’s history starting in the late 19th century and explains how America—over and over again—made decisions that helped the Chinese Communist Party: first to gain influence, then to defeat the Nationalists led by Chiang Kai-shek, and eventually to rescue the CCP from certain collapse in the 1970s.

By visiting Beijing and re-opening US-China relations at a time when China’s economy was in shambles, President Richard Nixon effectively “saved the CCP from the ruins,” she says.

The history of how the United States helped the CCP survive is “hidden history,” as she calls it, one that is not taught in the schools and not discussed publicly: “A lot of people want to hide it. But in order for us to understand, we have to learn this very, very important piece of history that my book is all about.”

Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

In this no-holds-barred interview, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, director of the National Institutes of Health, breaks down how the world’s largest public funder of biomedical research is changing under his leadership.

Bhattacharya, a former professor of Stanford University, public health expert, and coauthor of the anti-lockdown Great Barrington Declaration, was sworn in as director of the NIH in April last year.

With an annual budget of almost $50 billion, the NIH sets the direction of research at universities, medical centers, and research institutes across America.

It encompasses 27 institutes and centers that cover different areas of health and employ some 20,000 people. One of those is the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which was headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci for nearly 40 years.

The NIH, Bhattacharya told me, “really hasn’t had a change in leadership in decades. ... We’ve had new directors, but the fundamental structure and direction of the NIH has been basically the same until last year.”

Bhattacharya says his top priority is to end the practice of “funding the scientific enterprise for the sake of funding science” and ensure that NIH-funded scientific research actually produces better health outcomes for the American people. The goal should be improvements in health and longevity, not just more scientific papers, he says.

During our interview, we covered a lot of ground, including:

-Has the NIH completely stopped funding gain-of-function research?

-Is the NIH continuing to fund research with China?

-How has funding for international research institutes been restructured?

-Has the NIH stopped funding all research grants related to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives?

-What is being done to reverse the politicization of science?

-What is the NIH doing to help those who suffered injuries from the mandated COVID-19 mRNA vaccines?

-What can the NIH do to alleviate the massive replication crisis in research?

-How does he view the controversy surrounding vaccines and autism? Is the NIH looking into potential links?

-How is the NIH restructuring the allocation of funding?

What America needs, Bhattacharya told me, is a “second scientific revolution,” saying: “The NIH has the capacity to induce that second scientific revolution. That’s what I’m going to work toward for the next few years.”

Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

In 2015, a whistleblower came forward to The Epoch Times to share an unthinkable story.

Years before, while a resident doctor at one of China’s largest military hospitals, he was summoned one day with other doctors for a “secret military mission.” They were brought before a 17-year-old young soldier—bound so tightly that the ropes cut into his flesh—and ordered to pin the boy down and extract his kidneys and eyes.

The young soldier had gotten on the wrong side of his army supervisor, and while imprisoned in military jail, military command discovered that he was a blood and tissue match with a high-ranking superior in need of an organ transplant.

“When I looked at him, I saw fear in his eyes. His eyelids were moving. He was alive,” recounted the whistleblower Dr. George Zheng.

His testimony is featured in the harrowing documentary “State Organs,” directed by Peabody Award-winning filmmaker Raymond Zhang.

A powerful film that exposes the brutal reality of China’s forced organ harvesting industry, the documentary follows two families’ decades-long search for their disappeared loved ones. It’s a story of tragedy and brutal inhumanity, but also faith and redemption.

It seems the film hit such a nerve in Beijing that theaters in Taiwan received threatening letters and even bomb threats ahead of film screenings.

In this special episode, I sat down with Zhang to hear about his incredible journey of making this film and what he uncovered along the way.

“State Organs” is now streaming on Apple TV, Amazon Prime Video, YouTube, etc.

Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

Matthew Spalding is a professor of constitutional government at Hillsdale College and author of “The Making of the American Mind: The Story of The Declaration of Independence.”

A century ago, progressive historian Carl Becker argued that whether or not we have natural, inalienable rights as described in the Declaration had become a meaningless question. He believed that the idea of natural rights was not a veritable truth but merely a creed or faith of the men of his time and a product of historical circumstances.

Spalding disagrees. He argues that the existence of natural rights and natural law lies at the very heart of the Declaration of Independence. “It’s a claim of truth,” Spalding says.

Spalding regards the Declaration as America’s “epic poetry”: “It’s the heart of America ... really the heart of Western civilization.”

The founders saw themselves as part of, and as a continuation of, a deep and long tradition, in particular the Greek, Roman, and Judeo-Christian beliefs in natural law and free will.

However, after the American Civil War, early American progressives no longer viewed it that way, he says.

Their goal was to transform the United States into what they considered a modern state, and they turned away from natural law and God-given rights, and they viewed the U.S. Constitution as a “living document.”

Now more than ever, it is vital to rediscover the true meaning and importance of the Declaration, Spalding argues.

Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

A significant industry has emerged of expectant mothers flying from China to states such as California or U.S. territories such as Saipan to give birth to American citizens, says investigative reporter Peter Schweizer.

As soon as the newborn is old enough to fly, mother and child travel back to China with their babies. Chinese state-run media began promoting such services years ago, Schweizer says.

“They are exploiting this on a massive scale,” Schweizer said. “It’s industrial, and we are completely oblivious to it.”

He estimates there are tens of thousands of such cases per year. When the child turns 21, their parents can then potentially claim green cards through them.

There are also growing anecdotes of surrogacy as another preferred route.

“Politically connected elites in China ... are hiring women in the United States to carry their children. They call them carriers. And these women are American citizens,” Schweizer says.

Schweizer is the author of multiple New York Times bestsellers, including most recently “The Invisible Coup: How American Elites and Foreign Powers Use Immigration as a Weapon.”

In this episode, he breaks down some of the incredible findings of his book.

Over the course of history, “migration has oftentimes been used as a weapon: a weapon of subversion, a weapon to overwhelm an enemy, a weapon to divide an enemy, a weapon to sow chaos,” he says.

Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

“We are witnessing the turning point of the Chinese Communist Party rule. … The chain of command in the military is totally broken,” says veteran China analyst and Epoch Times columnist Heng He.

On Jan. 24, China’s Ministry of National Defense announced that two top military generals, Zhang Youxia and Liu Zhenli, were under investigation for “serious disciplinary and legal violations.” This comes on the heels of a series of purges of Chinese military leaders.

Of the seven original members of China’s Central Military Commission, five have now effectively been purged or removed. Only two remain. And one of those two is Xi Jinping himself.

In my deep-dive interview with He, he lays out why he’s convinced the latest purges are the signs of something historic happening in China.

“They have open rules, and they have hidden rules. But what Xi Jinping did was against every single rule,” He says.

What’s really going on behind the scenes now? And what does this turmoil mean for the Chinese Communist Party’s plans to invade Taiwan? What are the policy implications for the United States?

Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.