When a Billionaire Calls You a Chinese Proxy, You Make a TikTok
The moment Gabi Finlayson and Jackie Morgan’s phones exploded with messages, they knew something had gone very, very wrong—or very, very right.
It was late afternoon in Utah. The two political strategists and cofounders of Elevate Strategies were driving out of a canyon when service returned. Incoming texts piled up like an avalanche: “Are you okay?” “Just saw you on Fox Business.” “Kevin O’Leary is talking about you.”
“We were like, ‘What is happening?’” Finlayson told Business Insider.
What had happened was this: Kevin O’Leary, the Shark Tank investor with a permanent scowl and a flair for dramatic accusations, had gone on national television and essentially called them agents of the Chinese Communist Party. His target? A pair of Utah women who had the audacity to oppose his proposed data center project in the state.
The back-and-forth is now a case study in how local opposition to AI infrastructure can explode into a national spectacle—and how a well-timed social media video can turn a billionaire’s accusations into a PR liability.
The Original Accusation: “These Are Proxies for the Chinese Government”
Let’s rewind the tape.
During a segment on Fox Business, O’Leary was asked about pushback to his data center project in Utah. Rather than address the specific concerns—land use, water consumption, environmental impact—he took a sharper turn.
“Who would want us to stop building our electrical grid? Who would want to stop us from having compute capacity to develop AI? Which adversary would want that?” O’Leary said. “There’s only one: It’s China.”
Then he named names.
“These are proxies for the Chinese government is my argument, and if they’re not—because I want them to be able to defend their names—come out, come out wherever you are.”
The names he called out? Gabi Finlayson and Jackie Morgan.
Let’s be clear: Finlayson and Morgan are American citizens, Utah-based political strategists, and cofounders of Elevate Strategies. They have no known ties to the Chinese government. Their opposition to O’Leary’s project stems from local land-use and environmental concerns—the same grassroots objections you’d see in any community facing a massive industrial development.
But nuance doesn’t sell cable news segments.
The Response: Flip-Flops, Mocking, and a Viral Video
After the initial shock wore off, Finlayson and Morgan didn’t panic. They did something smarter: They took control of the narrative.
In a video posted to their Elevate Utah social media account, the two women directly disputed O’Leary’s claims. But they didn’t just issue a serious denial. They leaned into the absurdity of the situation.
The video mocked O’Leary for wearing flip-flops with a suit on television—a choice that, let’s be honest, is a legitimate stylistic crime even if you’re a billionaire.
The caption read: “Billionaire Kevin O’Leary is trying to ruin our state and name checked us on Fox News. We’re not scared. Pre-order hats at the link in our bio!”
Finlayson’s parting shot to Business Insider summed up the energy: “The only foreign operative here is a Canadian wealthy person trying to ruin our state.”
That’s not just a zinger. It’s a strategic reframe. O’Leary is a Canadian citizen investing in American infrastructure. Finlayson and Morgan are local residents pushing back. Who’s the real “foreign agent” in this picture?
The Deeper Context: Why This Matters Beyond the Drama
This isn’t just a feud between a celebrity investor and two consultants. It’s a microcosm of a much larger battle.
As AI infrastructure booms—data centers, power plants, transmission lines—local opposition is becoming the single biggest bottleneck for the industry. Communities are asking hard questions:
- How much water will this data center consume during a megadrought?
- What’s the impact on local property values and housing costs?
- Who benefits from the tax incentives, and who gets stuck with the long-term environmental bill?
When those questions get uncomfortable, powerful voices sometimes reach for the nuclear option: accusing opponents of being foreign adversaries.
O’Leary’s argument is that stopping data center construction helps China by slowing American AI development. It’s a geopolitical framing that’s both convenient and hard to disprove in a 90-second TV hit. But it’s also a tool for shutting down legitimate debate.
The Problem with Calling Everything a Chinese Proxy
Here’s the thing: There are real concerns about Chinese influence in critical infrastructure. That’s not a conspiracy theory; it’s a national security issue.
But when you slap the “proxies for the Chinese government” label on anyone who opposes your business deal, you cheapen the term. You also risk alienating the very people you need to win over: local communities.
O’Leary’s strategy here is a classic “transparency trap.” By calling out Finlayson and Morgan by name and demanding they “defend themselves,” he’s trying to force them into a position where any denial looks weak. But it backfired because:
- The accusation was too absurd for anyone who actually knows these women to believe.
- The response was quick, clever, and culturally resonant (who can’t get behind mocking flip-flops with a suit?).
- The underlying local concerns remain unaddressed.
Paul Palandjian’s Clarification: The Weaker Defense
O’Leary Ventures CEO Paul Palandjian later issued a statement to Business Insider attempting to walk back the accusation. He said the company is “not accusing a specific individual of being a foreign agent” but is instead “calling for greater transparency around the data center opposition.”
That’s corporate-speak for: “We said something we can’t prove, so let’s pivot to a vague demand for transparency.”
It doesn’t hold water. If you’re not accusing anyone, why name names on national television? Why use the phrase “proxies for the Chinese government” if you don’t have the receipts?
The contradiction is obvious, and it’s why the video response is winning the internet.
What This Means for GTM and SaaS Leaders
You might be wondering: Why does this matter for a B2B growth publication? Because there are three lessons here that directly apply to how you position your product, handle objections, and navigate controversy in a hyper-politicized climate.
Lesson 1: Don’t Attack Your Critics with Conspiracy Theories
When a customer, prospect, or community member raises a legitimate objection, respond with data, not drama. Accusing critics of being foreign agents is the nuclear option—and if you don’t have the evidence to back it up, you’ll end up looking worse than if you’d just addressed the original concern.
For SaaS founders: If a customer says your pricing is too high, don’t call them a competitor’s shill. If a prospect says your security isn’t tight enough, don’t imply they’re working for a nation-state actor. Address the objection head-on.
Lesson 2: Speed + Authenticity > Polished Denials
Finlayson and Morgan didn’t wait for a legal team to draft a carefully worded statement. They posted a video within hours. It was raw, funny, and human.
In B2B, we often over-engineer our responses to criticism. We write lengthy blog posts, issue press releases, and wait for approval from every stakeholder. By then, the narrative has already set.
If you’re facing an unfair accusation, respond fast. Respond authentically. Use the channel where your audience actually is.
Lesson 3: The Absurdity of the Attack Can Be Your Shield
When someone throws an accusation that’s wildly disconnected from reality, you don’t have to treat it with the solemnity of a Supreme Court case. You can laugh at it—and by doing so, you make the accuser look foolish.
Finlayson and Morgan didn’t just deny the charge. They mocked the flip-flops. They turned O’Leary’s own image against him.
In business, when a competitor makes an outrageous claim about your product or team, you don’t have to take the bait. You can smile, point out the absurdity, and refocus on what actually matters.
The Bottom Line: Data Centers Need Community, Not Conspiracies
Kevin O’Leary’s data center project may or may not be a good idea for Utah. That’s a separate conversation about infrastructure, energy policy, and economic development.
But what’s clear is that accusing local opponents of being Chinese proxies is not a winning strategy. It doesn’t build trust. It doesn’t answer real questions. And it hands your critics a viral moment they can ride to fame.
Finlayson and Morgan now have hats for sale, a growing social media following, and the moral high ground. O’Leary has a PR headache and a lot of questions from reporters about why he’s wearing flip-flops with a suit.
In the court of public opinion—and in the court of B2B marketing—the second group is not where you want to be.
So the next time you face opposition to a project, a product launch, or a pricing change, remember: You can either address the real concern, or you can call your critics Chinese spies. One of those paths leads to growth. The other leads to a very awkward TikTok video.
Choose wisely.