Mining Executive Caught Fabricating U.S. Government Endorsement After Ambush Photo With Congressman Who Says “I Have No Idea Who That Guy Was”
IPNEWS: Peter Pham, Chairman of Ivanhoe Atlantic, has been caught red-handed using one of the oldest tricks in the political con artist’s playbook: taking an ambush photo with a U.S. Congressman at a fundraiser, then falsely claiming that photo represents official U.S. government support for his company’s controversial Liberian mining deal. The only problem? The Congressman says he has “no idea who that guy was” and his committee has taken no position on the deal whatsoever.
According to an explosive report by The Floridian, Pham posted a photo on X (formerly Twitter) showing himself with Rep. Brian Mast (R-FL), Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, claiming he “thanked” the Congressman for his committee’s “support for progressing multi-user, independently-operated infrastructure vital to Liberia’s development” and for supporting Ivanhoe Atlantic’s critical minerals investments.
The reality? Pham approached Rep. Mast at a fundraising event for Texas Rep. Ronny Jackson, asked for a photo, and walked away. Rep. Mast told The Floridian he had “no idea who that guy was.” A House Foreign Affairs Committee staffer was even more blunt: “Mast has no f*cking idea who this guy is.”
And the committee’s supposed “support” for Ivanhoe? It doesn’t exist. Rep. Mast confirmed that the House Foreign Affairs Committee “has not taken any position” on what is clearly a commercial matter for Liberia to manage internally.
This is not a misunderstanding. This is not a miscommunication. This is deliberate deception designed to mislead Liberian government officials into believing the United States government officially endorses Ivanhoe’s rail access deal—when no such endorsement exists.
The Classic Political Photo-Op Scam
The tactic Pham employed is as old as politics itself: approach an elected official at a public event, request a quick photo, then post that photo on social media with fabricated context suggesting the official supports your business, cause, or agenda.
Politicians routinely take photos with constituents, donors, and random attendees at fundraisers and public events. These photos are courtesies, not endorsements. Taking a photo with a Congressman does not mean the Congressman supports your business. It certainly doesn’t mean the Congressman’s committee has taken an official position backing your commercial transactions.
But that’s exactly what Peter Pham wants Liberians to believe.
By posting the photo with Rep. Mast alongside language thanking him for “support” and referencing the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Pham created the false impression that:
- Rep. Mast personally knows and supports Ivanhoe Atlantic
- The House Foreign Affairs Committee has reviewed and endorsed Ivanhoe’s Liberian deal
- The U.S. government considers Ivanhoe’s investments strategically important
- Liberian officials negotiating with Ivanhoe should view the company as having official U.S. backing
Every single element of this impression is false.
Why the U.S. Government Has No Position—And Won’t
Peter Pham’s attempt to manufacture U.S. government support for Ivanhoe’s Liberian rail deal reveals a fundamental misunderstanding—or deliberate misrepresentation—of how U.S. government involvement in foreign commercial transactions works.
The U.S. government does not routinely endorse private companies’ commercial mining deals in foreign countries. The U.S. may provide diplomatic support for American business interests broadly, but official government endorsement of specific commercial transactions is rare and typically reserved for matters involving U.S. national security, critical strategic interests, or explicit trade diplomacy initiatives.
A Canadian mining company’s subsidiary (Ivanhoe Atlantic is part of the Ivanhoe group founded by Canadian Robert Friedland) seeking rail access in Liberia to export Guinean iron ore does not remotely qualify as a U.S. national security priority. This is a commercial transaction between a private company and the Liberian government, involving minerals from Guinea.
The U.S. government has no dog in this fight. Rep. Mast’s confirmation that the House Foreign Affairs Committee “has not taken any position” reflects standard U.S. policy: commercial mining deals are for the host countries and private companies to negotiate. The U.S. doesn’t pick winners and losers.
Yet Peter Pham is attempting to create the illusion of U.S. government endorsement to pressure Liberian officials, convince skeptical legislators, and overcome legitimate concerns about the deal’s compliance with the Liberia-Guinea Implementation Agreement and Guinea’s opposition to the project.
This is manipulation, not diplomacy.
The Congressman’s Concerns: Chinese Communist Party Ties
The irony of Peter Pham’s fabricated “support” from Rep. Mast becomes even richer when one examines what Rep. Mast actually told The Floridian about companies with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) ties.
Rep. Mast stated: “We must divest from China, and work to ease our reliance on Chinese goods, products, and CCP-backed Chinese companies. There is a high probability that these CCP-backed companies could and would work to sabotage our supply chain, or the critical components (minerals) that we as a nation rely on.”
This statement is particularly relevant because Ivanhoe Atlantic’s parent company, Ivanhoe Mines Ltd., is partially owned by CCP-supported Chinese companies.
According to The Floridian‘s investigation:
- Zijin Mining Group Company Limited (Hong Kong-based) owns 12.23% of Ivanhoe Mines
- China CITIC Bank Corporation (Beijing-based) owns 22.33% of Ivanhoe Mines
- Company founder Robert Friedland owns just 12.08%
- A mysterious 50.77% of ownership is unknown
Additionally, two Ivanhoe Atlantic directors—Kenneth Lau and Patrick Tsang—are tied to Hong Kong conglomerate Chow Tai Fook Enterprises.
So the very Congressman Peter Pham falsely claimed supports Ivanhoe has publicly expressed concerns about precisely the type of CCP-backed companies that own significant stakes in Ivanhoe’s parent corporation.
If Rep. Mast actually knew who Peter Pham was and understood Ivanhoe’s ownership structure, he almost certainly would not support the company. This makes Pham’s fabricated endorsement even more audacious—and unethical.
The Morocco Trap: President Boakai’s Weekend Photo-Op?
Here’s where the story gets urgent for Liberia. According to sources familiar with Ivanhoe’s operations, Peter Pham is planning to pull the exact same stunt this weekend in Morocco with President Joseph Boakai.
President Boakai is scheduled to attend an international summit in Morocco. Pham, who has been shadowing Liberian officials and lobbying aggressively for the Ivanhoe rail deal, reportedly plans to engineer a photo opportunity with President Boakai that he can then post on social media with misleading captions suggesting the President personally supports Ivanhoe’s operations or that high-level diplomatic discussions occurred.
This would be a disaster for Liberia’s credibility.
If Pham successfully photographs himself with President Boakai and posts it with fabricated context—just as he did with Rep. Mast—it will create the false impression internationally that:
- President Boakai personally endorses Ivanhoe despite ongoing legislative review
- Liberia’s government has reached consensus on the controversial deal
- Guinea’s objections have been resolved or overridden
- International support exists for a project that violates bilateral agreements
President Boakai and his security team must be alerted immediately. Pham should be denied photo access, and any public events where the President appears should have protocols in place to prevent ambush photography by interested parties seeking to manufacture false endorsements.
The Pattern of Deception
Peter Pham’s photo-op con with Rep. Mast is not an isolated incident—it’s part of a broader pattern of deceptive practices Ivanhoe has employed throughout the Liberian rail deal:
Deception #1: Claiming Guinea’s Support
Ivanhoe and its defenders cite approvals from Guinea’s government dating from 2020-2021—before the September 2021 military coup that overthrew President Alpha Condé. Guinea’s current military government, which has ruled for over four years and just completed the $20 billion Trans-Guinean Railway, has provided zero documentation supporting Ivanhoe’s use of Liberian infrastructure. Yet Ivanhoe continues claiming “Guinea approved” the project, citing documents from a government that no longer exists.
Deception #2: Misrepresenting the Implementation Agreement
Ivanhoe and Liberian officials claim the 2019 Implementation Agreement allows Liberia to unilaterally grant rail access to companies mining in Guinea. This is false. The Implementation Agreement requires consensus through the Inter-Ministerial Committee (Articles 3.4 and 5.7). No evidence exists that this committee has met since the coup or that consensus was reached. Yet Ivanhoe proceeds as if bilateral approval is unnecessary.
Deception #3: Fabricating U.S. Government Support
Now Pham has been caught manufacturing fake U.S. congressional endorsement through an ambush photo-op. The Congressman says he doesn’t know Pham. The committee has no position. Yet Pham publicly thanked them for “support” that doesn’t exist.
This is not how legitimate businesses operate. This is how con artists operate.
Ivanhoe CEO’s Revealing Quote: “We’re Playing Geopolitics”
Perhaps the most revealing moment in The Floridian‘s investigation comes from a quote by Ivanhoe Atlantic CEO Bronwyn Barnes:
“You know, we’re not here playing mining, we don’t play mining anymore, we’re playing geopolitics.”
Read that again. “We’re not here playing mining… we’re playing geopolitics.”
This is an extraordinary admission. A mining company CEO openly acknowledges that her company is engaged in geopolitical manipulation—not straightforward commercial mining operations, but leveraging political relationships, manufacturing government endorsements, and navigating diplomatic tensions for corporate advantage.
“Playing geopolitics” means:
- Exploiting Guinea’s political instability following the 2021 coup
- Pressuring Liberian officials with fabricated claims of U.S. support
- Attempting to circumvent Guinea’s sovereignty over its own mineral resources
- Using photo-ops and social media to create false impressions of official backing
- Treating bilateral agreements as obstacles to be manipulated rather than frameworks to be respected
This is not normal corporate behavior. This is the behavior of a company that knows its deal cannot withstand scrutiny on its legal and diplomatic merits, so it resorts to deception, manipulation, and manufactured political cover.
What Liberian Officials Should Understand
Liberian legislators currently reviewing the Ivanhoe Concession and Access Agreement need to understand what they’re dealing with:
1. No U.S. Government Support Exists
Despite Peter Pham’s X posts and lobbying claims, the U.S. government has taken no position on Ivanhoe’s Liberian deal. The House Foreign Affairs Committee has not endorsed it. Rep. Mast doesn’t even know who Peter Pham is. Any claim that U.S. officials support this project is fabricated.
2. Guinea Has Not Approved This Deal
Every “approval” Ivanhoe cites from Guinea predates the September 2021 military coup. Guinea’s current government has provided zero documentation supporting Liberian transit. Guinea just spent $20 billion on infrastructure to ensure its minerals never depend on foreign corridors. Guinea will not allow this deal to proceed.
3. The Implementation Agreement Requires Consensus
Liberia cannot unilaterally grant rail access for Guinean minerals. The 2019 Implementation Agreement requires consensus through bilateral committees (Articles 3.4 and 5.7). No evidence exists that these committees have functioned or reached consensus since the coup.
4. The Company Has CCP Ties
Ivanhoe Atlantic’s parent company is significantly owned by Chinese Communist Party-backed entities. The very Congressman Pham falsely claimed supports Ivanhoe has publicly warned about “CCP-backed companies” that “could and would work to sabotage our supply chain.”
5. The CEO Admits “Playing Geopolitics”
Ivanhoe’s CEO openly acknowledges the company is engaged in geopolitical manipulation rather than straightforward mining operations. This admission should raise red flags about every claim the company makes.
The Ethical and Legal Implications
What Peter Pham did—fabricating Congressional support through a misleading photo-op—may not be technically illegal, but it is profoundly unethical and raises serious questions about Ivanhoe’s trustworthiness as a business partner.
In the United States, falsely claiming government endorsement for commercial purposes can violate:
- Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulations against deceptive advertising
- Securities laws if the false claims are used to influence investors
- Congressional ethics rules if elected officials’ names and images are misused
In Liberia, using fabricated foreign government support to influence legislative deliberations on a major concession agreement should be grounds for:
- Immediate investigation by relevant oversight committees
- Disqualification from concession consideration if deception is proven
- Potential legal liability for misrepresentation
At minimum, Liberian legislators should demand that Ivanhoe Atlantic and Peter Pham:
- Publicly retract the false claims of Congressional support
- Apologize to Rep. Mast and the House Foreign Affairs Committee
- Provide certified documentation of all claimed government approvals
- Explain the pattern of deceptive practices throughout this deal
The Morocco Warning: Stop Peter Pham Now
President Boakai’s team has this weekend to prevent Peter Pham from executing the same con in Morocco. If Pham succeeds in photographing himself with President Boakai and posting it with misleading captions, the damage to Liberia’s credibility will be significant.
Recommended immediate actions:
1. Alert Presidential Security: Brief security personnel about Peter Pham and instruct them to prevent unauthorized photo access.
2. Implement Photo Protocols: Any public events in Morocco where President Boakai appears should have clear protocols preventing ambush photography by parties with commercial interests in pending Liberian decisions.
3. Issue a Public Statement: The Executive Mansion should issue a statement clarifying that:
- President Boakai’s attendance at international summits does not constitute endorsement of any private company
- Photos taken at such events do not represent official government support
- Liberian government positions on pending concessions will be communicated through official channels only
4. Demand Accountability: The Legislature should summon Ivanhoe representatives to explain Peter Pham’s fabrication of Congressional support and determine whether the company remains a trustworthy partner.
Conclusion: When Trust is Betrayed
International business partnerships depend on trust, transparency, and mutual respect. Peter Pham’s fabrication of U.S. Congressional support—caught in the act by The Floridian‘s reporting—demonstrates that Ivanhoe Atlantic operates with none of these values.
The company has:
- Misrepresented Guinea’s position by citing approvals from an overthrown government
- Ignored bilateral agreement requirements for consensus decision-making
- Fabricated U.S. government support through deceptive photo-ops
- Admitted to “playing geopolitics” rather than conducting straightforward business
- Maintained ownership ties to Chinese Communist Party-backed entities while claiming otherwise
This is not a company Liberia should trust with a 25-year concession agreement.
Rep. Brian Mast’s statement that he “has no idea who that guy was” should echo through the halls of Liberia’s Legislature as they consider ratification. If a U.S. Congressman—whom Peter Pham publicly thanked for “support”—doesn’t even know who Pham is, what else is Ivanhoe lying about?
The photo-op con has been exposed. Peter Pham’s credibility is destroyed. And Liberia’s legislators now have irrefutable evidence that they’re dealing with a company willing to fabricate government endorsements to advance its commercial interests.
The question is simple: Will Liberia reward this deception with a 25-year concession? Or will Liberia demand honesty, transparency, and respect for bilateral agreements before allowing any company access to strategic national infrastructure?
Peter Pham must be stopped. His tactics must be exposed. And Liberia must protect President Boakai from becoming the next victim of Ivanhoe’s photo-op con game.
Read the full Floridian Press investigation: Ivanhoe Atlantic’s Peter Pham’s Questionable Political Play With American Lawmakers
The empty photo frame with Rep. Mast stands as a monument to manufactured credibility. The question for Liberia is whether it will ratify an agreement built on such deceptions—or demand the truth before committing its national infrastructure for a quarter-century.
