Literally zero evidence for this but a NYT journalist claiming anonymous sources, with the same journalist having many scoops in the past where their source was executives at Anthropic.

The DOJ, The CIA and the FBI are all saying that these claims she was a spy are not convincing...

Its a very calculated political hitjob, when the spy allegations didn't hold up, and the megamond accusations were hearsay at best, all of a sudden they started dropoing new affairs. Its very scheduled/coordinated.

Also me saying this instantly gets downvoted. There's bots in this thread downvoting any mention of this.

Nvidia earnings are next week, and a number of these articles were dropping right after market close the last week. The timing looked intentional, as was the announcement this morning right before open that Huang was stepping down.

Someone is playing games here, it's just a question of who and what their ultimate goal is.

my best guess is NatSec folks, perhaps BigAi too

there are very differing opinions among the presidents cabinet, re: Ai, chips, open weights and certainly some real china hawks in the NatSec bureaus

those departments are run by loyalists to the same guy Jensen gave $25M tomorrow ballroom, I would be very hesitant to believe their words on this

You could make an argument that Jensen became super maga, and made all these donations after he hired a crisis PR firm out of nowhere a little over a year ago today. And recent remarks from Trump about threatening the head of an AI company with jail time as well, they could easily have been extorting him.

He did get suspiciously political very quickly around that time. Im definately not convinced that this is a Red Vs Blue thing, I think there's plenty of people on Trumps team that are extreme China hawks.

Its hard to know for sure, but I dont think the lady was a spy. Atleast not until I see evidence.

We do this kind of mysoginist thing in the West when we see successful, well dressed Chinese women close to polticians, CEOs and label them spies, pawns of the CCP... Like Mitch McConnels wife gets this treatment frequently.

Even if she was funneling GPUs to China, which there's also no evidence for other than claims in the WSJ that lack any evidence. I dont think being a cunning business women makes someone a spy, nor does it make Jensen complicit.

Its as if we dont want to admit to ourselves that its possible for the Chinese to be successful, cunning and tactical like any other business person without it being a shadowy plot of the communsit party.

Its very weird, and it makes it super easy to manufacture consent around stories like this.

did you make this account just to defend Jensen?

Yes.

I do wonder, not knowing exactly how this came to light, exactly how it came to light. Not that the the actions, if true, aren't bad. But why and when it broke that is interesting.

I appreciate your comments, but 'spy' is definitely the correct term for someone who acts on behalf of another country/company, even if only through a minor/informal/temporary arrangement. That's actually how most spying is done - 'assets'/'informants' rather than 'agents'. A lot of Chinese espionage is incredibly informal.

Even if the Chinese government instigated her funneling GPUs IMO it'd just make he a smuggler and not a spy. I don't know thatI particularly defend him, but reporting is very vague and short.

> Even if the Chinese government instigated her funneling GPUs IMO it'd just make he a smuggler and not a sp

It's not even smuggling either; if the destination government is cool with your imported product, you declare your import like every other legal import. Using 3rd party countries to go around export restrictions is a very old entry in the sanctions-busting playbook; I'd bet every single sanctioned country in the history of sanctions has done this in some shape or form if there existed at least one third country that traded with both sanctioner and sanctionee.

Yes, but that's what smuggling is.

But the destination government is not cool with it. CCP have strict limits on Nvidia imports to encourage their domestic GPU industry. There is 10$billion of nvidia GPUs sitting on a dock in Hong Kong rn because they are blocked from import.

10$billion of GPUs are sitting on a dock in Hong Kong because CCP banned their import. China has a strict limit on how many Nvidia GPUs each firm can buy. China don't believe LLMs will lead to AGI/RSI and are betting that it's more valuable to become independent of Nvidia than to win the LLM race.

> and made all these donations

"donations"

The conventional term is 'bribes'.

If the NYT destroys their reputation with this, you can be the first to tell us. Until then, what they report has some weight to it. I also think you're understating the amount of details that have been provided.

If people are downvoting you it's because you're spinning conspiracy theories around a topic that a lot of people have personal financial interests in.

The type of person who takes NYT reporting uncritically would not change their opinion if this is false. The NYT has been deeply embedded in the American state propaganda arm for a long time, remember WMDs in Iraq?

Deeply embedded meaning they have a deep network of sources, or deeply embedded meaning they are working in concert with American intelligence services?

The sort of quick rule I have for measuring credibility is "how much of a story is it when a reporter or outlet gets something meaningfully wrong?" For the NYT, it's a rather important story, like the Iraq WMDs you mentioned. Which, needless to say, was over 20 years ago.

We'll see what the truth ends up being with time.

> Deeply embedded meaning they have a deep network of sources, or deeply embedded meaning they are working in concert with American intelligence services?

¿Por qué no los dos? Access Journalism easily explains both phenomena. Journalists know where their bread is buttered - members of the "deep network of sources" may occasionally call in favors, or drop breadcrumbs leading journalists to a specific, preselected destinations.

A recent HN thread led me down the rabbit-hole that included an observation by some (British) monarchy insider that they'd intentionally leak a story to the press, and the article would include the usual "We have reached out to the royal family for comment" spiel, and yet the entire article is the comment by the royal family. On the other side of the Atlantic, it wasn't too long ago that JD Vance was outed as the unnamed source on a story that the Trump admin subsequently attempted to sue for.

How are they conspiracies...This is CNNs reporting. I hate how people can just label something a conspiracy to discredit it. I dont believe in conspiracies actually, everything I said is verifiably true. You are literally a character out of an Orwell novel. Think for yourself for once.

https://www.cnn.com/2026/11/12/politics/alice-huang-us-intel...

Not really relevant,

But the NYT laundered crimes against humanity and covered up the death of 30k children over the last three years. They published dozens of provably fabricated stories to do so. Sorry they dont have weight to their journalism, they are completely beholden to whatever special interest that benefits them.

It's the very definition of a conspiracy. You are claiming that people conspired to perform a character assassination of Jensen Huang, while dropping hints of involvement of Anthropic, which especially on this forum invokes further conspiracy.

You're using the "conspiratorial they" (as I like to call it), that "they" failed with the spy allegations so started releasing information about affairs.

And then, to top it off, you play victim and say there are bots scanning the comments and automatically downvoting you.

This also only touches on the potential spy aspect. The largest part of the story is Nvidia seemingly intentionally breaking US trade laws over something that a significant part of the AI industry believes should be treated as dangerous as nuclear weapons.

Conspiracy theories don't have to be wrong or crazy, but what evidence do you have to so confidently claim that yours is correct?

---

I've been following Nvidia for a long time. I've seen online discussions of the company become increasingly corrupted since 2020/2021. The only explanation that's held up for me is that money corrupts, and there are a lot of individual shareholders of Nvidia stock that feel a duty to try and protect their investment. I have no idea if that applies to you, but I'm saying it to give you an idea of the angle I'm reading these threads from. More recently, AI has provided new potential sources of corruption aside from investments. When I see you and the mass of other people in these threads that are presenting these ideas of a conspiracy to take down Jensen Huang for sinister reasons, well... my initial reaction is rather negative.

Comments in this post became pathetic and comic at the same time.

> This is not a conspiracy theory

> [proceeds to explain carefully organized plot between Anthropic, Rubio and Bessent]

————————

> This is not smuggling

> [proceeds to explain that if destination country is cool with imports then it’s ok to send goods via 3rd country]

————————

> She was not a spy

> [explains what she did and what spies do, same thing]

You're a character from 1984

I assure you there are not just bots downvoting you.

What constitutes the reason for a political hit job? Seems to me that Trump likes Jensen quite a bit, and has quite a bit of influence over the DOJ etc. There is also a lot of economic reason why the administration would want as little disruption as possible.

I've seen claims that it's anyone from Marco Rubio to Sam Altman, but I'm not really that sure what to think. There are a lot of players with our era's unique mix of idiocy and incompetence involved.

> What constitutes the reason for a political hit job?

The timing is curious; the admin knew for at least a year and managed to keep a lid on it, and then congress flipped, meaning the oversight and intelligence committees would be chaired by people with a (D) in their name

> Seems to me that Trump likes Jensen quite a bit

Marco Rubio probably doesn't; which would explain why it was leaked to the press and not via a formal DoJ or Commerce Department investigation. If Rubio has presidential ambitions, now is probably the best time for this to come out and not after the Democratic party gets subpoena power, and difficult questions about the administrations inaction to go with it.

So your theory is that Trump allowed Nvidia to ignore Biden-era export controls, under the table? And now that that is likely to be exposed, they are pre-emptively leaking the story and taking on the case?

I mean, that doesn't seem that ridiculous. The story is, currently, mostly "oh, no, leather jacket nvidia guy got fired". In the alternate universe where this didn't leak, the story would instead, in early 2027, be "administration was covering up for the guy shagging the alleged spy, who has given the administration tens of millions of dollars for a ballroom". And I mean, that's part of the story now, but it's not really _dominating_ the story. From Trump's point of view, the current story is certainly better framing than "Trump covered this up, presumably because the guy was bribing him", which is how it would look if it came out in a congressional enquiry.

Honestly I'd expect more leaks of this type over the next month or so, as the administration prepares for scrutiny.

Trump is immune from even being investigated. He has the pardon power. I doubt he cares.

_He_ may not care. I'd assume a lot of the people who work for him are getting fairly nervous, though.

Trump blanket pardoned insurrectionists, some of whom were felons, committed violence, had history of rape, etc. His appointments know the price of a pardon is absolute loyalty or $1mm USD (or Trump coin equivalent).

So, even assuming that that magic pardon comes (and there are all sorts of ways that it might not; Trump is not, y'know, the most _reliable_), there would still be a huge _optics_ problem (actually, the pardon would make it worse). People are currently annoyed about corruption. If this had come out when a congressional investigation poked at it, then there would have been a very obvious narrative that would be extremely bad for Trump and more broadly for Republicans; rich guy gives $25m for Trump's vanity project, and rich guy's little problem just... goes away. I mean, it is very obvious how that could be framed.

And that narrative's still there, but I think probably subsumed a bit by the "nvidia kicks out CEO" story. Like, if I was a republican I'd definitely prefer to see this version of events than the "congressional investigation finds it" one.

> Trump is immune

Marco Rubio is not, and he - if he were to get a Trump pardon, that'd kill Rubio's chances of being POTUS.

De facto, or de jure?

> So your theory is that Trump allowed Nvidia to ignore Biden-era export controls, under the table?

Trump said it out loud that he knew for about a year.

> And now that that is likely to be exposed, they are pre-emptively leaking the story and taking on the case?

What case? Jensen resigned and that's the end of it. Which is the ideal outcome for the Secretary of State - or VP - who wishes to campaign for the presidency without being interrogated by the other party on what they knew about accepting a bribe from a compromised tech CEO. With the current news cycles, this story will be dead by the endom of the month.

he's implying that anthropic employees want Jensen gone because he doesn't care about existential risk and such + he's pro open weight models and if he's getting cards to china he is propping up the models they like to whine about.

Maybe Musk needs someone else to take the hit for meddling in the US.

Your post is now over an hour old and still has positive votes.

So much for the bot downvoting theory

Never let the truth get in the way of a good narrative.

This is the exact message I get from contacts on the hill. They say Anthropic is driving this. My question is, "why?" Hard to understand what the motivation is.

Nvidia blowing up hurts all of the other big AI companies, except for them (and Google)

Jensen was a huge supporter of open weight models and exporting GPUs to China, both of which Anthropic didn't like, and he's been pretty critical about all the AI safety and doomer stuff the frontier labs have been on about.

But honestly, I would not have expected something like from Dario. Heck, I have a hard time seeing even Altman trying something like this, largely because he realizes his dependency on GPUs and the role Jensen has been playing in boosting the entire AI economy. If Dario is driving this, it seems uncharacteristically short-sighted.

As a board director, you'd trust him to tell you the truth when he's completely fine lying to his wife, family, friends -- and you, to your face, leading you to defend him publicly putting your reputation and that of the whole board and company at risk, while he continues to lie to you about multiple secret affairs, including with two direct reports and a big (perhaps legally dubious and potentially dangerous) customer?

Forget the spy stuff. If your CEO is schtupping customers and employees, are you really going to trust him with running your company? If you, as a board member, don't draw the line at hiding the sausage in your customers and subordinates, where do you draw it? Drunken bar fights? Road rage incidents? Rape? Murder? All fine as long as it's his personal life? All fine if he's making the company money? I don't think that's how most BoDs for massive corporations operate.

Basically yes I would not care at all if he's lying to his wife or family or friends, that's his own personal life. It's not illegal to lie or cheat or bang your customers. Criminal behaviour is much worse and besides, you may as well get rid of them if they're going to jail anyway. If I was on the board I'd want the guy who's getting me rich, not a moral CEO or one you could have a beer with, or a nice guy. If the reputational damage of non-illegal activity (or even minor illegal activity - I wouldn't care if the CEO is doing drugs or speeding or whatever) is not going to damage the company as much as getting rid of him (which it wouldn't, who on earth is going to boycott a company for being run by a cheater?) then it just doesn't make sense to get rid of them.

Trust a liar, interesting.

I'm sorry but this is s truly brain dead take.

Hard agree - if you ever tell a child that Santa exists while he doesn't, immediate execution by a firing squad. Lying should never be tolerated.

How do you square this view with the share price going down on the news, so he was literally not doing his job per your definition of the job?

Down because people assumed that he would be sacked (or would be investigated or found guilty of espionage), recovered a bit after he's actually out because uncertainty is worse than a bad outcome. I think it would've recovered anyway if he didn't leave.

That doesn't help. Why wouldn't it be his job to conduct his life in a way where people avoid making such assumptions because those assumptions decrease returns to shareholders?

Not actually advocating this but as a thought experiment: The shareholders could offer him a bonus/his position back in exchange for chemically castrating himself. In the context of private jets and crazy executive perks that supposedly give the company a slight edge, this actually doesn't seem that unreasonable. I'm sure the market could put a price on how much value it adds.

Ethics aside, chemical castration does not necessarily work.Biologically yes but behaviourally...

> If it’s not actually damaging to the company’s reputation

There is a lot of talk about morality and all sorts of things here on HN in regards to this, but isn't this basically the reason? I'm Danish nvidia is one of the major news stories because of this. Lots of bad press all around the globe. As much as I'd personally like for CEO's to be held accountable for their morals, I think it's quite simply about reputation.

Wasn't that Coldplay concert CEO also fired?