David Sacks Fires Back at The New York Times, Saying Claims That Alice Huang Was a Chinese Spy Remain Unconfirmed
NYT has responded to my post by claiming that I’m “spreading conspiracy theories.” But which of us is the one trafficking in unsubstantiated allegations? Recent coverage (including CNN, which I QT’d) shows: — The intelligence community has not established conclusive evidence
Context
A prominent investor whose bio lists a White House advisory role publicly disputing the spy narrative adds to the fight over why Jensen Huang left Nvidia and what comes next.
Jensen Huang resigned as Nvidia CEO on November 12 after reports of extramarital relationships, including one with Alice Huang, a businesswoman US officials suspect of spying for China. David Sacks, whose X bio lists him as co chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, had called the spy narrative collapsing. The New York Times then wrote that he had started spreading conspiracy theories.
Deep dive
On the evening of November 13, David Sacks posted a screenshot of a New York Times passage that quotes Martin Casado of Andreessen Horowitz defending Huang and says others, "like the former Trump administration official David Sacks, have started spreading conspiracy theories." Sacks asked which of them was "trafficking in unsubstantiated allegations."
Citing recent coverage, including a CNN report he had shared, Sacks wrote that the intelligence community has not established conclusive evidence that Alice Huang knowingly acted as a spy or funneled information to Beijing, and that there is internal disagreement about the strength of the evidence and whether she was recruited by China's Ministry of State Security.
He also wrote that Attorney General Todd Blanche has said on the record that the Justice Department, he and FBI Director Patel have reached no conclusions about "who she is or is not," that some officials at ODNI and CIA have indicated the label is "not fully accurate," and that incoming House Intelligence Chairman Jim Himes said it was still unclear after a briefing.
Sacks argued that the Times' stories relied on anonymous officials and that no official has affirmed the claim on the record. These are his characterizations of other outlets' reporting; no response from the Times appeared in the posts scanned.
What to expect next
Watch for any on the record statement from US intelligence or Justice Department officials that settles whether Alice Huang acted for Beijing, since both sides cite anonymous or partial accounts so far. The answer could shape pressure on Nvidia's board to reconsider Huang's exit, a push already backed by an open letter and several investors. Nvidia's earnings on November 17 are the next moment the company could address the matter.